Sony RX1R III Review: A $5,000 Letdown in a Familiar Shell

When Sony announced the RX1R III, the photography press—myself included—kind of lost our minds, and not in a good way.

After more than a decade of waiting for a proper successor to the RX1R II, we were expecting something big. The original was groundbreaking; we hoped this one might be too.

Instead, we got... a sensor update. And a steep price hike.

I’ve had the RX1R III in hand for a week of real-world shooting, and I’ve got to say: it’s not just underwhelming—it’s frustrating. There are a few things to like, but the problems stack up fast. Let’s start with the good (it won’t take long) and then dig into where this camera goes wrong.

As a note, usually we get cameras in to test for several weeks. With the RX1R III, the press is only getting access for several days. Since the image quality of the sensor and power of the autofocus in the RX1R III is on par with the cameras that already use this, my review focused less on that, and more on the confusing aspects of the camera.

That said, it’s unlikely that after more time with this camera, my opinions would have changed.

Watch Our Hands-On Review Video

What’s Good About the RX1R III

Sony gave this camera the same 61-megapixel full-frame sensor found in the a7R V and a7CR, packed into a body that’s even smaller than the a7CR. That’s no small feat. You also get Sony’s latest AI-based autofocus system—at least, on paper.

And that’s it. That’s the entire list of pros.

The previous RX1R II shoehorned the sensor and focus from the a7R II, which was cutting-edge at the time, into a surprisingly small body. This update takes the internals of the current a7R V and sticks them in what is essentially the same shell.

The image quality in the camera is impressive, as is the image quality of the a7CR and a7R V, which share the same sensor.
Photos are rich in detail with resolution so high that you can easily crop shots to frame your subject. With 61 megapixels, there’s plenty of data to use for post-processing adjustments.

The camera can shoot in several different RAW modes, as well as high-quality HEIF. HEIF is a much better format than JPEG, and I encourage all JPEG shooters to give HEIF a try instead.

As of the writing of this article, there is no raw converter for Lightroom or other camera apps, so images were opened and reviewed in Sony’s Imaging Edge desktop app.

What’s Changed—And What Hasn’t

There’s this concept in camera design we used to talk about where I worked previously, we called  “table stakes”—the minimum feature set needed to even sit at the table in today’s market.

When few cameras had subject detection autofocus, the lack of this feature in a camera wasn’t a problem. But when the first cameras with subject detection showed up, it became the new table stakes. Camera systems without subject AF are often compared unfavorably to those that do.

The RX1R II met those stakes a decade ago and handily exceeded them. The RX1R III? Not even close.

Let’s start with that 61MP sensor. It’s high resolution, which means more cropping flexibility—but also more noise at moderate ISO settings. Usually, you’d rely on IBIS to compensate for slower shutter speeds and keep ISO lower.

But the RX1R III doesn’t have IBIS. Ten years ago, fine. Today, it’s an oversight that makes a noticeable difference in real-world results.

I’ve spent a lot of time in the comment section on our video review of this camera, and there are plenty of people who say that IBIS isn’t necessary. That’s true, strictly speaking. You don’t need IBIS, but it’s a staple on all but the lowest-end cameras.

IBIS allows you to shoot at a lower shutter speed to avoid noisy images. A 61 megapixel sensor is noisier (all things being equal) than, say, the 42 megapixel sensor in the a7C II. IBIS would help compensate for that.

Since Sony managed to squeeze a whole pro-level mirrorless camera into the RX1R II, people were expecting an update, especially a decade-long update, to have this key technology.

With IBIS, this camera would be vastly more useful for street photography and to capture quickly moving animals while panning. Billing this as a travel camera means that there are certain expectations for its use.

IBIS would allow shooters to handhold as the sun sets on a foreign travel destination, or to capture images of your travel partner while you’re both walking. In the dim interior of a coffee shop in another country, handholding at slower shutter speeds would result in noticeably cleaner photos.

A 10-Year-Old Lens on a Modern Sensor

There’s a catch with this camera, despite the sensor’s excellent performance. This camera ships with the same Zeiss 35mm f/2 lens as the RX1R II. Not a redesign. Not an updated version. The same lens.

It was fine when Sony’s autofocus was slower. But now that the AF system is lightning fast, pairing it with an outdated, slow-focus lens creates a performance bottleneck. You can even hear the motors working—something you don’t expect in a $5,000 camera.

To be fair, some reviewers haven’t noticed the lag. But I use the a7R V daily—I know what this sensor and AF system should feel like. This doesn’t match it. It’s not very far off from the a7R V or the a7CR, but it’s not on par with them either.

I even shot some tests with our kittens, using multiple bodies for comparison: my a7R V, the Nikon Z6 III and Z5 II, and this RX1R III. The subject detection on Sony, Canon, and Nikon can usually lock onto a cat’s eye without breaking a sweat.

But with this RX1R III, I missed a lot of shots. This is either because the lens is holding back the AF system, or because the lack of IBIS meant my movements introduced blur.

That said, when the camera does hit, and that is the majority of the time, the image quality is superb. Zeiss glass is still Zeiss glass, and paired with that sensor, you can get gorgeous shots, albeit with some chromatic aberrations if you pixel-peep.

Major Ergonomic Misses

The RX1R III lost the tilting LCD screen of the RX1R II, which is something that confused and infuriated many reviewers.

All of the photo press are friends, and after a company’s briefing, we often call or FaceTime each other to talk about the products. Every one of the five calls I had about this camera started off discussing the lack of a tilting LCD screen.

This isn’t the first time a feature has been removed in a camera’s update, but a tilting screen makes a camera more usable. A fixed-in-place screen is just odd.
If you’re framing at eye level, it’s fine. But if you’re shooting low to the ground—flowers, pets, wildlife—you’re getting down on the ground. For overhead shots, it’s nearly impossible to see a non-tilting LCD screener. That’s something I haven’t had to do with a modern camera in years.

The built-in EVF is better than the pop-up version on the RX1R II, which always seemed to collect grime, but it’s still not great. It’s small, doesn’t have excellent resolution, and doesn’t inspire confidence when manually focusing or checking fine details.

And the LCD? Also mediocre. It washes out in sunlight unless you crank the brightness, at which point your already bad battery life becomes worse.

Speaking of Battery Life

Sony says you’ll get around 250 shots per charge. That’s pretty accurate—I got 75 shots and dropped to 61% battery. Not ideal for travel or street shooting. You’ll need a second battery, minimum.

Worse yet, the SD card and battery live in the same compartment under the grip. If you’ve got a tripod plate attached, you have to remove the camera from the tripod, unscrew everything just to change batteries or swap cards, and then put the plate back on and attach it to the tripod again.
Sony fixed this in the ZV series. Which makes me think they didn’t redesign this body at all—they just made minor tweaks and called it a day.

Other Frustrations and Missed Opportunities

Let’s run through the rest:

• No joystick. You can move AF points using the touchscreen, but if you’re left-eye dominant like I am, your nose hits the screen.
• No locking dials. Not the worst omission, but come on—it’s 2025.
• No 4K/60 video. You’re stuck at 4K/30, which is fine for some travel footage—but again, $5,000.
• Fixed lens. No flexibility. And for this price? You could have an interchangeable system.

There is one small but appreciated detail: when you turn the camera vertically, the interface rotates. That’s great. But it just reminds me of what could have been.

This Could Have Been a Killer Vlogging Camera

Imagine this: a lightweight, full-frame compact with a slightly wider lens, flip-out screen, digital audio support, and the same mic system found in Sony’s ZV series.
Throw in IBIS, and this could have been the ultimate street/travel/vlogging hybrid. Sony got this close, then gave up.

The Bigger Picture

Some commenters pointed out that adjusted for inflation, the RX1R II would cost around $5,000 today. That’s Fair.
But the a7CR is $3,000. It has IBIS, a flip screen, better video, interchangeable lenses, and vastly better battery life.
So for two grand more, the RX1R III gives you… a smaller body, an old lens, and fewer features.

If you’re a Sony shooter, just buy the a7CR. 

Final Thoughts

Sony built its reputation on miniaturization. Radios that fit in a shirt pocket. A Walkman that shrunk every generation. Cameras and lenses that beat DSLRs in size and specs.

The RX1R II was part of that legacy. The RX1R III? Not so much.

It’s the same size, with minimal innovation, and a feature set that doesn’t match the price. Give me this camera at a7CR pricing, and maybe we’re talking. Still not a great value—but at least closer to making sense.

As it stands, this is a $5,000 reminder that progress isn’t guaranteed—even from Sony.