Compact camera recommendations

Hello, I am venturing over from I Love People-making to ask for a digital camera recommendation. I have an Exilim which is a bit cack at indoor shots of the kids, have just returned a Samsung ST45 as the focusing was terrible and it gave no control over selecting modes..

Needs to be sub £250, pocket-sized and easy to use as I are not a proper photographer, but would like a reasonable amount of control along with point n click simplicity. But take nice clear shots of fidgety toddlers.

Any advice welcome...

As I'm sure you know, all compacts are, to some extent, limited by the same problems: poor in low-light (high ISO pics are very grainy), slow autofocus, not great for portraits as you don't have much control over depth of field. Having said that, I've heard good things about the Canon Ixus 100 IS and the Fujifilm S100fd - they're both in the £160-£180 range on Amazon at the moment.

(If you ever do decide to go the DSLR route, it can be done for £250 and I've got loads of advice! But not pocketable and, if you want to get the best out of it, not all that simple).

Find another £110...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-PowerShot-Digital-Megapixel-Optical/dp/B002LSI1I2/ref=sr_1_21?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1263309711&sr=8-21

Nice big aperture for indoor kid shots.

I've used several IXUS models and liked them all.

I had a play with the S90 this lunchtime (hey, I was picking up prints from Jessops, whaddya gonna do?) - it really is very nice and apparently quite simple to use once you set it up right, but I stood there for 5min trying to figure out how to change white balance. I played with the Fujifilm F200EXR too, which was pleasingly solid (£176 on Amazon). Does all kinds of clever things like combining multiple exposures for the best single image (cheapo HDR, I guess), Fuji film filters (Provia, Astia, etc). The Fuji camera has a very slightly larger sensor than the Canon (though they're both about as big as you get in compacts (around 45-50mm2).

Oh, that does look lovely. Really is out of budget, though :(

X-posts. That Fujifilm one is on my list actually.

I never sort the white balance cos it's so easy to do in Aperture afterwards.

Fine if you're shooting raw. I just wanted to get a decent looking image on the (very nice, better than our DSLRs) LCD. Funny that camera shops use bloody awful fluorescent strip lighting, just like everyone else. I wonder if they go round after the light starts to fade outside and change all the WB settings on the display models so prospective customers can get natural-looking shots of their dubious partners/bored kids in-store as they dither over a purchase.

Amusing stuff that modern cameras do, part #321: face recognition on posters/newspaper ads/billboards. But it's not a real human!

I shoot jpeg; I still don't really understand RAW!

Hmm, you can't really change colour temp in JPGs - you can pick a neutral with the dropper and let Lightroom/Aperture/Photoshop do a best approximation, but it's usually a bit of a fudge. Raw gives you much more control. (That said, back when I shot JPG all the time - when I had the 300D, as it was so slow writing Raw to the card - I didn't encounter too many problems. Oh, apart from one kids' party under fl tubes, which was a disaster).

Im starting a beginners photography night school course soon. I want to purchase a budget DSLR but dont have clue where to start, any ideas for BEST BUY!?

Hmm, you can't really change colour temp in JPGs

so when i drag the WB slider in lightroom, what's it doing? is my image quality suffering? maybe i'll shoot some raw and compare.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/jpg-follies.shtml

the raw file can have the warmth of the late afternoon sun completely removed

why would you do this?!

but yeah thinking about it, i have noticed similar problems, usually after shooting in low light. i will dip a toe into the exciting scary sloooww world of raw.

yeah it's meant to be a limit case but like MJ sound, fluoroscent lights often trick your camera's WB sensor, so it's nice to have. if you're using lightroom anyway, I can't see any reason to choose JPG over RAW except for storage conerns, as Lightroom makes the RAW process completely transparent to the user

Kiwi - all the major manufacturers all make great entry level DSLRs - visit any camera shop and have a play with them and buy the one you like best

That Luminous-Landscape page has left me completely unconvinced.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/06/more-thoughts-o.html

ledge, you'll get bigger problems making colour temperature adjustments at high iso because it has to boost, say, the blue channel, which effectively puts that on an even higher iso with all the noise problems that can cause. but you can get a lot more out of a raw file and make more drastic adjustments.

here's a couple of shots from the luminaire, one from some random flickr guy which has the lights a sickly orange (they're gelled that way, so his pic is probably more accurate) and one from me where i've changed the white balance to bring back the natural skin tone and turn the dull grey background blue. it gives you more options.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2154/2109352258_b30c1af3a5.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2418/2201428189_7ed2fac37e.jpg

I much prefer the latter but I know my missus would want to see something more akin to the former. Borders, white balance, flash - we disagree on some of the fundamentals of photography which is why our joint Flickr stream is so all over the place.

so when i drag the WB slider in lightroom, what's it doing?

The main colour temp slider in Lightroom is limited to some vague +/- blue/yellow thing for JPEGs; for Raw files you have the full K range from 2000 to 50000 (plus a load of drop-down presets). I'll read that LL article later but, in my experience, fixing really f-ed up JPGs shot with AWB is not really possible; with Raw, it genuinely doesn't matter what you shot at (but it's good to be close so the LCD image - a quick and dirty JPG the camera makes - is reasonably representative).

It's funny how I've become a Raw convert in the last six months; I used to use it sparingly in awkward lighting conditions, now I just leave it on. Bad news for my hard drive.

that second one is a great pic. still find it hard - despite my love of lightroom presets - to stray too far from the verité side of things though.

We should have a thread about how we 'normally' shoot and process and stuff.

(We should really get back on topic otherwise Meg is never going to come back!)

So, any other compact suggestions?

Ixus all the way from me, I guess.

back to the topic..

I think a olympus E-420 with a 25mm pancake would easily satisfy all the requirements except being pocketable - actually it's about the smallest DSLR you can get, will definitely focus quickly and get good shots indoors. it's still kind of heavy and doesn't have a patch on the portability of true compact cameras.

We should have a thread about how we 'normally' shoot and process and stuff.

― exploding angel vagina (Scik Mouthy), Wednesday, January 13, 2010 6:30 AM (13 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah i was gonna start a LR/Aperture workflow thread

oh you already did it

Thanks for all the responses. One day I would love a DSLR (if I ever have time to learn to use it) but for now compactness is key -- I have to cart about all kinds of crap for two under-threes wherever I go and I need something I can just shove in a pocket.

I just devote one compartment of my Crumpler bag to pull-ups, nappy sacks, wipes, snacks, spare pants! Well, they are a bit older (and I'd love something like a GF1 in a pocket rather than the faff of pulling out the 40D)...

a used panasonic LX3 might fit under 250 - it's got that crucial f2.0 aperture which will help with getting good indoor shots. a bit bulky as far as compacts go, cause the lens sticks out.

I got an LX3 for Xmas and so far I'm pretty impressed, really loving being able to take shots in 16:9.
The lens is pretty good in low light, but true to form anything above 800 ISO is too damn noisy.

I have a new compact, actually - my brother won it in a raffle and figured, seeing as he already has a perfectly good camera, why not give it to the couple with, er, 13 cameras? (Ok, a lot of them don't work, including our only existing digicam). Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS15 - quite good fun, nice sharp WVGA video, fairly hopeless flash and poor at high ISO, but great for casual snapping. Leave it in "intelligent auto" mode, tweak a little in Lightroom, voila...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2680/4294341712_80805d555c.jpg

Was that a RAW file Michael?

No, the little Lumix doesn't do raw. It does 12MP JPGs in 4x3 mode (or 10.5M in 3x2, 9M in 16x9) or a variety of lower resolutions. Hilariously, that's more pixels than my 40D. The above shot was a quick LR job - Direct Positive preset, rolled back the blacks a bit, exported with a LR/Mogrify border. (And yes, all those presets are optimised for raw - the effects on JPGs tend to be a little more extreme, which is probably all the better for a smeary 1/10sec, ISO 800 digicam shot).

I should read the manual at some point.

And here is the fun item...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4041/4305180088_cf13201622.jpg

Ah righty, wrt that pic how weird that you can see Centre Point now that the Astoria building is trashed. I work just over the other side of Soho Sq.

I go to Soho Sq a lot - usually to see the people at C20th F0x.

PEPSI DRINKER

Em's likely to unfriend you on Flickr for that - she's a Coca Cola fascist.

But they taste the same! (j/k) Classy shot - fizzy drink can in the background, Panasonic balancing precariously on my wallet (SYMBOLIC, yes?).

Ok so I have got my options down to the Fujifilm F200 or the Lumix (although a friend has the Lumix and says not great for dim indoor shots, but what is I guess?)

which lumix? the fujifilm is not going to be any better, I can guarantee.

Was looking at FX150...

would probably go withfuji...

Well I have gone with my gut feeling and just ordered the Fujifilm F200EXR from Amazon, thanks for everyone's input, I shall report back when it arrives (as well as pick everyone's brains on how to use the damn thing).

OK the Fujifilm arrived a couple of days ago, have been playing around with it and pretty happy so far. Here are a few sample shots in case anyone cares -- all taken in automatic mode by a camera dunce (=me) and not tweaked or anything afterwards...

<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/BAPM5-aMXrRJjHUANpUaIA?authkey=Gv1sRgCO_AkruGwMfUKw&feat=embedwebsite";><img src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_Q2cuqOo8v8M/S3R5pCKr_jI/AAAAAAAAOpI/J8XgL_cHjSU/s800/DSCF1012.JPG"; /></a>

<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/l3ft9gv0HVJYzV8iKiUB3w?authkey=Gv1sRgCO_AkruGwMfUKw&feat=embedwebsite";><img src="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Q2cuqOo8v8M/S3R52iQLxCI/AAAAAAAAOpU/W3bHjDHMtCU/s800/DSCF1023.JPG"; /></a>

oops

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_Q2cuqOo8v8M/S3R5pCKr_jI/AAAAAAAAOpI/J8XgL_cHjSU/s800/DSCF1012.JPG

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Q2cuqOo8v8M/S3R52iQLxCI/AAAAAAAAOpU/W3bHjDHMtCU/s800/DSCF1023.JPG

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Q2cuqOo8v8M/S3R6EKnJ_BI/AAAAAAAAOpg/xm0aXeDpEbY/s800/DSCF1026.JPG

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Q2cuqOo8v8M/S3R6Ti1fIaI/AAAAAAAAOps/eH2miiHvaDU/s800/DSCF1068.JPG

Well, they're great! I could totally murder a nice pint of McMullen's too.

I just had an orange juice because I was driving :(

Also would like to point out that I didn't take Archie to the pub with me, that was on another occasion!

Future bro-in-law just bought himself this, following a chat with me;

http://www.findbesttech.com/lumix_dmc-lx3.jpg

Kinda jealous; very sexy.

Took delivery of a G11 yesterday that work bought me so I can make their websites spanky. Very hefty; reckon you could take out an intruder with it if you got a good headblow in. Not really had chance to experiment with it but I've got it home over the long weekend to play with.

Have decided I don't really like compacts anymore. But it'll do for work. Found it very, very odd trying to frame things.

sorely tempted by the X1

:(

just held a canon s90, wow that seems like a fun camera.

the samsung ex1/tl500 sounds like a very tasty camera. 24mm f/1.8 lens

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sam-ex1.shtml

I have the samsung TL225 which is the one with the screen in front and back of camera. great for photographing kids because they get mesmerized by their own image. also you can choose 'kid mode' which will show a creepy clown if youre looking to get pics of your kid in a state of hysterical fear induced sobbing

Just got a Fujifilm X100T. Couple of test shots:

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8660/15956699220_3548f8f56e_z.jpgDSCF0020 by disbister, on Flickr

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8651/15956562278_6a3814c224_z.jpgDSCF0041 by disbister, on Flickr

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8600/16143252932_e007d4d809_z.jpgDSCF0034 by disbister, on Flickr

Loving the size and ability to shoot in low-light. My old Pentax had problems in low-light, and was only 6MP, so I couldn't really crop anything...

I got a DSLR years ago which I really enjoyed and thought would be great for kids, but now that I have kids I HATE lugging it around and only really leave the smallest prime lens on it. I think I'm going for an original X100 to see how I like it. The other option would be something like the RX100 which is maybe too small.

Glad you revived this - I've been thinking a lot about plunking down for something up-to-date in this department. I bought a Canon G15 while scrambling to get ready for a trip a few years ago, but I've never warmed up to the darn thing. I like that it gives me the range of control of an SLR (shooting RAW, moving between Av/Tv/M, easy access to self-timer and stuff like that), but sometimes it's a little too much fiddling, undermining the value of a real quickie point-and-shoot, not to mention that it's just bulky enough to not really be something I keep in my jacket pocket on the regular (though at least I can keep it in my everyday backpack). It also seems like it's out of date in ways that matter - the dinky 1/1.7 sensor, which I guess was not even great at the time, just doesn't deliver the fine detail. In particular night shots really don't look good at all, which is a problem since half the reason for me to have a compact camera is for fun/socializing shots while out on the town and not packing the big 5Dii. In a way, I just really miss the simplicity and reliability of the various film-type Canon Styluses I had in the early 2000s, which, assuming I was packing fast enough film, pretty much always gave a photo I loved with no fuss.

I'm really really drawn to aesthetics/look/feel of the X100 line but I worry that I'd be getting snookered into a high price tag by these kind of irrational factors. On the other hand, a camera I love is a camera I'm likely to shoot with. On the other other hand, maybe I should be giving a closer look to the Sony and Panasonic offerings, even if the sleek modern-day tech-product look isn't really my thing. I think the only thing I'm certain about is that I want to shoot through a viewfinder, not peering awkwardly at a screen on the back. Help?

cameras are so good these days, just spin a wheel

I love my little Fuji X-M1. Yes, the glass for it isn't cheap (I got a very good bundle deal that included the 27mm pancake prime and basic 16-50mm zoom but eventually shelled out for the 35/1.4) and I miss having an eye-level viewfinder, but it's so small and light and I take it everywhere. My rationale for getting the (joint-)cheapest Fuji was that, seeing as I couldn't stretch to the X-T1 with its amazing EVF, I should just do without entirely and have a different photo experience.

It's not great for events where autofocus needs to be super-quick but the quality is astoundingly good. Also, it's the runt of the litter - no longer in production and very few firmware updates - so can now be found, secondhand, body-only, in proper camera stores in the UK for around £120. When you consider what sort of secondhand DSLR that money gets you - something from 2006-08, maybe, low-res screen, crap over ISO800, no video, certainly no wifi - that's amazing value.

(Having said all that, it's precisely a pair of 10yo Canon DSLRs that I've got the girls for Xmas...)

hmmm. does anyone who's used both have opinions on point-and-shoot compact versus interchangeable lens compact? i've never really used the latter - interested in how they stack up in terms of weight/convenience. for myself, i'd be thinking of something i'd keep one lens on at all times, for simplicity / "always at the ready" reasons versus my SLR.

xxxpost: the earlier x100 and x100s are much cheaper used $350 to $600. Also, their out of camera jpegs are supposed to be amazing which I'm interested in because I never shoot RAW anyway.

I'm in the same boat with the 5DII which I love using, but hate carrying, storing, etc etc. I thought about switching to the 6D which is somewhat smaller and lighter, but I still think these big cameras are just rarely appropriate unless you're a professional.

I actually went to a camera store to get a sense of the sizes of these. The RX100 was really really small - like, too small and seemed fragile when using the popup viewfinder (using the viewfinder seemed silly). The Fuji was a little bigger than I was expecting which was actually a plus. That said the X100 is a jacket pocket camera and the sony is truly pocketable and performs almost as well except in certain conditions (but then I always have my iPhone for a good portion of those conditions).

I think the X100 having a single focal length is an advantage at this point in my life.

cameras are so good these days, just spin a wheel

Also agree with this. In fact, for 90% of people, a modern phone camera is the best option.

I definitely would not give up my 5D - full-frame sensor, solid optics, really easy to futz with the controls just spinning dials around with the thumb without looking away - but yeah, I hear you on all that. Maybe an earlier x100 model makes sense for my pocket-ish cam.

If you go for the original, beware of something called "SAB" which might affect some early serial #s (google it). X100S doesn't seem to have the problem.

As for the 5DII, I love it, but I'd be perfectly happy giving it up if the X100 performs as well as some say and I don't miss anything.

Go for an X100s over the X100 - the improvements to usability (viewfinder, speed, AF) are immense. Sensor difference is negligible IMO but the S was loads easier to deal with.

Buy a cheap thumb grip off Ebay or Amazon plus the off brand (JVC? I think) filter ring/hood combo. Thumb grip doesn't add any size but makes holding the body much more stable. The cheap filter ring/hood lets you either use filters (I don't) but more importantly add just a couple of MM of space between the front lens element and the world.

There are a couple of projects in my mind that I'd like a high-megapixel full frame for (to use like I would a 4x5 or MF SLR, giant prints) but it's not something I can realistically pursue and the high-MP cameras are still ungodly expensive.

One thing I love about the smaller mirrorless cameras these days is AF accuracy - it's maybe not blazingly fast but there are no front/back-focus issues (or worries that you're making the issues up in your head) with an X camera.

Agree about AF accuracy. With the 50/1.4 on my Canon, it's a bit of a lottery - esp when the subject is more than a couple of metres away and I'm shooting fairly wide open in low light. Maybe 60% of images are truly sharp (much better hit-rate for closer subjects). I end up pixel-peeping and fiddling fruitlessly with in-body microadjustment. The L lenses are better (my 135 rarely misses). But the Fuji, *when it can focus* (and often I get a red box in difficult conditions - again, the centre-point AF on the 6D is the king here), is dead on every time. If you get a green box you know it's perfect.

I think the higher-end Fujis have a proportion of phase-detect pixels too, enabling better tracking.

Milo, the X100 was given a final firmware update in late 2013 after being discontinued that increased focus speed by 20%, added focus peaking etc. Also the sensor is different and some people prefer it to the later versions (JPG NR for skin at higher ISOs is bad) . That said, I'm still debating which one to get.

I also have the 50/1.4 which drove me crazy til I set only center-point on P mode. I'm also at about 60% for truly sharp photos. They look dreamy at small sizes though.

Whew, good to know it's not just me with the AF issues on the Canon! Does drive me nuts sometimes. I usually just say to myself, well, that's why you were taught to focus a camera manually in the first place. (Though, god, you could never get me to go back to the bizarre ''line up the circles'' ground-glass deal.)

The 50/1.4 seems notorious in this regard. When I use it I tend to shoot two or three frames on the same scene wherever I can.

I had a little look through my Lr catalog for a particularly egregious example of this... This is Green Park during the summer, an f/2.0 shot of a bench maybe twenty feet away (another thing the 50/1.4 doesn't appear to do is write subject distance into EXIF data):

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5642/22891882980_4970b3897c_c.jpg

Detail:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5802/22559181534_95aaf0b66a_c.jpg

It has pretty much focused on thin air in the lower image.

Are those really both 2.0? I like the blurrier one better at least in this thread.

Yeah - I mean, I normally wouldn't take shots like that with shallow DoF, but I knew that it was the kind of scene where the lens would struggle - into the light, subject several metres away - and sure enough, it focused on nothing in the second pic (the focus point was over the guy on the bench). Literally everything is soft. But it does look nice as a detail, you're right - almost like I meant it.

Even the bench colouring has changed, I guess due to there being some purple fringing on the first pic, which I eliminated, and then pasted those adjustments onto the second pic (where there wasn't any such fringing as it was all OOF).

Dithering about this again. Basically, to recap, my frustrations with the G15 have been the 1/1.7" sensor, the bulkiness that keeps it out of my jacket pocket, and the time I spend futzing with buttons and menus because I don't quite trust the auto modes. I DEFINITELY want something with a viewfinder though and this seems to really limit the choices.

Being finicky about not wanting to get saddled again with a dinky sensor brings it down, seemingly, to the Lumix LX100 ($700) and the Leica D-Lux ($1100), both with 24-75 mm zooms and 4/3 sensors... and then the X100T (also $1100) with a fixed lens and an APS-C sensor. The X100 is also the only one with a built-in flash, though tbh I really don't use flash very much at all - and a camera that really can perform in low light would more or less obviate all but fill-flash needs. Meanwhile I feel like I probably would in fact use the zoom enough for the X100 to be a bad choice for me - - - but maybe if I really want to get back to having a simple, effective pocket-cam that's fine? Boy am I a sucker for the aesthetics of the X100. Ugh...

Or am I going about this all wrong? Could I step down to a 1" sensor and still get nice results with night shots and stuff? Are there such cameras with viewfinders anyway? This is the main thing holding me up right now so any feedback would be greatly appreciated. I might also consider something like the Sony RX100 III (1" sensor, $750) with the pop-up viewfinder - the smallest and lightest of any of these - but the pop-up does seem potentially awkward. Aghghghghghgh.

The latest 1" sensors are quite decent. Will you be printing much?

The RX100 series is tough to beat as a complete, pocketable package. The Lumix LX100 is really great, and the beefier body handles well, but I'm not sure that the extra stop or so of high ISO capability is worth the increase in size.

The Lumix GM5 might work for you. The 12-32mm zoom and 14mm pancake prime are tiny, besides other gems like the Olympus 45mm that fit in a spare pocket. I read it's just been discontinued. There are some great deals around.

Size comparison: http://j.mp/1k1fdhW

Do you really need the zoom? I think the 35mm equiv on the X100 series is perfect for most amateur/casual/whatever photography - friends and events and so on, documenting travel. It encourages you to get in close and it's not the end of the world if you find yourself cropping a bit to a 50mm perspective. Everything else about the X100T is top shelf IMO - the EVF is excellent, as is the optical viewfinder, AF is fast, menus are good, the Fuji JPG profiles beat anything anything I can do in RAW with color (B&W is different but the Fuji is good there too).

<3 my x100, no regret at all

These are great posts, thanks everyone. Glad to know the 1" sensors hold up. I basically don't print anything these days but I always say I'm going to pick up the habit again, cause I do love having physical albums to flip through and stuff.

I probably don't really need the zoom. My nostalgia is for a fixed-length, film-type Olympus Stylus - god what a great camera that was - and yeah, can always crop when you have a high quality image. By the same token, I don't really see myself ever buying additional lenses for an intechangeable-lens, or making any use of a hot shoe, so I worry that I'm adding bulk or cost unnecessarily - though yeah, $400 for the DMC-GM5 with kit lens is pretty appealing.

That size comparison site is great... How portable/pocketable do y'all find the X100T in practice? It's bigger and heavier than my current "keep it in my backpack just in case" camera, so it could just take up that role - but something I could actually keep in a pocket would be really nice for social photos and things, I think. Things were simplest as a college freshman when I still was willing to be seen wearing cargo pants. Those days being gone, I'm starting to feel like I'm in denial trying to convince myself I won't ultimately regret buying anything much bigger than the RX100 (III, but maybe II - review/comparisons I've read suggest the difference isn't big enough to justify the price difference). I'm gonna go to the store tomorrow and see how these things feel in my hands though.

Only thing I think I've definitely ruled out though is the Leica D-LUX 109. As far as I've been able to tell, it's just overwhelmingly similar to the DMC-LX100 (which is $400 cheaper), except the Leica usually comes bundled with Lightroom, which I already have. So...no. I was also looking at the Canon G7X for a second but then realized it doesn't have a viewfinder?!?! so I cut that from the list easy. Camera shopping is so complicated! Feel like I could easily get almost to the checkout counter and realize I've totally forgotten to check whether the thing I'm buying can shoot RAW, or whatever.

it doesn't fit in any of my pockets :-(

I totally forgot that the GM5 has a viewfinder! It's so tiny. When Pam was looking at cameras we briefly considered its predecessor (GM1) but it seemed almost too small to navigate. Also, the 20/1.7 prime actually stuck out at the bottom - you needed the extra grip to make it flush. I guess that's still the case with the GM5. I don't think the smaller-form 14/2.5 was available then.

I guess if you have it set up the way you want (aperture priority, f-stop on thumb-wheel, auto-ISO, fast prime), you never have to fiddle with tiny buttons anyway, so it becomes an ideal pocket cam.

But, as you know, you get an interchangeable-lens camera, you WILL end up with more than one lens. It's inevitable ;) Sigma do some affordable primes for micro-4/3rds, at 19/30/60mm.

The X100T is definitely backpackable but not pocketable. It's light but the overall size is similar to a film rangefinder with small lens.

The Ricoh GR II might be a good option - bigger sensor, no viewfinder but you can get aftermarket options I think. I had an older GR when they used smaller sensors and even that one was nice (until it was lost with some luggage).

Hmmm, looking at that one... don't think I can seriously see myself doing anything where you have to clip on a viewfinder though - defeats the pocketability/ready-to-go-ness I fear. Thanks for the tip, though.

I think I have it down to this:

GMC-DM5 ($400, 4/3) - by far the best price/size for seeing how I feel about an interchangeable-lens cam
RX100 II ($500, 1") - for size, weight, and flash when you need it - most portable of these and seemingly best in its class*
LX100 ($700, 4/3) - "halfway" b/w the RX100 and X100T, bigger sensor and more features than the former, plus zoom
X100T ($1100, APS-C) - serious enthusiast mode, big beautiful camera everyone raves about, no consumer-friendly frills like flash or zoom

* - seems like the differences with the RX100 III and IV aren't big enough to justify the price leap - III gains a full stop at max zoom but...

Kind of a wild range of types of cameras and price (and used prices for some of these do change the picture a lot - now seeing X100Ts at $920)... but since I'm trying to compromise around a few ineffable factors maybe that's what I need to do. Gonna head to the store today and at least try 'em out, maybe make a purchase! Thanks again everybody.

X100T has a really great flash! No zoom though.

why not get an x100s or x100? much cheaper.

I have an X10 because the X100 was too expensive at the time. I appreciate it more than I did when I bought it, but the lack of a real viewfinder and bulkiness are down points. I think it's a rung or so below what you're looking at here, though.

haha oops yeah, i had so many inky scribbles on my page that point that I got mixed up (re: X100T and flash).

So! Here's how it went down:

GMC-DM5 ($400, 4/3): Glad I looked at this, but didn't seem like it really made sense; with the lens on, it fits so awkwardly in a jacket pocket that the advantage of the tiny footprint fades away and the disadvantages (thumb/button size ratio, limited controls) loom large.

RX100 II ($500, 1"): Realized only the III actually had the viewfinder - oops. So, looked at the III ($750). Thought the overall feel was pretty good! Size is great obviously. However, I didn't realize how finicky the pop-up viewfinder actually is - you have to pull down a little switch to pop it up, and then grab its front element between thumb and forefinger and pull it towards you 1/8" to 1/4" til it clicks, at which point it actually works. It's possible I could get used to that, but then on top of it - and maybe it was the display model being a little loose or worn out - but I found that even in just taking a few shots around the counter, my glasses would bonk into the viewfinder enough to push it back in and thus turn it off. What a pain! Just couldn't imagine that ever being pleasant or natural, in the "camera as an extension of my hands and eyes" kind of way.

LX100 ($700, 4/3): Just got nowhere with this. The zoom lens makes it quite bulky, but I thought it generally just had surprisingly bad feel, particularly in handling the aperture ring and the other dials and controls. Nothing I could really describe to you now and maybe I would have eventually gotten used to it, but it just didn't seem to naturally "work," if that makes sense.

So that left the X100T, which I loved from the moment I picked it up. The greater size and weight are obvious negatives for my "pocket cam" goals - but even if it remained a "bag cam" it just seemed obvious that I would enjoy shooting with it more than my current bag cam, and get photos I liked better out of the process. While I thought I was being seduced only by the aesthetics, it turns out it was also by the design - the dials and controls are all nearly exactly where I'd put them and I can just see myself, after I have all the custom settings worked out, being able to point-and-shoot with it. However... by the time I got back to the used counter where I'd been checking it out to see how it did with pockets (inside jacket pocket actually a passable fit!), the used one had actually already sold online. At this point, the gentleman behind the counter thought to do a search and found that he had an X100S in the back (which I swear they didn't have when I was searching yesterday) - sold for $600 plus memory card, tax, etc. Considering what I was considering as an uppermost price point when I walked in the door, it feels like a steal - not much more than i paid for the utilitarian and tiny-sensored G15 two years ago.

Savored the manual on the way home, have the battery charging now. I'll be shooting with it on this next trip down south, so will report back on results. Thanks to everyone on this thread for really thoughtful responses - feeling much better about this purchase than I would have otherwise.

Hurrah! Welcome to the Fujifamily. One of us, etc

good deal :-)

an annoyance: they included the strap, but no triangular clips or the clip-on device! so it goes with used. will just have to grab them at the first camera shop i encounter on my trip i guess.

With the money you saved buying the S instead of the T, you can buy the tele and wide lenses

yikes, no thanks! desperately avoiding carrying around any extra items, and AFAICT the teleconverter brings the lens up from a 35mm equivalent to a ... 50mm equivalent, which isn't really all that exciting right? like would the results be meaningfully different (in most situations) from just cropping the regular image? i say this as someone who lived for a long long time on my first film SLRs with only a 50mm normal lens (and was probably a better photographer for it) (though i did find it a bit cramped), while having a ball with the original olympus stylus's 35mm lens...

My all-time strap recommendation: http://www.streetstrap.com/
Amazon has them - sort of pricey but worth it.

I know Schwantz has posted on another thread about X100T battery life. Is there a way to configure it (like the X-T1/T10, I believe) so that the LCD is always off (except for image review) and the EVF only powers up when your eye is up to it? That's always going to be the problem with mirrorless - the batteries are physically smaller and there's continuous drain if you're using the LCD to compose.

I Instagrammed a snap of the menu display on my 6D a few months back - I'd done a couple of events back to back on a single charge and the shutter count was up to 1800+, with battery level finally down into single figures. DSLRs aren't going anywhere as long as they have that advantage.

Does the View Mode button not control that? On the X100S it cycles you between LCD, LCD-until-you-hold-it-up-to-your-eye, and EVF-only, though I keep bumping it accidentally and I need to look in the manual and see if there's a simple way of locking that setting...

Yeah, it does have eye sensor mode. In any case, the battery life is still not great. OTOH, you can get batteries on Amazon for like $10, and they are pretty small. Easy to carry an extra. Or, you can use one of those portable phone chargers to charge the camera via USB.

I get about 300-330 shots (with the 35/1.4 attached; maybe more with the pancake and kit zoom) with the original battery; my two third-party batteries top out at about 230 and never give any indication that they're about to die (straight from three bars to flashing red).

Don't think it's possible to charge the battery in camera (on my model at least), but, yeah, there are universal Li-Ion / NiMH chargers that will run off USB / 12V car socket / etc.

another vote for x100t if you don't need to zoom. It fits in a jacket pocket (ymmv) as far as I'm concerned but it's also small and light so you don't mind carrying it at chest level all day. I'm a heavy Canon MK3 user so I don't mind carrying SOMETHING but I don't always want to carry the big mama

I also think the 100-series will have a long practical life, for lack of a better word. Metal body; solid construction; wears well. I'm an every-other-generation buyer so I worry about things like a panasonic whatsit that is made of blue plastic and has a sliding shield door for the lens and so on

Still getting my bearings with the X100S. I think I like a lot of things about it, but one thing has been really frustrating - the playback image (like, the "just taken" photo) in the electronic viewfinder always has just crazily hideous and incorrect white balance and exposure. Like, if you look at the same image on the back screen it's a lovely frame, in the EVF it looks blown-out, washed-out, and often very different in color temperature. Kinda defeats the whole purpose! If I'm trying to shoot a candid or something, I don't really want to be pulling the camera away from my face, checking the screen, bringing it back up... plus I don't want to have to go through so many extra exposures to save just the good ones later. Is this normal for this camera, or do I have a glitchy one or something?

Perhaps related - the brightness of the digital display elements in the EVF will often kind of 'flicker' or cycle between brightnesses if I'm doing something like wheeling through different ISO settings. Very distracting...

Finally, sometimes for no reason I can perceive, I only have the choice of a few ISOs but maybe that's me getting into some mode I don't mean to be in or something...

The EVF will flicker in certain circumstances, like the refresh rate is too low - I encounter it with very long shutter times (which would be inappropriate for using the viewfinder anyway, most likely).

No idea on the white balance issue and ISOs, I haven't encountered that with the 100/S/T so I'd bet on settings issues (unless the former is a problem, which might be the case).

Confirmed - it was the EVF brightness setting! I just couldn't figure it out because when you go to that setting, if you happen to be looking at the LCD, it will ONLY show the LCD brightness control and nothing you do seems to let you fuck with the EVF. Kind of a "duh" thing but it threw me. Anyway, the EVF was set to +5 by the previous owner and things now are muuuuuuuch more WYSIWYG. Whew! With that and a new, non-defective battery, I'm ready to start keeping this in the backpack and see how I do!

Also glad to figure out where the Fuji film settings are buried in Lightroom - way down in "Camera Calibration." Without turning them back on, you default to your basic RAW image, which makes sense but is still a little annoying. Frankly I'm not sure I buy most of them - Velvia is SO over-the-top saturated and contrasty (shadow detail especially just gets fucked) that it looks like a kid playing around with Saturation for the first time. I bet if I did more B&W stuff I'd appreciate the different monochrome modes though, for portraits and stuff.

(Provia seems okay though, if I want something a little more saturated and heavy than the Adobe defaults, and Camera Pro Neg Std. if I want something a little deader and flatter.)

I need a couple of cameras to be used in a production environment by non-photographers who will want to be able to just point and shoot, often in low-light situations, and extremely quickly get the photos onto their computers. Prior to now they've been using 7Ds, often breaking the pins in the CF slot, being clumsy with the flash, etc. The cameras are FAR too complicated for them. I need something rugged and no-think that can still take a good picture.

I mean they don't really get simpler than the 7D. You can go 100% the other way and just get a bunch of rebels and throw them away when they break

With Lightroom, I find that I have to dial back some of the contrast to use the Fuji profiles.

Tracer: yeah, I'm not sure... if they're breaking CF pins and damaging the pop-up flash, then maybe something with an integral (flush?) flash and SD cards? I know they were just two random examples of clumsiness and not the main issue, but maybe a good solid compact like the Canon G7X or even the Fuji X100 series we've been discussing? You can just use a DSLR like a point-and-shoot, just like you can use ProTools like a tape recorder, but I know it's probably a bit daunting if you're not handy with it. There's a "green box" mode on the 7D, right?

Dr C/Milo: I've never used the Fuji profiles in Lr, I should have a go. Lots of people have been complaining about Lr Raw conversion for the X-Trans sensor (there are dozens of side-by-side screengrabs out there on forums showing how Such and Such Standalone Convertor from Small Company totally trounces Adobe at extracting detail from the X-series cameras) but I found a blog post from someone who came up with some fairly counterintuitive sharpness settings for Fuji, and they do the trick as far as I can tell (or care). So I have them as presets. I will have a look later.

Out on a limb here, since I know nothing about your profession/situation/etc., but would there be any possibility of, or percentage in, putting these staffers through some really basic photo courses? Dunno if it'd help with them being cavalier/clumsy with equipment, but I have to figure even a few tutorials or 1-2 classes at the local store (or wherever?) would lead to people being more comfortable with something like a 7D, or even get better pictures out of it! Just an idea.

Wonder how much, these days, even REALLY basic camera-handling techniques might be fading out. If you really only ever shoot with an iPhone than even the kind of grip amateurs would have learned to use with an Instamatic or latter-day point-and-shoots, or the small gentlenesses of unloading film, memory cards, or batteries, might be on their way out.... though we're probably a long way from that being a ubiquitous condition.

^ yeah basically. I have no clue how you bend a CF pin tbh. One of the things I remember my dad harping on about when I was little is that "you shouldn't have to force _____ in order for it to work." in these modern times you should assume that if a CF card isn't going into the slot it's user error and not the problem of the machine eg THINK, CHILD.

...speaking of which how old are these people who keep breaking shit bc really...

They are like 25 years old and yes, even the really basic camera handling techniques are like some ancient art to them.

They break the pins by shoving the card in the wrong way. Then they shove it in the RIGHT way, which damages the card itself. Then that doesn't work, and they leave the card lying on a desk, which someone else then tries to use in another camera, and the broken card then breaks the pins in THAT camera.

We have provided classes but only the motivated ones take the classes and/or pay attention, and they're not the ones we need to worry about anyway.

I have had a vote for the Fuji X10/20/40 series, so will go down to a shop and see how they feel.

Memory cards are going to be an issue with every camera - I guess an SD card slot is less breakable, but they'll be snapping the cards themselves left and right.

this is so weird to me tbh - how many cameras exactly have they broken? feel like just learning the "don't force things" rule and maybe like, idk, marking the cards and cameras up with brightly-colored electrical tape or paint or something to give you an "orange lines up with orange" type system might be cheaper than buying a new set of cameras.

or have another, separate person in charge of all memory card loading/unloading

lol

marking the cards and cameras up with brightly-colored electrical tape or paint or something to give you an "orange lines up with orange" type system might be cheaper than buying a new set of cameras.

Oh believe me we've done all this sort of thing. Colour-coded stickers, big clear arrows drawn with Sharpie, the works. That's why we're not letting these particular folks borrow the 7Ds anymore. They will be buying their own cameras, probably 2 of them, and I want to give them a recommendation about what to get.

what... class is this?

Maybe one of these?

http://m.thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-mirrorless-camera-under-1000/

I love my X100t, but there are many cameras for much less that are pretty close in image quality, and probably easier to use.

It's a radio station, Jimmy :/

Fujifilm X-A2 looks pretty nice. Do you need the ability to connect different lenses (like big zoom lenses for example)?

aaaaah I see...

If they need to use your existing EF lenses, a cheap Rebel makes the most sense. Familiar handling too, if they've been using the 7D. Dead-simple EOS M also an option, given how low their sale prices have gone in the past.

Awesome, thanks! EOS M is WAYYYY less expensive and looks super simps..

X-Pro2 announced from Fuji - more megapixels, better faster stronger etc..

X200 coming soon, then?

So over the holidays i traveled to visit family and didn't even bother to bring my big camera. I did miss it a few times but I just dont ever want to travel with it again so I resolved to slim down. I found an excellent original X100 on eBay (for cheap) which is arriving soon and will report back on whether it can at least partially fill the Canon's shoes.

So far, I think I'm really digging the X100S. Haven't Flickred anything from it yet but just from some preliminary poking in Lightroom I'm really impressed. The biggest thing is just how well that sensor performs - I can shoot at ISO 2000 and the images look good. I can shoot at 4000 and if I got a good exposure the images look good. If I have to boost overall brightness or shadows, I do start seeing some noise, but compared to where I would start on my previous camera, I mean, ISO 4000 looks like ISO 400 or something.

I do wish it were a little quicker on the draw, or maybe I just don't have my technique down yet. Need to read the manual through again and see what other kinds of shortcut/customization options I have. There's this very slight delay between pressing the topside function button and the associated menu popping up which is maybe part of my issue. Would love an actual physical dial for ISO just for maximum speed of being able to set that, but obviously there are strong reasons not to go that route. Overall though I'm feeling good about this camera and these images.

it's not you it's slow on the draw

http://www.shutterbug.com/content/old-becomes-new-olympus-unveils-pen-f-mirrorless-digital-camera-based-analog-classic

drooling uncontrollably

Nice but I still think Fuji have the edge in aesthetics.

I'm thinking of getting a new camera - I have a LUMIX FZ38 which is good but bulky and about eight years old.

Has anyone used the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II?

I've been using an E-M1 for the past couple of years, and Micro Four Thirds as far back as the GF1.

The E-M10 Mk. II is pretty hard to beat as an entry-level mirrorless camera, especially if you are interested in picking up additional lenses down the line. All it really lacks vs. the higher-end bodies is weather sealing, but you still get twin control dials, touchscreen, and a nice OLED viewfinder.

The new Lumix GX85 seems to be getting great reviews and has much better video quality, but it's a bit more expensive. Maybe Fuji X-E2 or XT-10?

Size comparison between the likely contenders: http://j.mp/2dQQHCn

Fuji a bit misleading since they lack a compact kit zoom, but most of their prime lenses are quite small.

I have a mk1 and love it

That's great, thanks all.

a sad end to a happy thanksgiving: dropped my X100S and it is a dead duck. on powering up, i get only a fixed display of white static in the viewfinder (whose shutter is incidentally stuck closed) and no response from any other part of the unit. :( last time i needed something fixed (purple static viewfinder glitching), it cost $300 which was half what i paid for the camera. now the price for a refurbished one is down to $300-500 so is it even worth trying to fix/sell?

confession, a dumb part of me is like, "wellp, guess that's the excuse to finally shell out for the X100F!" but that's a pretty big purchase! and i don't want to just get caught up in the holiday madness. and yet and yet.... that is a two-generations improvement. seems like biggest things are more megapixels, more customizable dials (freeing up one from being ISO, which should have been a dial to begin with), and most intriguing of all, the focus-point selector joystick... should i do this???

i guess i never really came back here to really report on the X100S but i really loved it, thanks again to those who chimed in with advice on this thread. kept in my backpack at all times and i got some great, great shots, not just "great for a compact" but great (imho!). in particular the dynamic range and performance in low light/high ISO are real winners. when i go out with my DSLR i still pack it and use it for tough "sunlight but also deep shadows" situations since my 5Dii just can't match that performance (might eventually have to make an upgrade there too - but, $$$).

the majority of what i snapped with it over the past two years (!) isn't online, but here's a few samples to show off its capabilities:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4418/37034677435_c51e9c3188_c.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4396/36893841121_970c7c7158_c.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4390/36199487274_a7959e5241_c.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4410/36987133876_7352962473_c.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4415/37004913472_b8a74b56b1_c.jpg

(all shot raw and then fiddled in lightroom)

Get the F. And report back. :) I have the T and I love it, but I’d like the F just for the ability to crop.

I’m thinking of getting an XT20 maybe. Replaceable lenses would be nice.

i would just get a new one

Sorry to hear about the X100S! Maybe by now there are X100Ts out there now for less than what you paid for the S two years ago?

(I know this is the *compact* camera thread, but talking of holiday deals, B&H and Adorama torture me every year with their Black Friday bundle emails. B&H were doing 6D2 + pro-grade printer + paper + spare battery + bag + battery grip + 64GB SD card for the dollar equivalent of £1070. That camera retails for about £1700 over here, body only. Of course, I don't *need* a 6D2 or anything else).

I got the F and the joystick is a PITA (it bumps around when I wear the cam around my neck) but overall it's the same experience/pleasure to use

also MJ the f*ing 5DIV deal is staring me in the face as my 5DIII is literally falling apart in places so I'm w/ you on the TORTCHA

http://78.media.tumblr.com/58cd0b2b77e342ab565bf97b2453e1b8/tumblr_owllpfGgrl1qb3bjyo1_1280.jpg

^ that's w the F. not that it really shows anything!

I have an X-T2, which is the same sensor as the X100F, it's really good (though 99.9% of photos I take are for my store's social media or Ebay now). Fuji's made big improvements in the autofocus speed in the last two generations.

Those rooftop babes appear very life like

er... is that supposed to be a reference to my friends?

fwiw anybody who is thinking about shelling out for the X100F, I can say that I am a million percent satisfied with mine. haven't gotten anything shot with it online yet but it is everything i liked about the X100S, but better. the focus point joystick thing is REALLY REALLY REALLY helpful, very fast and beats focus-and-recompose by miles. plus pretty easy to explain to people if you need to hand over the camera. the increased number of programmable buttons and dials is very helpful too and having the front dial to dedicate to ISO saves a ton of button-massing to change this very basic thing. i also think there's a real leap in high ISO performance, which was already excellent on my X100S. if you have a working S or T, it's not an urgent must-do upgrade, but if you're just in the market for a great camera to keep in your bag, and the price works for you, i really think it's phenomenal.

Was thinking abut the x100 for awhile but now the Sony a7s has my attention because of its reputation working with low light

X100 4 LYFE
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3798/12351945543_afc3631df0_o.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/711/22545069306_3c853e5d05_k.jpg
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3903/14355250525_0edb973750_k.jpg
All straight from the camera, no tweaking needed.

yeah, this line can do amazing things.

X100. Oh dear wish I'd not clicked on this thread now...

some discussion here

The camera thread.

Why did you do that the late great when I had pretended to have not bookmarked the thread? I have already been salivating on eBay.

doooo it

Soooooo I did it. X100 as early Xmas present to me. Looking forward to testing. Any tips for best results for an x100 beginner? Should I stick with the auto settings for best results?

Works for me! I pretty much leave it on Auto most of the time.

If you notice the lens hunting a lot to focus, make sure you didn't turn on macro mode (by hitting the up arrow - at least on my X100T).

Still in love with my x70, the way it picks up light is striking.

Re X100,
(a) make sure the firmware is updated, it fixes a lot of focus issues
(b) have the focus setting switch on the middle position (it has a box in the middle not crosshairs) - it tends to focus quicker and with less fuss at the expense of occasional errors
(c) straight JPEG out of the camera usually looks pretty phenomenal
(d) http://fujix-forum.com is a good support community for beginners to pros

Thanks for all the tips re X100. Getting more used to its idiosyncrasies now.

can anyone recommend me a point-and-shoot I can find for less than ≈$50 on eBay? I like the specs on the Canon PowerShot S95 (1/1.7" sensor, f/2.0–f/4.9 lens, 10MP, manual focusing and exposure, shoots RAW, seems to work well in low light) although the 3.8x zoom is a slight drawback. I just want a solid carry-around camera and I don't really care if it's 5+ years out of date as long as the image quality is decent.

I’ve had good experiences with the old Sonys, still have an old 10x Optical zoom model that works great.