My trusty 12 year old Lumix FZ5 bridge camera is dying and I Intend to replace it as a 50th birthday pressie to me. Looking for something small enough to actually take biking as the FZ5 was a bit bulky. The FZ1000 is a direct descendant but weighs over 800g. Priorities are minimum 1″ sensor, adjustability via control dials rather than endless menus and enough zoom to assist composition, rather than using cropping later. Quite like a viewfinder too. I’m aware of the trade off between zoom / lens speed and am now bewildered by the choice available. The Sony RX100 mk111 is well regarded but lacks zoom, the Lumix TZ100 has plenty zoom but is slower. Canon offer various G models in between. Help!

am now bewildered by the choice available.

Given your somewhat narrow spec ideals I must admit to being surprised by that.

To recap (please correct if I’m out)

Compact zoom or bridge camera with:

Long/ish zoom
Fast lens
1″ minimum sensor
Control dials/intuitive menu
Relatively lightweight (lighter than 800g)
Viewfinder if poss

?

When you say the RX100 ‘lacks zoom’, how do you feel it lacks sufficient zoom to ‘aid in composition’? This is obviously subjective yet I found the zoom 3.6 zoom on my MK1 was ample for that task. Not so much/at all for macro. And I almost despised the ergonomics/menu system. Great size vs IQ though!

When the RX100 developed an error I ended up trading sideways and going larger/heavier, with faster lens, smaller sensor (Pentax MX-1). I don’t normally intend to make large prints from a compact camera so it’s not a problem. And it takes really nice pics.

Would love something similar with larger sensor. A ‘unicorn’ of a camera, I imagine. So easy to get hung up on sensor size.

What about a Canon G5X? Couple of years old now, so right price, seems to fit much of the bill?

Hence my bewilderment! 1″ sensor seems to be the benchmark, with some premium compacts having larger sensors but losing a viewfinder to keep prices competitive. The FZ5 had a 12x optical zoom that was handy for shooting wildlife or neighbouring peaks, although anything over 8x needed a trig point or tripod in dull conditions. The Sony RX or Lumix LX models appear suited to low light but 3x zoom may frustrate me. Moon on a stick?

Quite like that G5. Proper control wheels and viewfinder. Do Canon offer similar with a longer zoom?

Sony A 6000. I ran a Nex 6 for two years before killing it. The new A6000 has a better autofocus system which is class leading for CCS cameras and puts many DSLRs to shame. Great image quality and I run it with a neck strap on a Lowepro rucksack strap bag.

The downside is the zoom isn’t long so may not work for you.

Like you say, moon on a stick!

A Sony RX if you want compact with good image quality.

Hope this helps?

Cheers

Sanny

Sanny, what camera did you have on the Aberfeldy and Prost8 Pedal trips? It was small enough to stay round your neck and actually get used, rather than live in a padded bag.

I’ve got the Sony A6000 and it’s brilliant but my brother in law has the A5100 and it’s probably more suitable for biking/portability.

It’s got all the manual control most users would want but it’s a bit smaller and more streamlined than the A6000. Only issue would be the zoom but I have no idea why anyone would want that.

It was a NEX 6. The new A6000 is a step up for sports photography. I have no illusions of being a great photographer but the NEX 6 has always done a good job for me in full auto mode. The new model is the same price and size but a real improvement where it counts for me (up to 11fps).

I hummed and hawed about a replacement but ended up going for the 6000 as I had two lenses and it got really good reviews for sports.

Cheers

Sanny

A5100 doesn’t have a viewfinder though?

The thing you’ve identified with ‘superzooms’ is that you carry a lot of bulk in order to get closer to things. And not always with the best IQ from what I’ve seen.

With a larger sensor compact like the RX100 I found that even with cropping it obv gave me better results at the equivalent magnificafion than my older much smaller-sensored Lumix. The extra ‘digital zoom’ on the RX100 was also surprisingly usable and I’d certainly be happy with 5×7 prints from that, possible larger.

And whatabout the RX100 ‘Clear Image zoom?’ Again, even more impressive. Dammit, I’d have loved that amera if it was built like my Pentax.

Here’s a discussion about this you may find interesting

RichPenny – Member

A5100 doesn’t have a viewfinder though?

True. That’s part of why I recommended it. My b.i.l. is just getting into photography and he specifically said he didn’t like using the view finder on my A6000. I think that was more because he felt he might look a prat than any ergonomic or functional reason though.

Thanks Sanny, plenty of decent pics on both trips.

Interesting article MR, now wondering if my desire for a longer optical zoom and viewfinder is entirely necessary.

1st world problems…..

Love my Sony A6000, Zeiss, 16-70 zoom on it. Speed, quality but bulk. Daughter has the A5100 and 16-50 kit lens. It’s great, same sensor as the A6000, no view finder though.

Also, love my Canon G9x. 1″ sensor, proper aperture ring too. Speed, small, decent quality.

Had a Sony RX100 mk3 but found it too small and fiddly. Canon is nicer to use.

Out of the Sony and the Canon, the Canon goes put more, just because it’s smaller.

Best biking camera though, my Olympus Tough TG3. Images are ok, it’s waterproof, tough, and I don’t care about it like I do the others.

Interesting article MR, now wondering if my desire for a longer optical zoom and viewfinder is entirely necessary.

For landscape work I don’t miss a viewfinder. Close portraits yes. I’d miss an articulated screen more as they are great for macro and candid.

Longer optical zoom is not something I’ve used much as (maybe wrongly) I don’t really see the point other than moon or sports and the latter is always served better by miles by a fast DSLR

Forgot to post this link re different zoom options, crops etc on the RX100

Pics say it best

Forgot to say, maybe put the LX100 in the shortlist? Fast lens, biggish zoom, sensor size may be the only compromise, yet as always depends on expected final output

Nikon was set to release a 1″ sensor range of compacts, but it looks like they cancelled them….

https://www.dpreview.com/news/6864148000/nikon-cancels-dl-compact-series-citing-high-development-cost

Which is a bugger because I’ve been lusting after the 24-85 version since it was announced.

I’ve been looking for something a bit more capable than my little TZ72, which does a great job but is limited by sensor size and ISO ratings in dim light, but it does have a long zoom.
The downside of that, of course, is trying to track something that’s moving and camera shake. I’ve looked at the NEX/A6000, which are nicely compact, with a good range of lenses, but then you have the hassle of carting lenses around! I’d looked at the RX100, but I was rather put off by the lack of a long zoom, so having read the article linked to above I’m thinking an RX100 III/IV might be exactly what I need. I like the viewfinder on the IV, I’ve got used to having one when taking photos at gigs, it’s far less distracting for others not having a glowing screen held up, plus I find it far easier to frame with the camera held to my face, the ISO range is ideal in dim lighting, coupled with an f1.8 lens, and the Clear Image zoom looks fantastic, coupled with the greater crop-factor of the large sensor.
Thanks, this has proved a really interesting read, and has crystallised my thoughts.
I’m due a week’s holiday pay for days I didn’t realise I was due last year and didn’t use, so there might be a little gift to myself in the very near future! 😀

My trusty 12 year old Lumix FZ5 bridge camera is dying and I Intend to replace it as a 50th birthday pressie to me. Looking for something small enough to actually take biking as the FZ5 was a bit bulky. The FZ1000 is a direct descendant but weighs over 800g. Priorities are minimum 1″ sensor, adjustability via control dials rather than endless menus and enough zoom to assist composition, rather than using cropping later. Quite like a viewfinder too. I’m aware of the trade off between zoom / lens speed and am now bewildered by the choice available. The Sony RX100 mk111 is well regarded but lacks zoom, the Lumix TZ100 has plenty zoom but is slower. Canon offer various G models in between. Help!

I’d say that the TZ100 is still an option. It maybe slower but I suspect on all levels it will outperform the FZ5 in terms of low light and perhaps even reach. I have an RX100 and iso 400 is great, it was poor in my memory, on the FZ5. I’d say the TZ100 will be a zoom in good light camera. I’d miss the f1.8 at the wide end for those flash free pub shots

RX100 and it its variations will allow croping so I think my RX100 can be seen as 200 and still print as big as the FZ5. But the 11 iv and v are really poor on reach with their 70mm equivalant zoom

I think the other thing to investigate is microfourthirds, maybe with a 28-300 equivalant zoom

Me I’m happy with an RX100. I might try and sell my DSLR for an FZ1000 one day

Quite like that G5. Proper control wheels and viewfinder. Do Canon offer similar with a longer zoom?

G3X ?

G3X 25x zoom, water & dust sealing but over twice the weight of the FZ5
TZ100, slightly less zoom (10x) and weight than the FZ5

Anything new will blow the FZ5’s socks off I suppose.

Just a thought, why not pick a minty Olympus Stylus 1 (discontinued) and take it for a test run? Yoy may find (as did I with the MX-) that your needs for a 1″ sensor seem to vanish with the right feature-set and IQ

Stylus 1 pool

I’ve got a Stylus 1s. Love it, but then again I’ve never had a DSLR (had a few film SLRs, though). It seems good enough for anything I would ever use it for, fast lens, good EVF, tilting screen etc etc.

^. I now remember shortlisting the Stylus 1 (and the XZ-2) after the RX100 died. I really like the lenses of Olympus/Pentax compact zooms, especially 2.8 aperture available right through the zoom range. Half a mind to pick one up as an alternative/backup for my MX-1. Viewfinder and extra zoom would come in handy in certain situations. Seems the low-light focusing is v fast ?

[video]https://youtu.be/5OxzPYun2Xg[/video]

.

Best biking camera though, my Olympus Tough TG3. Images are ok, it’s waterproof, tough, and I don’t care about it like I do the others.

Ditto – I’ve got a TG4. Shoots RAW, f2.0 and can go in the sea

If you can live without a zoom then for £500 the best two cameras for image quality you can buy that are also more than small enough to put in your pocket are the fujifil x70 and the Ricoh GRD. Both these cameras will give you better dynamic range and low light performance than the recommendations so far.

If you are looking at the A6000 I’d suggest one of the smaller m43 bodies. With one of the compact zooms it would be a much smaller overall package.