[Closed] recommend me a camera

What sort of camera do you want then? Do you want to be able to change lenses? Do you want it to automatically sync with online services (such as Dropbox) to back-up images? Do you want robust? Small? Waterproof?

Not enough info to recommend I'm afraid.

Don't care that much about automatically syncing or changing lenses. Waterproof - not important.

Will be using to take lots of indoor and outdoor shots.

I want a compact digital camera that takes quality pictures and not something i'm going to get annoyed with as it takes crap indoor shots or takes too long to focus.. or has too many features i'm not going to care about

Sony RX100. Compact so you'll take it with you more often and plenty of functionality

A friend of mine suggested the sony a5000 because it has a huge sensor and great quality. I noticed it doesn't have a viewfinder? Should i be looking at a camera with a viewfinder (are they faster?)

I've still got my Fuji X100 for sale, if that's of any interest to you ?

Updated the Firmware to the latest version this weekend as well.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ot-fuji-x100-camera-4

Sony RX100. Compact so you'll take it with you more often and plenty of functionality

I was just about to reply saying "are you crazy, that's way outside his budget", but I checked and it's not. I bought one when they first came out (and it WAS way beyond his budget) and it is absolutely brilliant. Very small, fantastic image quality.

excellent. Cheers guys. Will take a look at the rx100 and the fuji

+1 for RX100. Bought a used one from fine fellow hereabouts to replace my Lumix / complement my DSLR and it has been exceptional for reliability and image quality. Not so nice (in a tactile sense) to use as other cameras, and can be fiddly, but the IQ is maybe peerless at that size and price.

Lumix panasonic tz60 🙂

+2 for the Sony RX100. Fantastic image quality, IMHO.

But add an after-market finger grip like Richard Franiec's:

[img] [/img]

It makes the camera sooo much nicer to use.

Re: The Sony RX100
There is a mkI, mkII and mkIII now, so just buy the one that's in budget 🙂

The others I would consider would the latest Canon S120 (or earlier cheaper ones like the S110). Or Lumix LX7 (or again the previous LX numbers)

Olympus XZ2

If you felt comfortable buying second hand and can adapt your technique ever so slightly, that Fuji X100 will give drop dead gorgeous colours out of the camera. The Song RX100 is excellent but the Fuji is a much better camera.

The other consideration which is admitedly a little more than budget is the Rocoh GRD.

I should add that the Fuji is better if your main criteria for value is image quality.

^^ Agree that the x100/x100s is nicer IQ still, and love those colours - s'pose it all depends if you want a (wider) zoom lens or a fixed 35mm, and which you consider to be 'compact'? I'd have both if I could as they aren't strictly comparable IMO, and have long coveted an X100s.

(Did they ever fix the AF issues in the x100 firmware btw?)

[img] [/img]

The sony is real nice but too small for my big hands.

Canon G16 is a robust tank that has some nice features. It's also a very high quality build,capable of capturing great images

[img] ?1426544316163&1426544387678[/img]

[img] ?1426544316162&1426544387678[/img]

[img] ?1426544316164&1426544387678[/img]

I should add that the Fuji is better if your main criteria for value is image quality.

Only if that image happens to be at one field of view and stationary. For the vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time the rx100, or anything with a zoom, will be better.

I want a compact digital camera that takes quality pictures and not something i'm going to get annoyed with as it takes crap indoor shots or takes too long to focus.. or has too many features i'm not going to care about

With all the love in the world for the X100 (i have one) it doesn't sound right for the OP. The X100 is a fiddler's camera for those that know how to fiddle and want all the controls right there as dials. It's brilliantly fast and easy to use if you want to do that, as a point and shoot it's not great.

E.g. I lent it to my Dad, who's been well into photography years ago but wouldn't be able to work most modern digitals but he was straight in and worked it all out from the dials. I pass it to my mum for a point and shoot pic and it'll invariably not come out well.

be at one field of view and stationary.

Though I will say I find the X100 particularly good for moving targets, as you can see the person before they enter the frame as the viewfinder's wider than the frame, which is ace. You have to pre-focus though, but I find that on all but the top end DSLRs (and even then sometimes).

I got a Canon G16 just before Xmas and I'm really impressed with it. I came from an older A series PowerShot so it was a leap forward
I like that it is heavy and has dials or buttons and is not limited too much by multi-layered menus or touch screen systems. It may not have a billion pixels but it has a good lens, good on board processing and seems to work well in low light. I'm no expert though

You have to pre-focus though, but I find that on all but the top end DSLRs

That hasn't been the case for years. The Fuji is hard core retro, which is fine, but you can't compare it to a normal camera.

For the vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time the rx100, or anything with a zoom, will be better.

The X100 does have a zoom capability though. Sure it will always be at the same focal length, but you'd have to really know you're stuff to see the difference betewen two objects, the same size in the frame, but via different focal lengths.

With all the love in the world for the X100 (i have one) it doesn't sound right for the OP. The X100 is a fiddler's camera

It may not be right but it's no more a fiddlers camera than the RX100, which has just the same level of control as the Fuji.

RX100 is tiny, if the OP has big hands then it'll be a pain

Did they ever fix the AF issues in the x100 firmware btw?

Yes it was. You can see all the information about the [url= http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/firmware/x/finepix_x100/ ]firmware updates here.[/url]

A couple of sample images to show what it is capable of

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

I found it very versatile, I'm simply wanting something a bit beefier, so I'm going to buy a Fuji X-Pro 1 instead.

RX100 is tiny, if the OP has big hands then it'll be a pain

Ha ha, yup. If you have big, sausage fingers like me, the small dials can be a bit fiddly. Hence why I need to change camera.

New x pro1 reportedly coming soon.

Canon G16 for me. I have a G7 still going strong. Very tough camera takes nice images without much fuss.

A couple of sample images to show what it is capable of

Wow.. is that the rx100 or the fuji x100?

RX100 is tiny, if the OP has big hands then it'll be a pain

nope. no sausage fingers here!

So are people saying i'm going to have to learn a bit about the camera to take pics as it's not a point and shoot?

What about the sony a5000/a5100/a6000?

They were all taken on the Fuji X100 (which has now been sold btw) and I'm not even that good a photogrpaher.

New x pro1 reportedly coming soon.

Fantastic. I shall reap the harvest of other peoples 2nd hand kit, as they rush to upgrade.

RX100

or G16 if you want more controls and a basic viewfinder

If you might print large then the Rx100 will have better IQ

But the G16 will be fine for what most people do

So are people saying i'm going to have to learn a bit about the camera to take pics as it's not a point and shoot?

What about the sony a5000/a5100/a6000?

All modern cameras will work as a point and shoot

But its waste of money to pay for controls and not use them. No point buying an X100 and not playing

But its waste of money to pay for controls and not use them. No point buying an X100 and not playing

Well exactly. Most blokes are naturally tinkerers I reckon. My GF would like it simple to use when she wants to take pics of the baby but I think it would nice to learn what everything does

So are people saying i'm going to have to learn a bit about the camera to take pics as it's not a point and shoot?

Well, in general I think that learning a bit about photography, and how the how the camera works, and how to think about your technique, ie, framing, subject matter, lighting, composition, will make you a better photographer in general, regardsless of whether you shoot in Manual or Auto.

At least that's the approach I take. It's a liitle bit of a longer route, but it pays off in the end.

So are people saying i'm going to have to learn a bit about the camera to take pics as it's not a point and shoot?

In the case of most cameras now (including the RX100) it's entirely up to the user. There are two fully auto modes ('superior auto' and 'intelligent auto') which take great snapshots. The minimum you need to learn is which auto mode to select for a given situation. As with most new cameras I started out with auto, then quickly learned about other stuff. Now I tend to use aperture priority mode with auto HDR selected. If you want to open up more creative potential from your camera then you might wish to learn much more about its capabilities and also post-processing. I like that my camera has an onboard user guide I can select and read whenever.

Malvern Rider: Got an shots you've taken with the rx100 you can show?

Also.. don't by any chance know Stu from Worcester cycle centre?

If you are still looking I've got this..

Canon SX500 IS Powershot.

It's got this 30x zoom thing in it and thats very useful for long-distance shots. I like it's simplicity, has quite a few inbuilt functions that are easy to use and once you get better or more interested in creation of images theres all the manual settings in there to play with too. I paid £250 from John Lewis 12 moths ago.. It's got a load of great reviews too..

Maybe of interest.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

This shot:
http://www.autresdirections.co.uk/pblog/index.php?showimage=503
[img] [/img]

and the subsequent ones were taken with the RX100, but I don't think they represent the capabilities of the camera.

[img] https://www.flickr.com/photos/morfe/15233531749/ [/img]

I think it massively depends how nerdy you think you are likely to get about photography.

I've known quite a few people who buy an entry-level (or better) DSLR or CSC and only ever stick with the kit lens and auto mode - they end up disappointed that the pics aren't really any better than the ones they can take on their phone.

A couple of sample images to show what it is capable of

They all look a little bit soft to me.

Well, that didn't work with Flickr. Will try again via tinypic.

RX100 Mk1 straight from camera:

Handheld, backlit, dark room, no flash with fairly inebriated subjects. Not an artistic shot, but to get any kind of usable shot in these circumstances is a big win for me.

[IMG] [/IMG]

Handheld, dark street under a bridge in partial shadow, moving subject, no flash.

[IMG] [/IMG]

Handheld, auto, through car windscreen. Happy with corner sharpness throughout when shooting wide:

[IMG] [/IMG]

I got an RX100 after a similar thread on here. Absolutely delighted with it, never used the flash, even when videoing action indoors (morris dancing before there's any pitcher requests). I used to be happy with my Lumix but this is a world apart.

...cont'd

Wide shot again, handheld. Shadow detail is acceptable to my eye. Can be improved with a range of HDR options.

[IMG] [/IMG]

Colour is good IMO, though I usually post process. This is standard auto fare.

[IMG] [/IMG]

BW edit panoramic landscape using Autostitch app. There is a sweep panorama function in the RX100, works well but as with most panorama functions is too low res for my needs so I shoot consecutive frames and then stitch later.

[IMG] [/IMG]

As above, now with HDR enabled. At this point I sometimes 'forget' to bring my DSLR along 😉

[IMG] [/IMG]

As nice as a lot of the photos being posted are - at the size they are being viewed they just look like decent compact camera pics.

Not trying to take anything away from the cameras used or the people who have taken them, but cameras are so good now (and have been for several years) that most of the difference between them will be lost when looking at a small image on a forum (IMO of course).

I would expect similar results from my Nikon Coolpix P300, which is several years old now & only cost me £200 new.
But, I am 100% sure that if you were to critically analyse the performance between the Sony model that has been mentioned lots on here & my P300, the Sony would win.

There hasn't been much mention made of usability and ergonomics. I would say that for a given price point, a range of cameras will all produce good results but they will potentially have a widely different 'feel' in terms of the physical unit, how it responds & how easy the menus etc. are to navigate.
OP, I would get a shortlist of cameras around your budget and go & try a few - you will quickly get an idea of what works and what doesn't.

Try the cameras out in store to see how easy things are to change/adjust; stuff like changing the white balance, swapping from multi-point auto-focus to single point selectable or centre point, shooting mode (single, continuous etc), exposure compensation (does it have a dedicated dial or require delving into menus). All of these things can make using the camera feel like second nature, or make it feel like you are constantly having to fiddle about with it & at the end of the day, that is probably more important than whether one camera has better outright quality, than another. Of course, if you find one that you get on with which also has the best image quality, then it's a double win.

^ Totally agree with stumpy's observations. As I said, I don't really 'enjoy' taking pics with the RX100, but for a DSLR complement it has the IQ to just get the job done. I have a few clients I supply archival/stock pics to, and quickly, so in that role it does well as the RAW files are very clean. But. Never ever enjoy picking the damn thing up and finding all those fiddly light-touch buttons and dials, even with my small girly hands, BUT - it is small enough to be on my person always, and that in itself is a thing of greatness. I love using my old Canon EOS DSLR, realllllly love using it. But carrying it? It's work.

For own fun I might still grab a used Pentax MX-1 for point and shoot/macro abilities, solid build and easy interface, not to mention the big bright lens. ( Macro is only really achieved with the RX100 by heavy cropping, it doesn't excel in this) and I was really surprised how the MX1 stacked up against fuji and sony on the DPreview IQ comparison widget

Everything is a compromise somewhere, although less so every year as new tech emerges to meet customer feedback.

I appreciate that the Fuji X100 is possibly the compact with the best rated IQ and "handle-a-bility", but for a main camera has it really got much else except the retro-chic appeal?

For someone who wants decent IQ, bit of zoom action and a good build wouldn't the XE-1 be a better buy....

trickydisco - Member
Also.. don't by any chance know Stu from Worcester cycle

No, but it rings a bell, probably bought something from him 🙂

As nice as a lot of the photos being posted are - at the size they are being viewed they just look like decent compact camera pics

Right click > View Image ? Works for me on a PC.

As nice as a lot of the photos being posted are - at the size they are being viewed they just look like decent compact camera pics

+1. Best to type (ie) 'Fujifilm X100 pool' into Flickr, visit the user photo pool for the camera you select and then be able to view a massive selection of pics taken with that camera, with many available at original sizes (select 'view all sizes' and then select the largest avaiable). Bonus - many have exif data available for the pic so you can see which ISO was used for the shot, etc.

Most digital cameras have a 'pool' over at Flickr.