|
Huskalator posted:So, I bought a Sony DSC RX-100 and I'm kinda disappointed it doesn't take better pictures than my buddy's camera phone and its way more of a pain in the rear to use. Your buddy's camera phone probably took better photos because your buddy has a better eye for compositions. There is no possibility the RX-100's sensor is worse than any camera phone's. Maybe you should just sell it, you clearly have no hope with a camera.
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:39 |
|
|
Huskalator posted:So, I bought a Sony DSC RX-100 and I'm kinda disappointed it doesn't take better pictures than my buddy's camera phone and its way more of a pain in the rear to use. In terms of technical difference, you get the ability to zoom and to edit RAW files, which really helps as compared to a phone camera. So it does boil down to how you're using it. It also explains to you why compact camera sales are diving off a cliff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
Huskalator posted:So, I bought a Sony DSC RX-100 and I'm kinda disappointed it doesn't take better pictures than my buddy's camera phone and its way more of a pain in the rear to use. Cameras don't take pictures, people do. It's like buying a $500 Kitchenaid mixer and wondering why your cakes don't taste as good as your favorite restaurant. You may have a great tool for the job, but there are many other factors that require consideration (and skill) to make a great final product. Your RX-100 is an excellent camera but if you want to make great pictures you will need to learn how to use it and learn about photography. If you're not interested in putting in the time and effort to learn, then you won't get the most of your camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
In good light at Facebook resolution sure it might not be a huge difference but there's no way a phone can get a shot like this: [Taken handheld after 3 beers]
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Huskalator posted:So, I bought a Sony DSC RX-100 and I'm kinda disappointed it doesn't take better pictures than my buddy's camera phone and its way more of a pain in the rear to use. Also it would be good to know if you are shooting manual or full auto, and if your friend is doing any post work on his photos.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Maybe he's taking upskirt pictures so it's easier with a camera phone
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Kenny Logins posted:Could you possibly post one of your RX-100 pictures vs. a picture from your friend's smartphone (along with what smartphone it is) and comment on why you think one is no better than the other? A lot of instagram filters can make photos look good in 160x160 resolution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:A lot of instagram filters can make photos look good in 160x160 resolution. On the other hand, sometimes photos like this (from the Cell Phone Photography thread) Kidney Stone posted:
are legitimately  but are the result of a lot of experience both with shooting and post-work (and some luck).E: I'm also curious as to what constitutes "pain in the rear to use". Manual controls are not as easy as shooting full-auto but if you know what you're doing it's obviously worth it. My wife got irritated with my shooting when we were on vacation (first time having done so with a camera that had full manual controls) so I'm sure I was being a PITA technically but she has better vacation photos as a result. On the other hand I like the UI for Canon stuff but find the Sony UIs I've encountered to be a pain to use by comparison. Kenny Logins fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Jun 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Kenny Logins posted:So can a lack of taste or technical appreciation. Thanks for the nice words about my picture (the one with the motocross bike). Can't really say I have a lot of experience - only had my phone (a Nokia Lumia 1020) for about a month now, the picture was taken using the Nokia Smart Cam app. Edit: The photo was taken directly from the phone, no processing afterwards. Kidney Stone fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Jun 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
I bought a S110 in the Christmas sales and a snorkel once summer arrived. Now I really, really want to bring my camera under water for gorgeous underwater photography and am therefore looking for a waterproof case. I was wondering whether anyone here had any experience of those? I'm still leaning slightly towards the official Canon one, if only because my camera is still under warranty and if something were to go belly up then at least I wouldn't void that through using third party products. The downside? The Canon case is 240€. That's quite a bit more than I'd like to spend. A case from Hydronalin is 160€, but I don't know if that's good or not. Then there are the 30€ plastic bag options. Those I am suspicious of. If you have used any of these cases and found them awesome and adequate, I'd be happy to hear it. Would also appreciate being pointed in the direction of reliable reviews. I will have to shop from Amazon.de and on there almost all these options lack good reviews.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Underwater cases are crazy expensive everywhere. The bags usually work alright but are more meant for things like hanging around the pool or shooting in rainstorms. Depending on costs you might be better getting a camera already designed to go underwater like the Oly Tough series or the ones by Fuji and... I think Pentax.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
Why isn't there a lot of love for the LX7? I did a search and there's only been a several mentions, almost all in passing. Seems like a good travel camera, especially with the fast lens. I know the LX8 is rumoured to be released in two weeks, but I'm thinking about picking up the LX7 used for cheap when it does.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
rawrr posted:Why isn't there a lot of love for the LX7? I did a search and there's only been a several mentions, almost all in passing. Seems like a good travel camera, especially with the fast lens. DPReview really likes it but they do list these as cons, for what it's worth: quote:Aperture ring cannot be customised, unlike similar controls on competitive cameras
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
LX7 has a smaller sensor than LX5. Right now the trend is getting bigger and bigger sensor. Thats why its message got lost. In order news you can get a refurb S100 from Canon black or silver for $130 http://slickdeals.net/f/7037196-canon-powershot-s100-12-1mp-24mm-f-2-0-wide-angle-lens-digital-camera-refurbished-130-free-shipping?v=1
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Woah, 4.0 firmware for my Ricoh GR has improved low light focusing by a huge amount. This was my biggest complaint, awesome to have it fixed like this... props to Ricoh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Ooh, interesting. I've been thinking about picking up a GR and that's the one thing that's kept me hesitating (along with no money.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
After extensive research, I picked up an X20 because carrying around my 7D is a pain in the rear end. Absolutely pleased with the purchase. Took this on my first day out with it. Played with the color a tiny bit, and had to distort the horizon a bit. Still. Crescent Bay by theokaluza, on Flickr And this was straight out of the camera without any editing at all.  DSCF0035 by theokaluza, on Flickr Point and shoots sure have come a long way since my Canon G1.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
On a recent holiday I went on with my family, my mother loved the pictures from my camera, but was really upset with the quality of all the pictures she took with their little point and shoot, and complained that she'd always been kind of disappointed with it. On that not I decided it might be nice to get my parents a new camera for the holidays. After looking around (but not really sure what to look for in the point and shoot world) I think I decided on getting them an rx100 m3. Is there any reason this is a bad idea? I know for that price (or less even) you could step up to a lot more serious cameras, but picking them up something even like a nex-5 is going to be too much camera for them to just take on vacations and snap pictures quickly i think. Still though, the OP is quite a bit out of date, and even though I've read through the last few pages I have no idea if theres some better choices or anything i'm missing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
If they're not serious photographers, I feel like they'd be happy with something like the S110. The rx100 m3 is obviously a much better camera than the s110, but might be more camera than they need.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:On a recent holiday I went on with my family, my mother loved the pictures from my camera, but was really upset with the quality of all the pictures she took with their little point and shoot, and complained that she'd always been kind of disappointed with it. On that not I decided it might be nice to get my parents a new camera for the holidays. After looking around (but not really sure what to look for in the point and shoot world) I think I decided on getting them an rx100 m3. Is there any reason this is a bad idea? I know for that price (or less even) you could step up to a lot more serious cameras, but picking them up something even like a nex-5 is going to be too much camera for them to just take on vacations and snap pictures quickly i think. rawrr posted:If they're not serious photographers, I feel like they'd be happy with something like the S110. The rx100 m3 is obviously a much better camera than the s110, but might be more camera than they need. Yeah, this too. The S120 is a more than capable camera for anyone's needs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Get the RX100 mark 1, its not like your mother will use the hotshoe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
Yeah, the Mk1 is a great camera. I'd suggest it over the Canon S series if the money isn't an issue as it's a better camera to use even if you aren't well versed in photography.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
I'm the reverse, I would recommend the S series for newbies because of its pocket size and fast UI. Regardless, both cameras are great and the greatest limitation is actually the user.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Get the RX100 mark 1, its not like your mother will use the hotshoe. I was thinking the mark 3 initially because while I don't know how much use they would get from a screen that tilts I thought the built in viewfinder might be genuinely useful for them. Maybe that's me projecting what I would need in a camera onto them though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Didn't they also improve the sensor and add things like WiFi ? Also option to be able to take better night movies cos you can take 24fps instead of just 50. If money isn't a question, the Mk3 is better than the Mk1. If it is, and it's a newbie, I think the s120 is probably a better choice. I've used the s95, s100, and now Mk1 and while the Mk1 is my favourite, my mum finds it easier to use the s110 that she has than my Mk1.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 13:30
|
|
|
The RX100 on auto will take generally better pictures than a Canon S1XX but it's bigger, heavier and the UI isn't as good as Canon and some of the features of the RX100 like the multi-exposure to reduce noise can make it feel less responsive. I just got back from a big vacation and I'm pretty drat happy with some of the pictures I got with my RX100M2, although after overexposing a few I thought "it would be great if this had a viewfinder," this is how the descent into camera gear madness begins, isn't it? My dream RX100M4 would have the viewfinder but a touchscreen instead of it being articulated, touch focus on my camera phone has spoiled me to that. The wifi was really nice because I could send pictures straight to my phone and you can set it to only copy a 2MP version for Facebook/Twitter posting and the like. I'll post a few of my favorites when I'm done working on them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
I appreciate all the advise, I'm going to have to take a look into the S1XX line a bit more, see if I can find one at a shop. I wish I could find a shop around here that carries the rx100, since I still don't like buying something I haven't been able to physically touch and play around with. On that note just *how* big are the rx100 line? They look pretty small in pictures, but having never actually seen one, id be a bit disappointed if it was too big to get used on a whim, and some of the posts here make it sound rather rotund. As far as the newbie stuff, I'm not too worried about my parents. My mom actually has a pretty good eye, and my dad used to be big into photography years ago, though never really transitioned into the digital age beyond a string of lousy point and shoots they've always owned. I think they would get a kick about being able to play with more options, while still having something that can be simple and pocketable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
They're still really small. Easily fit in a jacket pocket or purse. It's slightly bigger than an S series but whether that'll matter to you is really going to depend on how you're carrying it. The difference is mostly weight and a little bit of thickness. They're pretty much the same height and width. http://camerasize.com/compare/#475,555 Given what you've said about your folks, I'd say go for the RX100. My dad sounds kindof like your dad and he went from the S series to an RX100 after I bought one and was really impressed with the Sony.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
  Next to the first thing I could find. This is a MK1, don't think they actually changed the size for later models. It will easily fit in a jacket, pants not so much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Sad Panda posted:Didn't they also improve the sensor and add things like WiFi ? Also option to be able to take better night movies cos you can take 24fps instead of just 50. If money isn't a question, the Mk3 is better than the Mk1. If it is, and it's a newbie, I think the s120 is probably a better choice. I've used the s95, s100, and now Mk1 and while the Mk1 is my favourite, my mum finds it easier to use the s110 that she has than my Mk1. Its the same sensor, soon to be available on Fuji and Samsung cameras (according to rumor). I have the white S110. My opinion is that its an inside and out "consumer grade" product. It's not a premium product even though the IQ is very good. The G series camera for example, have much better fit and finish.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
quote:I was thinking the mark 3 initially because while I don't know how much use they would get from a screen that tilts I thought the built in viewfinder might be genuinely useful for them. I would go with that instinct. I have a Fuji XF1 and I basically don't use it because it doesn't have a viewfinder. There's a reasonable possibility that I'm your parents age and a reasonable possibility that this has something to do with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
I happen to be selling a new rx100 Mk iii in SA Mart for $100 off retail plus accessories... http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3650651&pagenumber=1&perpage=40#post432183766
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:After extensive research, I picked up an X20 because carrying around my 7D is a pain in the rear end. Absolutely pleased with the purchase. Haha I know how you feel now .. I bought one in April and it never left my bag since.  First compact digital camera of which I don't hate the noise (I'm still primarily a film shooter)
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
Could someone compare the OP's recommendation of the s95 (more like the s120 or s200 now) with the G16? Having a look myself it looks like the s120's lens has a lot more aperture settings, shares the same sensor as the G16, does all the important stuff and is cheaper than the G16. Why is the G16 more? Why is it superior to the s120? Also how does the s120 compare to the s200? edit: actually the lens between the s120 and s200 is nearly the same and the s200 takes movies while the s120 doesn't? Tony Montana fucked around with this message at 13:02 on Jul 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 12:59
|
|
|
I'm seeking S120 alternatives. I had a S95 a few years ago and was fond of its compactness and image quality. It was stolen 2 years ago and have just been using my galaxy s3 until i was ready to go on a trip, which will be to the USA next month. I thought there would be significant improvements in the Canon S series but it sadly doesn't appear so. I'll mainly be doing national parks and city/nightlife. I prefer taking wide landscape shots and sometimes take low light shots. I'm seeking a camera in order of importance: 1. Pocketable - S95 thickness size. 2. In-built GPS 3. Sweeping Panorama mode 4. Wi-fi - transfer photos to smartphone As much as i'd like to try out the RX100 it seems like it's just too thick. The s95 was just right in its size. I previously owned an LX3 and i would not consider that pocketable. It was too thick. I had to ponder about taking it with me anytime I went out without a backpack and be stuck with a bulky brick in my pocket. I did get a shoulder bag for it and that worked okay for hiking trips, but then when around the city I would leave it back at the hostel. So if the Rx100 is like that, then I will have to overlook it. Is there anything like the S95 (size, image quality and simple user interface); but with in-built GPS (no smartphone gps tethering), and sweeping panorama mode similar to on the galaxy smartphones? Movendi fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Jul 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 12:59
|
|
|
There was a new s95 on Amazon two days ago for less than $100, I intended to post here about how it was before I jumped but I procrastinated and now it's gone  I'm intending to travel a bit to some very sandy / humid areas, and the S-series are so pricy I'm afraid that I'll break it. Should I even consider the Canon A or ELPH series stuff, or should I just stick to the camera on my Galaxy S4?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Photography is a pricey hobby. At least it's getting progressively cheaper. S4 is fine taking outdoor sunny daylight pictures. Or making Facebook uploads/ small prints. Plus you can sync to drop box as well. If you are price sensitive stick with the s4 for now get the mini tripod. I rather you save for another flash deal. However battery life is limited and I'm always slightly nervous when other people handle my phone. Either camera app sucks or it's prone to dropping. When a point and shoot breaks you don't worry about lost contacts,lost emails and other mini computer stuff lost.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
On ritz camera there's a S110 + Pro100 + Photo paper + 16gb sd card combo for $185 after Canon's $400 rebate. Could be a killer deal on the S110 if you can sell the Pro100, although the price on those have plummeted (because of the rebate). Just the ink cartridges themselves go for like $99 on ebay though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Could someone compare the OP's recommendation of the s95 (more like the s120 or s200 now) with the G16? G series is designed for people who think in photography languages, the S series is designed for the consumers who think in "XX modes". G is a lot bulkier. Otheriwse the hardware are similar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:39 |
|
|
rawrr posted:On ritz camera there's a S110 + Pro100 + Photo paper + 16gb sd card combo for $185 after Canon's $400 rebate. Could be a killer deal on the S110 if you can sell the Pro100, although the price on those have plummeted (because of the rebate). Just the ink cartridges themselves go for like $99 on ebay though. I got that deal and got the 400 rebate. Make sure you print out the invoice they emailed you later. Thats the real invoice. Warming: the loving printer is as loving heavy as a fidge. It's seriously heavy. If you don't have a car, you are hosed. No wonder Canon is begging people to take it off their hands with mega bucks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 19:44
|
|