|
I did a spreadsheet for potential multi-day hiking cameras. The conclusion was the GR has hands down the best IQ to weight ratio. You can even charge it with a USB brick. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Dec 5, 2015 |
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:25 |
|
|
rawrr posted:Thankfully I'm going for pocketbility, so the X100 series isn't really on my radar. I'm a fan of tactile feedback (i.e. manual dials) so I love the usability aspect, but the LX100 offers something similar in a smaller form factor. It may just turn out that the RX100 or GR compromises too much usability in favour of form factor for me, in which case I'd eagerly rebuy a LX100.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
The RX100 remapping is frustratingly limited (coming from the LX100). For example, it would've been trivial for them to make the movie button mappable, since they already give you the option to disable it unless the mode dial is set to video mode. It is the perfect place for, say, back button focusing (which you can't map to any button anyway, requiring the user to assign a button to AF/MF as a workaround). There's really no real reason for the movie button to be positioned in the most pressable location. I too find the control ring's unresponsiveness annoying, and the fact that you can't switch what it controls - I would've preferred to be able to adjust exposure compensation from the rear dial, and have the control ring control the aperture or shutter speed. Specifically to the M3 (and M4, I guess), I also find the implementation of the viewfinder a bit stupid, how there's no setting to prevent it from turning off the camera when you stow it, and in practice it just seems like such a hassle to have a two step, pop up pull out procedure to use it. I wish Sony could get better at usability design as it's otherwise a really well engineered camera - it just seems like everything has been done by the engineers whose priority is to make everything fit. Even the menu is not organized intuitively.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
rawrr posted:I too find the control ring's unresponsiveness annoying, and the fact that you can't switch what it controls - I would've preferred to be able to adjust exposure compensation from the rear dial, and have the control ring control the aperture or shutter speed. I don't know about the M3 but in the M4, you can map aperture or shutter speed to the control ring, and I just press down on the back ring to access exposure compensation so that's pretty easy. On the M4 there's also a setting to disable the viewfinder from shutting off the RX100 when you stow it away too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
^ Yeah that's how I have it set right now, but I tend to change exposure compensation more often than A/S, so it would've been nice to not require a second hand to do it. -- Picked up the GR about half an hour ago, and my initial impressions are pretty positive. I like how there is a dedicated rocker switch for EV and everything is well laid out (including the menu) - it definitely feels more like a "photographer's camera" whereas the RX100 feels more like a point and shoot. I've heard a lot of positive things about the GR's control layout, and I'm starting to understand why. Size wise the GR is longer and noticeably lighter - it almost feels hollow compared to the RX100 which feels pretty solid and hefty for its size. Image quality is great, and it just "looks" better which I want to attribute to the larger sensor though it's probably also just placebo. The major downside for me is that it has roughly a .5m minimum focusing distance, so I'm not sure how great it'd be for taking pictures of food or whatnot. E: nvm there's a macro mode! (10cm MFD) E2: The more I play with it the more I'm liking it. Some size comparison shots:   (sorry it's upside down, can't edit images in album on imgur...) rawrr fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Dec 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
I like photographs, and how they remind me of a time and place. But I have no idea what I'm doing, which is why a point and shoot is probably the best way to go. I was all about the RX100 III since I could probably fit that in my budget, but then I saw someone actually holding the drat thing in his hands. And holy poo poo it's so small. I guess that would be the benefit that it's pocket-able, but I'd like something a bit more substantial to hold. Am I just stupid? Should I just learn to take pictures on a tiny camera? Or is there something between these tiny p&s cameras and an actual DSLR or the mirrorless stuff? (which in my case would probably be going too far in terms of complexity) Any advice or nudges in the right direction would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
Get a G15 or G16.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Or maybe G7X or one of the other larger sensor compacts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
I guess I'll need to head down to the shops and fiddle with them for a while, they all seem so drat tiny, or then they're the "full sized" DSLR range.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 10:15
|
|
|
I've no hands on experience with it, but the Panasomic Lumix LX100 sounds like it could be what you're after. Big sensor, but without the 'complexity' that you're worried about from a full system micro 4/3s camera. The only concession is probably the external flash unit. Though I'm assuming the 'complexity' you're referring to is the swapping of lenses? which you don't HAVE to do on any camera!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
Zaq posted:I guess I'll need to head down to the shops and fiddle with them for a while, they all seem so drat tiny, or then they're the "full sized" DSLR range. Why don't you get a mirrorless.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Why don't you get a mirrorless. I'm luckily not full blown OCD about dust and whatnot in my electronics, but having an expensive camera like that would probably make me really nervous. ninjaedit: And yeah, I did take a look at the lumix in a netstore, and it looked quite promising in terms of specs and whatnot, but the dimensions seem still small, though there was no example pic of someone holding it like there was for the RX100 III. Which is why I thought the next step is to just go to the store and try holding them and see how they feel. Zaq fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Jan 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Not a good as a hands on, but worth a flick through though http://camerasize.com/compare/
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Feeling it is gonna be your best thing. My GR is about the same size as an RX100 but it feels a zillion times better in hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
MeKeV posted:Not a good as a hands on, but worth a flick through though http://camerasize.com/compare/ drat. that's really loving awesome, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 06:32
|
|
|
Welp, I caved (somewhat because of the awesome slowmo options) and got the RX100 IV after all. It's a bit pricey but I could buy it with a one year contract that's pretty fair so I just went for it. Now for the intimidating bit of trying to learn what the hell the three dozen pages of settings in the camera menu does, or maybe more than that.  Also I'll try and see if I can find a copy of "Understanding Exposure" somewhere since it was recommended in another thread.  I'm rather easily intimidated in to not doing something if there's a steep learning curve, and I'm too critical of my pictures, but hopefully I can get some interesting pics eventually. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
Zaq posted:
The 3rd edition should be going for much less now that the 4th edition is out, and I doubt that there are many appreciable differences.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
surrender posted:The 3rd edition should be going for much less now that the 4th edition is out, and I doubt that there are many appreciable differences. Well I ordered the 3rd edition thinking it was the latest one, not seeing a 4th on any of the normal internet bookstores I use, so meh. It should help me get started in any case Plus it wasn't that expensive at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
Zaq posted:Welp, I caved (somewhat because of the awesome slowmo options) and got the RX100 IV after all. Well the good thing about the learning curve now a days is you're not paying for film anymore. Just go out shooting, and if you don't make any winners, it's not a big deal. You just have to keep at it. Also, don't feel like you have to be at a special location or special event to shoot.When I first started, I felt like there had to be something going on or I had to be in an interesting place for me to pull out the camera. Sure those things help, but good photos can be made anywhere. Shoot everywhere and anywhere and try to keep your camera on you as much as you can. It's just like anything else, the more you do it, the better you become.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Hey guys, need a little help picking out a camera for a trip coming up. i'm going to rio de janeiro, inside of one of the favelas and being in this questionable situation do not want to carry my nicer camera(even though its just an eos m with a 22mm and 18-55) with me to every location (should be ok at more touristy spots, but not walking around casually). That being the case, i was wondering what camera would be recommended under 60 dollars. I was thinking of picking up a s90 (i remember using one back in 2010 and really enjoying it) or a 520hs (like the reach on it, and it's neat boxy aesthetic) , also looking at the sd4000. Open to any other ideas for cameras i could buy used under 60.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Olympus xa2. Go film when you want good IQ + super cheap + not a big deal if it gets destroyed / stolen. I take an old Minolta SLR when rock climbing or fishing because its tough, cheap, and 35mm film is still well ahead of 2/3rd inch cmos sensors in resolution and color.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Yeah I'd say film is the way to go. S90 was cool back when it came out, but now it days it doesn't feel much better than iPhone camera. I'm sure it is still objectively better, but not to the point where it's worth carrying around with a phone. I think I stopped using mine around the iPhone 4S.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
Whoa, definitely not into film. Not being able to buy film locally, or process locally, Processing costs, wait time,not being able to review pics, not digging film at all, and i dont believe in it's image quality after shooting an ae-1 for a good while. Film cameras arent going to cut it.please give suggestions on digital cameras, if any. For reference, i will not be bringing my phone with me as i walk around as i will not have service because i will be out of the country, so camera phone is a no go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
If you don't have a phone then a S90 would be a good choice. With a modern phone I think a lot of lower end point and shoots become redundant for the most part. In my opinion they're not worth carrying around unless it's around the same quality of something like a RX100.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
For that budget you could pretty much buy anything in the price range and get the same ish quality (bad). I'm not sure why you don't just bring your phone without service unless you're that paranoid about being mugged or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
When I was in Brazil a couple summers ago I brought my iPhone 4s with a keepgo sim for data and it was great. We were in Natal though, so security was likely less of an issue for us. And we we're rolling around with $150k in other camera gear so my iPhone was the least of our worries.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
No offense but your EOS M is not worth much used any way. Just put black masking tape all over it to make it look cheap and old. And backup your photos daily. You can get a s90 or fuji f100fd for 50 bux. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Feb 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
The benefits of an S90/95/etc camera over a smartphone are its interface (no touchscreen), optical zoom, ability to shoot raw, replaceable batteries, and replaceable cards. Also it's an order of magnitude cheaper and more robust. And if it gets broken/lost/stolen you haven't hosed your ability to make phonecalls. If you just care about pure OOC JPEG IQ at 28mm equiv FOV in good light then yeah it's pretty much a wash.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Olympus xa2. Go film when you want good IQ + super cheap + not a big deal if it gets destroyed / stolen. I take an old Minolta SLR when rock climbing or fishing because its tough, cheap, and 35mm film is still well ahead of 2/3rd inch cmos sensors in resolution and color. Anything to look out for when buying? Looking on ebay (http://www.ebay.ca/sch/ctg/Olympus-XA2-35mm-Film-Camera-/82838736/) there's a big range in price. Never shot film before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
Maaaaan back in October somebody had an XA2 + Flash locally for $25 and I decided against it so I could have more money for my trip. I dun goofed there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Hey y'all. The boyfriend and I are going to Spain soon, and since I'd like to start taking more pictures anyway I've decided to use the trip as an excuse to get a new dedicated camera (rather than just using my phone or figuring out what I did with my old lovely p&s that isn't much better than the phone anyway), and something that's going to be better than the phone of course. I'm eyeing either the rx100 mk2 or the g9x, I think. I'd rather not spend more than the rx100. Aside from the Spain trip and any other trips, I'd mostly use it for taking pictures around town or of my cat. A lot of the features I like they seem pretty similar on, so I'm trying to tell if the extra $70 for the rx100 is really worth it. I have probably averaged sized hands for a woman, so I don't think size is an issue on either. Thoughts? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
meiram posted:Hey y'all. The boyfriend and I are going to Spain soon, and since I'd like to start taking more pictures anyway I've decided to use the trip as an excuse to get a new dedicated camera (rather than just using my phone or figuring out what I did with my old lovely p&s that isn't much better than the phone anyway), and something that's going to be better than the phone of course. I'm eyeing either the rx100 mk2 or the g9x, I think. I'd rather not spend more than the rx100. Aside from the Spain trip and any other trips, I'd mostly use it for taking pictures around town or of my cat. A lot of the features I like they seem pretty similar on, so I'm trying to tell if the extra $70 for the rx100 is really worth it. I have probably averaged sized hands for a woman, so I don't think size is an issue on either. Thoughts? Thanks! Not exactly answering your question, but I got a g7x for a trip to Spain last year- my gf had her s95. The extra 4mm on the wide end made some difference (24mm compared to 28) when trying to get floor-to-ceiling shots in churches or exteriors in narrow alleyways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Not exactly answering your question, but I got a g7x for a trip to Spain last year- my gf had her s95. The extra 4mm on the wide end made some difference (24mm compared to 28) when trying to get floor-to-ceiling shots in churches or exteriors in narrow alleyways. That's a good point, and I was eyeing the g7x too, but it's a bit out of my range new and I'm relying on prime shipping since we leave a week from tomorrow. Just checked again though and there was one used right between the cost of the other two with prime shipping, so I bit the bullet. Thanks for the response.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
Skizzzer posted:Anything to look out for when buying? Looking on ebay (http://www.ebay.ca/sch/ctg/Olympus-XA2-35mm-Film-Camera-/82838736/) there's a big range in price. Never shot film before. Just fyi the XA is pricier than the xa2 because the former has a coupled rangefinder and the latter just a tunnel viewfinder, so on the xa2 there's no way to confirm focus - you just have a dial for one person, two person, or mountain, and The most common issue with these cameras relates to the shutter button. It's practically on a hair trigger, which is great for cutting down on camera shake at low shutter speeds and keeps the camera very quiet, but the trigger can wear out and become fiddly, requiring more effort to depress. I don't know how you'd check for it on eBay (the one I bought for $70 from ebay had a shutter that worked fine at first but eventually started to give more resistance) but if you get a good one be sure to take care when depressing the shutter; too much pressure will wear out the mechanism. I don't have any experience with the og XA, but it seems pretty much the same, only better if you like rangefinders. Watch out! The xa1 is not the same as the XA, and is basically a cheaper xa2. There's an xa3, which I think has a wider lens, but it's pretty rare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
meiram posted:That's a good point, and I was eyeing the g7x too, but it's a bit out of my range new and I'm relying on prime shipping since we leave a week from tomorrow. Just checked again though and there was one used right between the cost of the other two with prime shipping, so I bit the bullet. Thanks for the response. Cool! I've enjoyed mine. One quick heads up: At least for the G7x, and probably for the g9x too (not sure), there's no direct panorama mode. Instead there's a Panorama Assist mode that helps you line up different stills to then stitch together on the computer. Not a huge deal if you don't mind using your smartphone for panoramas, but a baffling omission on the part of Canon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Cool! I've enjoyed mine. One quick heads up: At least for the G7x, and probably for the g9x too (not sure), there's no direct panorama mode. Instead there's a Panorama Assist mode that helps you line up different stills to then stitch together on the computer. Not a huge deal if you don't mind using your smartphone for panoramas, but a baffling omission on the part of Canon. Ahh thanks. I don't do a lot of panoramas as it is, so my phone will probably do if I get the urge.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
I'm going on a 3 month trip to Europe and I'm considering buying a camera to complement my gopro. I'm looking for something that's under $200 and compact, but I'm also going to be bringing either an iPhone 5 or 6. At that price point is an actual camera going to be better than an iPhone camera? If so what should I get? I'm also open to buying something used.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
regularizer posted:I'm going on a 3 month trip to Europe and I'm considering buying a camera to complement my gopro. I'm looking for something that's under $200 and compact, but I'm also going to be bringing either an iPhone 5 or 6. At that price point is an actual camera going to be better than an iPhone camera? If so what should I get? I'm also open to buying something used. You can buy an used Nikon 1 or Samsung NX camera for that much.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
I've made a move to a city for a new job, and I've since wanted to get more into street photography, but without having to carry my Sony FE kit around everywhere. Pretty much what I'm looking for is light, ergonomic, and quick. Is the Ricoh GR a good fit for me? What else should I consider? No real budget here, sky's the limit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:25 |
|
|
Slowhanded posted:I've made a move to a city for a new job, and I've since wanted to get more into street photography, but without having to carry my Sony FE kit around everywhere. Pretty much what I'm looking for is light, ergonomic, and quick. Is the Ricoh GR a good fit for me? What else should I consider? No real budget here, sky's the limit. Either that or the Fuji X70.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 15:57
|
|