Smaller camera recommendation please ? (D700 user)

<p>Hello folks, <br>

I'm a D700 user and while the D700's images still take my breath away every time I look at it, sometimes I want to have a camera with me all the time and the D700 is just too big to lug around. <br>

What other high image quality (low noise) cameras would you recommend ? <br>

I'm leaning towards he Fuji X-Pro, Olympus OM-D EM-5, or the new Canon EOS M at this stage. (I have the Canon s95 as my everyday camera, but the IQ is just pretty unsatisfying). <br>

What would you choose ? If you could help me choose or recommend some other brilliant ones would be great. Please don't say the Leica M9, as that's way out of my league. <br>

Thanks !</p>

<p> </p>

<p>You might want to check a Nikon D5000 or Nikon D5100 body. Much less to haul compared to your Nikon D700 body.</p>

<p>Please check</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/16346492</p>

<p>for how a Nikon D5100 works with the Nikon AF-S 40mm f2.8G DX Micro-Nikkor lens.</p>

 

<p>Have you handled a Nikon D3200? It will allow you to use your existing lenses, flash units, etc., but is remarkably tidy and lightweight. At least handle one in a shop somewhere, if you have a moment.</p>

<p>If you want low noise, you need something with a larger sensor such as APS-C, which in turn will make the camera bigger. Therefore, it'll boil down to the trade off between low noise and small size you desire. Do you need several interchangeable lenses? Among mirrorless cameras, micro 4/3 has the largest lens selection. I wasn't very happy with the Olympus E-PL3's noise performance when I tried it a few months ago. The OM-D EM-5 is supposed to be better but it is also a larger camera.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Have you handled a Nikon D3200? It will allow you to use your existing lenses, flash units, etc.,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That will partly depend on which lenses the OP has for the D700. Just about any lens you can mount onto the D700 can also be mounted onto a D3200; in fact, most pre-AI lenses that cannot be mounted into the D700 can work on the D3200. However, obviously there is the crop factor, and most AI/AI-S lenses will have no metering on the D3200 and non AF-S AF lenses cannot AF on the D3200.</p>

<p>The D3200 would be a good choice if the OP wants to use his existing lenses (with limitations mentioned above), but it is not as small as mirrorless cameras. And people who are used to the controls and quality of the D700 are not necessarily happy with something like the D3200.</p>

<p>Again, it boils down to the tradeoffs the OP wants.</p>

Sony RX100. No, I do not have one yet, but it has been well reviewed. It actually is small, can be carried easily

everywhere. Look at the Luminous Landscape and diglloyd sites. The bad news is that it has no real viewfinder but it is an

order of magnitude smaller than any DSLR with a lens on it. It is reputed to have excellent image quality.

Good luck.

<p>Nikon V1 / J1 / J2. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>In addition to the Sony RX100 and Nikon 1 series, the Sony NEX are quite small, and with the pancake prime they stay quite small too.... it's just with the zooms, they don't stay small. If you can live with a fixed lens only, the Fuji X100 also remains an interesting option.</p>

<p>Compared with a D700, even a D7000 is noticably dinky. In fact, I'm sure I can detect an appreciably difference even between my D700 and D800, which is a surprise with larger lenses.<br />

<br />

The NEX 5 series is the same sensor as the D7000 and tiny, but a big sensor means big lenses - it depends whether it's the size of the camera that's bothering you, or the size of the lenses. A smaller sensor - either the micro 4/3 systems (which are tiny with the pancakes or the 14-42 power zoom) or the 1-series/RX100, depending on your trade-off - will be more portable, but there's a continuum trading noise for size. People do make f/0.95 lenses for micro 4/3, which might help the noise, although I'd not expect to be too critical about sharpness.</p>

<p>How about the just announced Nikon P7700, the successor to the P7000 and P7100? Or the existing P7100? See the related posting just a few items below for more info. It is a point and shoot camera that takes raw or jpeg. I am not sure about its low noise capabilities however.</p>

<p>Joe Smith</p>

<p>It seems to me that if an important priority is to be able to use one or more of your existing Nikkors, than you should consider the smallest Nikon DSLR that will "drive", i.e., permit the chosen lens(es) to autofocus on that smaller body.<br>

If that is not an issue, there are several quite good 4/3 cameras if you want the interchangeable lens option. If you'll miss a viewfinder (none will be as great as the D700's), you'll have to pick one of the "DSLR-like" 4/3 cameras. They will not be as compact as the non-viewfinder models.<br>

There are just a few (and not inexpensive) 4/3 cameras that are more compact but also offer the (usually costly) option of an accessory electronic viewfinder. With those, compact size will be somewhat compromised.<br>

There are many good, smaller than 4/3 options, of course, from Canon and Sony, for example, and you may be comfortable framing shots by viewing the back-of-camera LCD and essentially shooting at something like arms' length. There can occasionally be some problems with viewing the LCD in sunny weather and not being able to hold the camera rock-steady for slow-shutter images (but many of these cameras now have built-in stabilization, anyway).<br>

I own and mostly use a D700, but my choice for a trip to hot, cobblestoned Italy last year was the 4/3 Panasonic GF1 plus the electronic viewfinder. That particular camera body seemed the most like my Nikon in controls for most all functions and I was easily able to make the transition for the trip. I must add that I shot RAW and was able to find a nice Lightroom preset to emulate the Nikon "look."</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I accepted the compromise of the Fuji x100. It works for my needs. The X pro 1 looks very good but is larger and more $$$. I would probably bring another lens along if I had that, more stuff and $$$. I also use the D700.</p>

<p>Nikon J1 (J2 or V1). Fast and accurate AF, Small and versatile...</p><div></div>

<p>My concern about suggesting a J1 or V1, coming from a D700, is that the useful controls seem to be so deeply hidden in the interface. Paul - I'll be interested to know how you're getting on with it, if you're also used to a DSLR.<br />

<br />

I doubt any of the P7x00 series will have a significant noise advantage over the S95, if that's one of the requirements - although they'll take an external flash, if it comes to that. Or you could try a monopod and a slave flash combination with the S95 and see whether it rises to acceptable levels...</p>

<p>I would wait for Photokina announcements, and pre-announcements coming soon.<br>

If the goal is to reuse Nikon D lenses D7000 is a great bet but with good lenses attached not siginificantly lighter than any Nikon kit.<br>

If looking elsewhere - NEX is great but lacks good glass. Unless you have bags of Leica mount Leica or Zeiss glass - in which case it is a great fit. I have seen the manual focus via the screen and it is superb.<br>

Fuji have apparently great image quality but are quirky to use - XPro1 and X-100; not cheaper either.<br>

Which leads to m43 and professional reviewers - stevehuffphoto.com and soundimageplus.blogspot.com rave about its image quality- not quite FF but closer to APS-C. The beauty is they have much light lenses.<br>

Everyone is unique, I personally cannot live w/o a good EVF -optical or electronic<br>

This rules out E-P* series of m43.<br>

But if you have $2500 in spare - an OM-D with a Panasonic 12-35 2.8 kit lens would give you a much lighter image system equivalent to D7000+17-55. Would be great for travel. You would lose out on the depth of field for sure for portraits. Steve Huff and others give the Panasonic 12-35 rave reviews, plus this kit would be weather sealed.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>NEX is great but lacks good glass.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is except the Sony 50mm f/1.8, Sigma 19mm and 30mm, Zeiss 24mm, Sony and Tamron wide range zooms and every manual focus prime made with more Sony E-mount lenses to be shortly announced. The kit zoom is actually pretty good for casual snap shooting and sweep panos (superb feature!).</p>

<p>I'm in the same boat. I needed something light for daily carry that had great quality. For me, the NEX 5n was the answer. I tried the Nikon J1 and I have a Canon S95. Fine for snapshots but I wanted APS-C quality. The feather light weight of the NEX means I can carry it all day and the quality is eye-popping! Yes, you need lenses but that's part of "going small". The NEX is so good I feel comfortable using it in the studio, too.</p><div></div>

There's DX DSLRs, but those aren't really smaller enough to make much difference. NEX and M4/3 cameras are good,

but when you put lenses on them they're not as tiny as you'd want them to be. Point and shoot cameras have sensors

so small they'll drive you nuts unless you're shooting in broad daylight at base ISO with the lens stopped down - as

you noticed with the S95, and there are newer models that are a bit better than that but not so much better that they'll

change your mind about small cameras. I ended up with a NEX 5n because it's small enough to make a difference

over the D700, has the good D7000 sensor and the NEX focus peaking is the best system for manual focus lenses on

small cameras. Also, its kit lens isn't bad and is well made.

<p>I've been using a Leica IIIc a lot this summer. I really like-a it!</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

Hello folks,

 

Thanks for your recommendations and also your discussions on possible options. Now I’m really confused ! Seriously

though, this has been useful and I thank you for your discussions !

 

Considering I only have one lens (24-120/4 VR2), and one flash unit SB-600, I don’t need to use my Nikon lens, and that

is why I am not ‘locked’ into having to use what I already have.

 

The thing with many of the suggestions such as the Nikon J1, maybe the Sony RX100, or even some of the new Nikon

units that are not dSLR, the sensors are pretty small, resulting in quality that does not come close to what I am used to

with the D700. That is why I’m looking for a ‘large sensor’ smaller camera. It does not have to be as small as the RX100

or the s95. I can live with the fact that it is the size of the XPro or OM-D, that are both smaller than even the D3200, right

?

(I know that the D3200 is pretty good ! but is still pretty bulky, and if I was going to carry the D3200,  I might as well use

my D700….haha)

 

I’ll do some explorations with the NEX5 and RX100, as it seems like it is highly recommended here ?

 

<p>I use a Lumix GF1 when I want to carry a small camera. They go for super cheap used. <br>

A few samples <a href="http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398240270237967.94681.171846589544004&type=3">here</a> and <a href="http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.182591415136188.47370.171846589544004&type=3">here</a>. </p>

 

<p>I'm in this dilemma too. I thought about the D3200 or D5100 with the 35 or 28 F1.8 lenses. Its still to big to put into a pocket though. The moment I need a zoom, that makes it into "too big" category.<br>

The other criteria is price. The 4/3 brigade are nice but still too expensive and a lot of them have a nice trim body but burdened with a huge lens. That's what was nice about older Nikon D lenses...the bulk of the AF mechanism being in the camera. <br>

I'm looking at $400-500 max and the two that impress are the Fuji X10 for the included viewfinder ( can be purchased for less than $400 on eBay), and the Canon S100 with no viewfinder for a little bit more.<br>

I am seeing prices of used D300's coming well below $1k and D90s at about $6-700. I just don't want to be lugging around all this kit. It makes me feel exposed. Its ok when you obviously are a pro, but not if you are not or when you want to do street candids.<br>

I also think that we consumers are unnecessarily lured into the pixel wars which only ever have an unhappy ending when these cameras are 3-4 years old. I just don't really need a big sensor when the max I would want to print would be A3.</p>

<p>The problem is always going to be that a large sensor means a large lens; a small sensor has worse light handling because, at a given f-stop, the lens is smaller and so less light is hitting it. (That opens a can of worms for discussion, which I suggest we leave closed, but nonetheless it's true that - for a given field of view - a bigger lens in any format captures more light.)<br />

<br />

It's true that a lot of the systems are expensive. The thing that made me decide on micro 4/3 (I have a GF2) is a combination of smallish lenses for the field of view (smaller than most of the other crop formats), the sensor is still large enough to adapt my Nikkors to if I need to (not, I feel, true of the 1-series; my wife wanted to be able to use the lenses I was carrying around, so adapting mattered), ability to mount Leica lenses (rules out the Samsung system), and - most importantly for this discussion - the 14-42 power zoom gives the (stabilized) equivalent of a kit lens in a size that still fits in a pocket or compact camera bag. If one of the other formats had come out with a similarly small zoom (I keep mentioning diffractive optics in the hope that someone will use them for this) I probably would have considered it. Sadly, it's quite an expensive lens (for what it does).<br />

<br />

That said, the X10 looks like a lovely camera, so long as you don't mind paying that much for a fixed prime lens system. And the software is apparently a little less polished than one might hope. I've only held one, not used one in anger, though.<br />

<br />

I was wondering when someone would mention a Leica. I have a cheap knock-off - a Voigtlander Bessa R - but it's actually bigger and heavier than you might hope. Sure, the lenses I have are reasonably small, but it still weighs more than my Eos 500 with a 50 f/1.8 on it.<br />

<br />

Wee-Ming: Are you sure you wouldn't be happier just getting a smaller <i>lens</i> for your D700? My walk-around is an old 28-200 f/3.5-5.6 G, which has done me proud after a little chromatic aberration correction (although I've yet to test it on my D800). It's small enough that I use it as a body cap before deciding which bigger lens I need for a specific shot. Also it's silver and looks cheap, which stops people from thinking about stealing the camera. If you want really small, the (over-priced, to me) 45mm AI-P lens is tiny, and some of the older 50mm f/1.8s are pretty pancake-like too. In autofocus, the 50 f/1.8 AF-D is pretty small, if not as good as the (bigger) AF-S version.</p>

<p>I had exactly the same problem; love the D700 but the bag, and weight of bag, just gets to be too much. Replies above are correct; you'll spend a bundle on smaller gear to get similar IQ, and if you're not careful, the new smaller kit will get larger quickly as you add lenses, etc.... but it will be nice stuff. However...<br>

If you can live with a (very) nice point/shoot, consider a Panasonic LX-5, or Leica D-Lux 5; almost identical cameras (firmware is only difference, really) but you'll get a Leica lens, f2.0 no less; 24mm - 90mm equivalent focal lengths; a 10MP sensor; and many very nice features (several focus modes, "film" modes, selectible shutter speed/f-stops, different metering modes, etc...). And you can pick up a 'tube' that will mount on front of camera to accept a CPL and lens hood, also completely encloses the extended lens, nice protection for that fragile feature. New models mount an available elecronic view finder, otherwise, you are using the (excellent) screen on back of camera. They are built like bricks, save for the battery door on bottom of camera, it's a little flimsy when open. The camera itself will fit into pocket of a work shirt<br>

Images are very good in right light, suffer from noise in lower light; but I find they clean up nicely in Lightroom4. And I can't say enough good about the colors. I bought the LX-3 for trip to Azores 2 years back, just recently updated to the D-Lux5; and have every accessory for each, save for the dedicated flash units; an entire kit fits into small, light pouch. It's the camera to carry when you aren't carrying a camera...<br>

C</p>

Sony RX100. I've been playing with one for a couple weeks now. Fits in my jean's pocket - a requirement

for me. Decent quality all things considered. Looking forward to Lightroom 4 RAW support - have been processing jpegs so far.<P>

 

<a href= "http://citysnaps.net/2011%20photos/RX100%20gallery/">Some pix here</a>.

<p>My concern, which I just state to anyone suggesting a sensor smaller than a 1-series/RX100, is that the OP mentions the s95, which is already a very good 1/1.7" sensor camera. In the context of a true compact, it's hard to get much better performance than that (with the P7-series Nikons, the D-lux range, etc.) - not that they're bad cameras, just that a similar solution has already proven inadequate in noise handing. I've no personal experience of the 1-series or RX100, but physics suggests that it ought to be the next step up. Failing that, there are a few compacts with faster (f/1.8, f/1.4) lenses coming onto the market, which might make a difference.</p>