Professional Point and Shoot ?

[jon_kobeck1]

<p>I am a fine art photographer. I generally use a 5D with prime lenses. I am finding that in my day to day travels there are times when I wish I had my camera with me, but for reasons of weight and size I just cant carry it every day every where. <br>

Can someone recommend a pro-quality point and shoot that I could easily slip in my pocket and carry daily? I print very large so resolution and IQ are important.</p>

<p>thanks</p>

[jeff_bubis]

You have only a few options out there.. The Sigma DP series, Canon G10/11. Panasonic LX-3/Leica D-Lux 4, and -

if $ isn't an issue - the New Leica X-1. I've got an LX-3 and love it, but if you are already used to primes, the Sigmas

and X-1 would likely be of more interest.

[sattler123]

<p>Take a look at the Canon S90. It is a superb little camera with very good high ISO capabilities, a 28-105mm lens a f/2 lens on the wide side, shoots RAW, is incredibly compact etc. etc. You get the picture. Buy the Richard Franiec grip for it and you have a camera that is comfortable to hold, slips into any pocket and takes excellent pictures.</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>In my view, the ability to make large prints with good image quality and the ability to pocket a digital P&S camera are mutually exclusive. If you want a relatively compact camera that will allow better quality enlargements, I'd opt for a micro-4/3rds camera, with a sensor many times the size of a Canon G11 or Panasonic LX-3. When it comes to resolution, the guy with the biggest sensor mostly wins. So I'd suggest the Olympus EP-1 with a 17mm f/2.8 (equals about 34mm in 35mm format), or a Panasonic GF1 with a 20mm f/1.7 (equals about 40mm in 35mm format):</p>

<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep1/">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep1/</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/</a></p>

[steve_solomon2]

<p>Greetings, Jon. First, congrats on your 5D! I agree with the previous poster, that there are few options available, and the ones he mentions are probably the best in the "point and shoot" or "compact" category. I just wanted to add that you should not expect the IQ of those cameras to come close to that of the full-frame 5D with primes, especially "L" lenses. Their sensors are simply too small, despite the newer Digic technologies in the G11 or even the G10. That said, if you can stay with the lower ISO's (100-200), use a tripod or monopod, and with good technique, exposing for important highlight detail, for example, and shoot RAW, with good post processing, your results should be quite good for moderate print sizes, perhaps even up to 11x14 or perhaps 16x20. Of course, I realize that print quality is subjective. In any case, good luck, and I'd be curious to hear what you wind up with. Thanks, Steve</p>

 

[robert lee]

<blockquote>

<p>... recommend a pro-quality point and shoot that I could easily slip in my pocket ...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Depends on which pocket. The Panasonic and Olympus micro-4/3 offerings are overcoat pocketable. Both are DSLR level performers.</p>

<p>If your photography sensibilities are amenable to longish exposures, learn to stitch multiple frames together. A couple or three frames shot handheld is just fine. This opens up to consideration the plethora of truly compact cameras, where optical performance tends to be more seriously compromised by a compact body. </p>

<p>The more resolution available to the composite, the more latitude available for various corrections in post. For example, a six frame composite from the 12MP Canon A1100 is probably equal to the 5D in single frame noise performance and exceed it in actual resolution.</p><div></div>

[tdigi]

<p>Jon I have been looking for the exact same thing. I have a small set up for my 5D2 ( small prime, 270 flash in an urban disguise 20 ) but I am also looking at a high end p/s. Jeff mentioned most of the best options along with the micro 4/3 setup. For me I pretty much ruled out the G10/11 because its not that much smaller then a DSLR with a small prime. Same with the 4/3. These all look like very good cameras but wouldn't you be better off getting a rebel and using your current prime lenses? Has anyone compared the 2? it does not seem like much of a difference in size and neither seems pocketable. which IMO you may as well just take the 5D if its not considerably smaller.<br>

<br /> I personally have been leaning toward the S90 because of its small size and pretty good zoom range along with good image quality but the others all look interesting to so I have been waiting and waiting. Seems when I wait this long I do nothing and just use my old 6mp SD600 which is surprisingly decent.</p>

[myworkshop]

<p>

 

<p>Hi Jon,<br>

I think the key word in your question is "Pocket". If you want to put the camera in you pocket the best bet is a micro 4/3 camera. I would recommend the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1. You can buy it as a kit with a 20mm f/1.7, (40mm equivalent on a full frame camera). This camera produces images on par with an entry level DSLR. It won't touch the 5D, but it will fit right in your pocket. <br>

Pete</p>

 

</p>

[Greg M]

<p>Look into the Ricoh GRD3. It's the ultimate *pocket* camera. 28mm f1.9 prime lens, dual control wheels, high resolution screen and what looks to be excellent image quality to at least ISO 400 or 800, and with an f1.9 lens, that's pretty darn good.</p>

<p>No matter what you choose, you just need to keep in mind you cannot apply your 5D image quality expectations to any compact or you will just be disappointed.</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>The GRDIII certainly is certainly small, but has a 7.6 x 5.7mm sensor. This is not a camera from which to make significant enlargements.</p>

<p>The Oly EP-1 has an 18 x 13.5mm sensor. While a 4/3rds sensor won't compare favorably to the 5D's almost-twice-as-large 36x24mm sensor, I've used the EP-1 and you'll certainly be able to get excellent-quality 8x10 inch prints.</p>

<p>Having owned a 35mm GR-1v (I wish I'd kept), I think the GRDIII is a very cool camera. However, if you're an image quality freak, it wouldn't be my choice for making enlargements.</p>

[vrankin]

<p>I would second the Canon S90. Many of the cameras mentioned above are really not that pocketable. The S90 is. And its quality equals the G11. It also has a faster lens: f/2.</p>

[Greg M]

<p>Eric, for anyone who is an image quality freak, NO compact is worthy of looking at. That's why I added the warning about applying 5D image quality expectations to any compact. The E-P1 is no compact and certainly nothing anyone could slip into their pocket, and the OP said he wanted something pocketable he could carry anywhere, any time.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>If your expectation is that somewhere, there is a digital compact that will take photographs from which you can make large prints and sell them alongside prints from a dslr without much discernible difference, I fear you are doomed to disappointment. I've bought and sold Canon G sereis compacts in the same unfulfilled hope. </p>

<p>Either accept that , or carry a compact with you as an aide-memoire to fuel further shoots with your main camera, or carry your 5D. There is perhaps one exception. A good friend of mine travels thye world with a Canon A620 and comes back with staggering images that couldn't easily be made with a slr camera , as a function of depth of field requirements, or the sheer ability to get the camera into places that a slr won't go. Now he's not making 20" x 30" prints of these, but they make excellent small prints. Have you considered using a compact to produce a body of work different from your mainstream , using smaller prints?</p>

[szrimaging]

<p>I went the LX3 route for this reason. I amhappy with the camera, but even my D200 outperforms it in IQ. However, if the scene doesn't have too much dynamic range, the results are quite acceptable. A standard DSLR gets about 12 stops worth of dynamic range, and I would put one of these compacts at maybe 6 to 8 stops. That said, I use the LX3 when traveling light (motorcycle or urban backpacking) and have been pleased with some of the results.</p>

[nathan_jandl]

<p>Or you could get P&S film camera! Maybe a Contax T3...load some Provia 400x in there and you're set. Decent develop & scan labs are still pretty easy to find. And in this case, the results would be right up there with your 5D, albeit with the "film look." </p>

[JRCrowe]

<p>I own a Canon A650 IS and have had good results with it. I have made enlargements up to 20x30 with it. There is free software available that allows it to shoot RAW. It has image stabilization and a 2.8 lens. You will see more noise than with a DSLR but it is mangeable. It also has the fold out display screen which adds all kinds of possibilities for composing shots. It is too slow for sports though with a long shutter delay and the optical viewfinder doesn't display the zoomed image. I tried some shots at my nieces soccer game and had real trouble following the action and including her in the frame while zoomed in, it may be a technique that could be learned though. I have used it to make panoramas which like Robert said increases resolution.</p>

[taje]

<p>Ok, lots of good info here, really... But the guy was talking FINE ART? Back when photography was different from pornography, FINE ART involved little less than a 4x5 viewcamera. That's not just a status quo. You want to sell a "fine art piece", printed LARGE on archival supports, dry mounted, guaranteed to last hundreds of years... and you do that with a noisy point and shoot?!<br>

Let's leave potatoes with potatoes and carrots with carrots... If you want a P&S to shoot photographs, that's just fine, but PLEASE don't prostitute that as fine-art. The world is so dumb, nowadays, that they might believe you.</p>

[starvy]

<p>pocketable might be the problem here. get a panasonic micro fourthird, get an adaptor and use a leica fast prime. the image quality would be astounding.</p>

[peterkonzuk]

<p>I was in the same boat as you. 5D, my favorite lens the 16-35II. I shoot alot wide and 24 is probably my favorite focal length. I rarely use much above 50. So, as you may have guessed, I went with an LX3 and havent looked back. Its just such a fun little camera. I must admit I do find the GF1 a sexy little camera as well and maybe if they come out with a wide prime might consider it. Unfortunately the same thing that makes the GF1 interesting for me, the larger chip, will necessarily make the lenses much bigger and even then won`t be able to compete with the 5D in very low light. Therefor the LX3 or similar small frame will always have its niche. <br>

Peter</p>

[maciek_stankiewicz]

<p>Fuji F100fd is an excellent camera with amazing sensor, lens and low-light performance.</p>

[mike_whalen]

<p>I would first look at and read the reviews for the new 12MP Panasonic and Olympus Micro 4/3 cameras (DMC-GF1 and the Pen EP-2) . If you can get by with their prime lenses (20mm/f1.7, 17mm/f2.8)you may actually be able to put these in a larger coat pocket (but probably not a shirt pocket). These should yield results similar to most modern crop sensor DSLR, especially at lower ISO. They also support removable lenses which makes them very flexible.<br>

If these are too big, next look at the slightly smaller Canon G11 (or the older G10). It has a smaller 10MP sensor, but has many manual controls and a pretty good (non-removable) zoom lens. It supports RAW and you can use an external flash.<br>

Next I would look at the very pocketable Canon s90 or the Panasonic LX3. Both of these are a notch up (in quality and in cost) from the many many P&S cameras on the market. (I own the S90 and it uses the same sensor as the G10). Both have zoom lenses.<br>

If you want to low ball it just to experiment, consider something like the Canon A1100 ($129 at Amazon). I got the earlier A590 for my wife last year and I was pleasantly surprised as to the picture quality for such a cheap camera.<br>

Note that none of the P&S's will give you the DOF, dynamic range, high ISO noise immunity or the optical quality that you are used to receiving with the 5D and primes. However, if you have good lighting, your results might be ok. Only you can make the comparison.<br>

As mentioned by someone above, a good quality film 35mm P&S might also be worth considering. You may find a good deal on a used one on ebay. Scanning film is a PITA though.<br>

Hopefully one day Canon will introduce a small P&S with a crop sensor on it.</p>

[luis_g]

<p> Although P&S's are beneath most PNetters, Magnum members Chris Anderson, Paolo Pellegrin, and Alex Majoli routinely use them to make photographs that are published in magazines around the world and shown widely in art exhibits.</p>

<p>Thank God they don't listen to conventional PN wisdom.</p>

<p> Michal Daniels used a mere 640x480 Eyemodule II personal organizer/camera to make a fine arts series book.</p>

<p>http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2009/05/michal-daniel-in-your-face/</p>

<p>Another photographer (ex-PN member) who now sells portfolios, $600 books, and is listed with a major US gallery with which he has had shows, used point and shoots to do it.</p>

<p> Small, good-quality P&S's?</p>

<p> For <em>true</em> pocketability, Fuji 200 EXR, FujiF100fd (I own both of those). A little bigger, Canon G-series, S90, Canon 650, and 640 (I own one of each). Coat-pocket size....LX3, Sigma DP1 & 2, Leica Dlux-4 & X-1. Panasonic Lumix GF1. Not pocketable, but still light and small, a Rebel with a 24/2.8.</p>

<p> The best camera is the one in your hand. Every design is a compromise. For everything one gets, one gives something up.</p>

<p> </p>

[robert lee]

<blockquote>

<p>But the guy was talking FINE ART? Back when photography was different from pornography, FINE ART involved little less than a 4x5 viewcamera ... and you do that with a noisy point and shoot?! ...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh please. "Fine Art" is defined only by two things, and neither has anything to do with equipment. First, the work is deemed by People Who Matter (PWM) that the Work is indeed Fine Art. A corollary is, of course, that the PMW has established and can defend real dollar market value for said body of work.</p>

<p>If the first isn't possible, then second, self-declare the work fine art. This starving artist, the world doesn't understand, model also has plenty of precedence.</p>

[indraneel]

<p>maybe a m9? The fastest camera with the best IQ in the pocketable category will always be a rangefinder - digital or film. I have the e-p1 (and the 35SP), but prefer the IR D70 for speed and "fine" art.</p>

[g-man1]

I think you may wish to look at some old film cameras loaded with some slide film.