which camera advice sought

[tom_bowling1664874721]

<p>Hard to know where to post this... but I'll try here and if a moderator wants to send me elsewhere I'm happy for that. After may years of film cameras I worked my way through a few digitals. I have more or less liked them all, with a few caveats but a recent visit to Paris convinced me I need a rethink. I have a D600 which I never use as a walkabout camera -I only ever take it to do something specific. I have an xpro1 which has served as the walkabout camera - but I'm starting to think even this is a bit too heavy/clunky. I would have a powershot g16 but the back doesn't swivel, and no matter how amateurish people think it looks, I think a swivelling back would be really useful -I still have a rolleiflex in a cupboard and i love waistlevel photography.<br>

so here's my list<br>

1. capable of being used manually<br>

2. capable of shooting raw<br>

3. light<br>

4. smallish (smaller than xpro 1) - should fit in a coat pocket<br>

5. good quality lens but Im not brand driven<br>

6. tilting rear screen<br>

7. gps/wifi I can take or leave<br>

Id be grateful for any suggestions for a camera that meets the criteria. Frankly I find the world of small modern walkabout cameras bewildering. Doesn't everyone?<br>

tia for suggestions</p>

 

[Hector Javkin]

<p>Plugging your criteria into dpreview's camera feature search (<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/search/cameras?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu#!"><strong>link</strong></a>), looking at compact and large sensor compact cameras, and assuming you want a viewfinder as well as an a tilting screen, I see 5 possible choices: the Nikon Coolpix 7100 and 7800, and the Canon G11, G12 And G1X. Note that the G1X version II no longer has a viewfinder. If you include cameras that don't have viewfinders or offer optional viewfinders at extra cost and weight, there are more choices.</p>

<p>I don't know any of the cameras above. The only compact I have at present needed to be waterproof and cheap, so it could resist damage from volcanic ash or could be easily replaced if it was damaged. It did survive. Good luck.</p>

[tom_bowling1664874721]

<p>Thanks Hector. That's very kind. I'd never found the preview search engine... schoolboy error! And yes I would want a viewfinder, for all their shortcomings.</p>

 

[Hector Javkin]

<p>Tom, I didn't check about shooting raw.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Take a look at the Fuji X-A1, or X-M1 if you prefer the X-Trans sensor. It meets most of your criteria, including the tilt screen (not fully articulating, however, so no tilt in vertical/portrait hold). It takes the same lenses as your X-Pro1, comes with a pretty good and lightweight stabilized kit zoom, is smaller and lighter than your X-Pro1, and even lighter than my Nikon V1.</p>

<p>And, yup, I've been using the X-A1 just like a TLR for some photos, even cropping the JPEGs in-camera to 1:1. Makes for a steady hold, even without the stabilized kit zoom. Nice feature about the Fuji - even with the various JPEG crops, the raw files are still full frame 3:2, so you can change your mind later, or simply reframe and still make the final output 1:1.</p>

<p>Not quite pocket size, due primarily to the 16-50 kit zoom. The lightweight Fuji 27/2.8 pancake prime would bring it closer to pocketable, if you don't need the stabilization. But the Fuji X-lenses are pricey for what you get, although the 27/2.8 tests indicate it's very sharp - the maximum resolution JPEG samples online look very impressive, noticeably better than the kit zoom's results. I'm tempted, but I'd need to swap or sell several lenses to get one.</p>

<p>The Ricoh GR (APS sensor model) might do well, if you can use the non-interchangeable 18.3mm f/2.8 lens (28mm equivalent in full frame/35mm film). If the Fuji X-A1 and kit zoom hadn't been such a good value recently the Ricoh GR would have been my second choice, although I'd prefer the Ricoh with a 22-24mm lens. Ricoh's ergonomics and physical controls are the best around - you can operate almost everything one-handed (right hand only).</p>

<p>I wish every manufacturer would license or just flat out copy/steal Ricoh's design. Instead most manufacturers seem to study the Ricoh GR digital cameras carefully, mumble appreciative things like "Hmm... this is very good... verrry good. Let's build something exactly the opposite to this and make it as non-ergonomic and frustrating as possible to use."</p>

[mostly sports]

<p>Tom, you don't say anything about sensor size, which some would make their initial specification. Your list adds up to a Sony RX100 ii in my quick review. I have the first model (no tilting screen) and find it the most quality one can put in a pocket. I've had one for years. Oddly, I don't have a lot of shots from it, probably because I'm usually happy to carry and use my larger Sonys and Fujis. I do hear a lot of good things about the Ricoh. I disagree with previous post that Fuji-X lens are pricey "for what you get." I shot with Leicas for twenty years, and find the Fujis to be an excellent value.</p>

[jordan2240]

<p>Tom,</p>

<p>I didn't receive it yet, but I just ordered the Panasonic Lumix FZ200 based primarily on reviews, looking at shots on the web, and my criteria for wanting the most versatile walk-around camera out there. For me, the FZ200 is it. Meets all of your criteria except for being small. But I'm not averse to sporting a 'geek pouch' around my waste/shoulder, so I didn't need pocket-sized.</p>

[tom_bowling1664874721]

<p>Thanks for responses one and all. Very helpful. to answer Phil Stiles, I think you have to make compromises with the compact camera on sensor size... if sensor size ruled all I wouldn't ever prefer my xpro1 over my Nikon D600, but actually I often do. I agree with you about Fuji lenses, though. the 35mm is an absolute cracker.</p>

[Brad_]

Also very impressed with my Fuji X-A1. Still $450 on Amazon with a great 16-50 (24-75mm equiv) lens. Some X-A1 and X-E2 (that I rented before purchasing the X-A1) pix <a href= "http://www.citysnaps.net/2014%20Photos/Fuji%20Snaps/">here.</a><P>

 

If jeans pocket compatible is a requirement, the Sony RX100 is a good choice, having owned one for more

than a year. But it's a lot more money and has a non-interchangeable zoom lens. I really do like the X-A1

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

[aplumpton]

<p>An easily satisfied search, as there are lots of small cameras providing what you want. The choice only narrows when you start talking about further requirements like lens performance, sensor size, ISO performance, image quality, response speed, shutter noise, optical or electronic VF (optical is fine for a fixed lens compact camera), etc. The rotatable or moveable screen (with live view) is a limiting criteria. SONY NEX or Alpha mirrorless cameras may be what you are looking for in that sense, although the less costly ones need an attached VF. If I were you I would get a few of the local or international photo journals that objectively compare these small cameras. </p>

[pmind]

<p>I used my Sony NEX-7 in Paris last summer. The results were great, and it checks all of your boxes; but unfortunately it's not really any smaller than your Fuji. I've also found the X100S to be a fantastic travel camera, having my favorite viewfinder of all, but I don't think it meets all of you requirements.</p>

[tom_bowling1664874721]

<p>Thanks for replies, everyone. I'm grateful. After handling a few cameras I broke my own rule for a tilting screen and bought a g16. It just felt dead right in the hand compared to others, which is weirdly the most important criteria of all for a little camera which I expect will be a constant companion. </p>