New Camera Question #210419
Discussion
I've had a look on the first couple of pages, but didn't see anything that immediately struck me as relevant. If I'm wrong, apologies.
I'm off on Honeymoon in July - 2 week roadtrip through Spain to France and back home. Rather than rely on the iphone camera, I'm keen to get something a bit more substantial to take a few photos on the trip. In the spirit of utility, I also want to use it a bit more when I'm out with the dog etc too - and ideally beforehand so I get used to taking pictures.
I'm completely new to photography, but I think I take decent pictures with the iphone (who doesn't) Apart from a spell with my dad's old film DSLR about 10 years ago, I've not picked up a "proper" camera in ages.
I want to take photos of Landscapes, City scenes and the Dog.
I'd like something that's quite small. I don't want to be burdened by a camera when I'm enjoying a beer in the afternoon.
I'd really like a Leica because I like the look of them, but don't know if they're any good for what I need.
I don't want to be burdened by loads of lenses and loads of kit that I'll rarely use.
I don't really want to spend a fortune (circa £500) and I'm not bothered whether what I end up with is new or used.
What would you recommend?
I'm off on Honeymoon in July - 2 week roadtrip through Spain to France and back home. Rather than rely on the iphone camera, I'm keen to get something a bit more substantial to take a few photos on the trip. In the spirit of utility, I also want to use it a bit more when I'm out with the dog etc too - and ideally beforehand so I get used to taking pictures.
I'm completely new to photography, but I think I take decent pictures with the iphone (who doesn't) Apart from a spell with my dad's old film DSLR about 10 years ago, I've not picked up a "proper" camera in ages.
I want to take photos of Landscapes, City scenes and the Dog.
I'd like something that's quite small. I don't want to be burdened by a camera when I'm enjoying a beer in the afternoon.
I'd really like a Leica because I like the look of them, but don't know if they're any good for what I need.
I don't want to be burdened by loads of lenses and loads of kit that I'll rarely use.
I don't really want to spend a fortune (circa £500) and I'm not bothered whether what I end up with is new or used.
What would you recommend?
£500 really doesn't buy any digital Leica that is worth having. It might just get you one of the re-branded Panasonic compact models but there is really nothing particularly note-worthy about them other than being expensive.
You could look at the Sony RX100 options if a compact camera is the priority. Well liked on here though I personally find them a little too fiddly but it seems I'm in the minority.
Olympus and Fuji cameras might give you some of what appeals about Leica. It's all aluminium finishes, knurled knobs and retro styling. Olympus probably makes most sense at this sort of price but take a look at the options. HDEW do very good deals on Olympus gear. £500 should get you an OMD E-M10 mk3 with a couple of zoom lenses. That really is amazing value and a really nice little camera.
Oh and also worth mentioning the Fuji X100, available as X100, X100S, X100T and X100F.. They may be a bit niche and a tiny bit limiting but they're such a joy to use and definitely have the Leica look and feel. Used X100T's (which is what I have) are within budget.
You could look at the Sony RX100 options if a compact camera is the priority. Well liked on here though I personally find them a little too fiddly but it seems I'm in the minority.
Olympus and Fuji cameras might give you some of what appeals about Leica. It's all aluminium finishes, knurled knobs and retro styling. Olympus probably makes most sense at this sort of price but take a look at the options. HDEW do very good deals on Olympus gear. £500 should get you an OMD E-M10 mk3 with a couple of zoom lenses. That really is amazing value and a really nice little camera.
Oh and also worth mentioning the Fuji X100, available as X100, X100S, X100T and X100F.. They may be a bit niche and a tiny bit limiting but they're such a joy to use and definitely have the Leica look and feel. Used X100T's (which is what I have) are within budget.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 11th February 13:31
TBH, pretty much any mainstream compact camera from a recognised manufacture will do what you are after.
Many have the ability for wide angle and a pretty good zoom. Picture quality is pretty good these days too.
The only thing most lack is any real form of manual controls. But it doesn't sound like this is what you are after.
A mirrorless bridge camera of DSLR are just going to be a lot bigger. For the most part and require you to have multiple lenses.
https://www.canon.co.uk/cameras/superzoom-cameras/
https://www.nikon.co.uk/en_GB/products/category_pa...
Many have the ability for wide angle and a pretty good zoom. Picture quality is pretty good these days too.
The only thing most lack is any real form of manual controls. But it doesn't sound like this is what you are after.
A mirrorless bridge camera of DSLR are just going to be a lot bigger. For the most part and require you to have multiple lenses.
https://www.canon.co.uk/cameras/superzoom-cameras/
https://www.nikon.co.uk/en_GB/products/category_pa...
300bhp/ton said:
TBH, pretty much any mainstream compact camera from a recognised manufacture will do what you are after.
Many have the ability for wide angle and a pretty good zoom. Picture quality is pretty good these days too.
The only thing most lack is any real form of manual controls. But it doesn't sound like this is what you are after.
A mirrorless bridge camera of DSLR are just going to be a lot bigger. For the most part and require you to have multiple lenses.
https://www.canon.co.uk/cameras/superzoom-cameras/
https://www.nikon.co.uk/en_GB/products/category_pa...
Many of these cameras have sensors that are barely bigger than a typical phone camera so all you really gain is a zoom lens and a bit more control which admittedly might be important but you gain almost nothing in terms of image quality and in fact might well lose out as so much investment has been poured into phone camera processing that they tend to punch a little above their weight.Many have the ability for wide angle and a pretty good zoom. Picture quality is pretty good these days too.
The only thing most lack is any real form of manual controls. But it doesn't sound like this is what you are after.
A mirrorless bridge camera of DSLR are just going to be a lot bigger. For the most part and require you to have multiple lenses.
https://www.canon.co.uk/cameras/superzoom-cameras/
https://www.nikon.co.uk/en_GB/products/category_pa...
My personal feeling is that if you're going to go to the expense and effort of carrying a dedicated camera you really should push for better output.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 11th February 13:32
Gad-Westy said:
£500 really doesn't buy any digital Leica that is worth having. It might just get you one of the re-branded Panasonic compact models but there is really nothing particularly note-worthy about them other than being expensive.
You could look at the Sony RX100 options if a compact camera is the priority. Well liked on here though I personally find them a little too fiddly but it seems I'm in the minority.
Olympus and Fuji cameras might give you some of what appeals about Leica. It's all aluminium finishes, knurled knobs and retro styling. Olympus probably makes most sense at this sort of price but take a look at the options. HDEW do very good deals on Olympus gear. £500 should get you an OMD E-M10 mk3 with a couple of zoom lenses. That really is amazing value and a really nice little camera.
Oh and also worth mentioning the Fuji X100, available as X100, X100S, X100T and X100F.. They may be a bit niche and a tiny bit limiting but they're such a joy to use and definitely have the Leica look and feel. Used X100T's (which is what I have) are within budget.
Yeah, I realise that £500 doesn't go a long way with a Leica. I'm a complete sucker for marketing though, which is why I like them. You could look at the Sony RX100 options if a compact camera is the priority. Well liked on here though I personally find them a little too fiddly but it seems I'm in the minority.
Olympus and Fuji cameras might give you some of what appeals about Leica. It's all aluminium finishes, knurled knobs and retro styling. Olympus probably makes most sense at this sort of price but take a look at the options. HDEW do very good deals on Olympus gear. £500 should get you an OMD E-M10 mk3 with a couple of zoom lenses. That really is amazing value and a really nice little camera.
Oh and also worth mentioning the Fuji X100, available as X100, X100S, X100T and X100F.. They may be a bit niche and a tiny bit limiting but they're such a joy to use and definitely have the Leica look and feel. Used X100T's (which is what I have) are within budget.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 11th February 13:31
Talk to me about zoom lenses. Would you use them when you're out and about, or just stick one lens on and be done for the day? Walking around Barcelona, for example, I'm not messing around with a bag and multiple lenses.
If most of the photography I plan on doing is in a City, then maybe some wider landscape shots in Provence and Rioja, will I need loads of zoom lenses?
Man Maths being what it is, what's the next jump in price that you're likely to notice a difference in-terms of output?
Would a second-hand Leica be worth a look?
Gad-Westy said:
Many of these cameras have sensors that are barely bigger than a typical phone camera so all you really gain is a zoom lens and a bit more control which admittedly might be important but you gain almost nothing in terms of image quality and in fact might well lose out as so much investment has been poured into phone camera processing that they tend to punch a little above their weight.
My personal feeling is that if you're going to go to the expense and effort of carrying a dedicated camera you really should push for better output.
I would say the zoom is of huge benefit over a phone camera. And the images they can produce are sharp enough to produce nice A0 posters from. So I'd question if you really need anything sharper?My personal feeling is that if you're going to go to the expense and effort of carrying a dedicated camera you really should push for better output.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 11th February 13:32
Yes, they will have some limitations vs better cameras. But for most people most of the time they will surpass their expectations and actual photographic needs.
Tom_Spotley_When said:
Yeah, I realise that £500 doesn't go a long way with a Leica. I'm a complete sucker for marketing though, which is why I like them.
Talk to me about zoom lenses. Would you use them when you're out and about, or just stick one lens on and be done for the day? Walking around Barcelona, for example, I'm not messing around with a bag and multiple lenses.
If most of the photography I plan on doing is in a City, then maybe some wider landscape shots in Provence and Rioja, will I need loads of zoom lenses?
Man Maths being what it is, what's the next jump in price that you're likely to notice a difference in-terms of output?
Would a second-hand Leica be worth a look?
The trouble with lenses are, you'll nearly always want the one you don't have with you.Talk to me about zoom lenses. Would you use them when you're out and about, or just stick one lens on and be done for the day? Walking around Barcelona, for example, I'm not messing around with a bag and multiple lenses.
If most of the photography I plan on doing is in a City, then maybe some wider landscape shots in Provence and Rioja, will I need loads of zoom lenses?
Man Maths being what it is, what's the next jump in price that you're likely to notice a difference in-terms of output?
Would a second-hand Leica be worth a look?
Wide angle is great, right up to the point you want to get closer to something that is a long way off. But obviously a telephoto lens will restrict what you can shoot, as things will appear closer and you'll have to get further away from objects to get them in frame.
Zoom lenses offer the best practical mix, although some can produce softer images than prime lenses (fixed focal length), but probably not to the extent that really matters for most people.
The biggest limited is how much zoom and the fact many zoom lenses are slower (F stop) and won't work as well in lower light. Bigger zoom lenses are generally going to be physically bigger and heavier. Which makes the camera less pocket friendly.
At the end of the day, almost any interchangeable lens system will mean the camera won't fit in a pocket, so it's either in your bad or round your neck.
e.g.
While the mirrorless cameras are smaller, I can't see how they are small enough to really make any real difference to how you would carry them.
It's the lens that makes them big still
If you are ok with this, then no probs.
But if you want something more pocket friendly, then you may want to consider a compact camera still.
Tom_Spotley_When said:
Yeah, I realise that £500 doesn't go a long way with a Leica. I'm a complete sucker for marketing though, which is why I like them.
Talk to me about zoom lenses. Would you use them when you're out and about, or just stick one lens on and be done for the day? Walking around Barcelona, for example, I'm not messing around with a bag and multiple lenses.
If most of the photography I plan on doing is in a City, then maybe some wider landscape shots in Provence and Rioja, will I need loads of zoom lenses?
Man Maths being what it is, what's the next jump in price that you're likely to notice a difference in-terms of output?
Would a second-hand Leica be worth a look?
Well honestly, regarding your last question, I'd personally forget Leicas all together at this price. Proper Leicas are lovely but £500 definitely doesn't buy one and I suspect a £500 Leica compact is not the concept you have fallen in love with. They're almost literally a very ordinary panasonic compact with a red sticker on. I don't really have a problem with Leica generally but at £500, you're very much looking at Aston Martin Cygnets here if you know what I mean! Talk to me about zoom lenses. Would you use them when you're out and about, or just stick one lens on and be done for the day? Walking around Barcelona, for example, I'm not messing around with a bag and multiple lenses.
If most of the photography I plan on doing is in a City, then maybe some wider landscape shots in Provence and Rioja, will I need loads of zoom lenses?
Man Maths being what it is, what's the next jump in price that you're likely to notice a difference in-terms of output?
Would a second-hand Leica be worth a look?
It's hard to answer the zoom question so all I'll do is give you my own experience and I expect it not to help even a small amount!
I have three cameras in regular use and they all have a specific role.
My serious one is a full frame SLR with some big heavy zooms and the odd prime lens. I use this if I'm going out on a trip with the sole intention of taking photos and don't want any compromises. It's mainly landscapes, cityscapes, astro and motorsports for me. The zooms are high quality stuff with limited range but great image quality. It requires a big bag and gives you a sore back! I doubt this appeals to you,
My second camera is a Fuji X100t which has a fixed 23mm lens (equivalent to 35mm in old money). This is pretty compact, doesn't fit in a trouser pocket but slips into any bag or even a big coat pocket. I love this thing as it delivers great IQ, is very tactile and just a joy to use. I personally love the focal length but not for landscapes. If you're happy with the kind of focal length that most phones are, you might like these, it's not far off. Worth looking these up, they're a sexy camera and do have some of the same pure and tactile appeal that made Leicas popular. I take this camera out a lot for family trips or whilst on holiday. It's very portable and discrete.
My last camera might work better for you. It's an Olympus E-M5ii and I pair it with a 14-150mm Mk2 Olympus Lens. The camera and lens combo is small but again not pocketable but you get a huge zoom range from wide to long (28-300mm in full frame terms) and the sensor is big enough to deliver very good image quality. Lenses with such a big range are a slight compromise in terms of ultimate image quality but they're still very good. The reason I have this is that it is weather resistant and can do more or less anything. So I carry it a lot when in the mountains or doing other outdoor stuff. Video functionality is pretty good too.
All that said, most of what you've described, other than your unhealthy Leica obsession, points to a Sony RX100. Very compact, good image quality and a useful zoom range.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 11th February 16:00
300bhp/ton said:
I would say the zoom is of huge benefit over a phone camera. And the images they can produce are sharp enough to produce nice A0 posters from. So I'd question if you really need anything sharper?
Yes, they will have some limitations vs better cameras. But for most people most of the time they will surpass their expectations and actual photographic needs.
I think we have quite polar opposite views on this but it is a fair point that we don't necessarily 'need' better image quality but then frankly we don't need to take photos at all. And I think if we are interested enough to not just use a phone, we are normally interested in achieving good IQ. And I'm afraid I definitely cannot picture a scenario where a sharp A0 print can be produced by a sensor smaller than the tip of your little finger. To put it in context, if we agree that a sharp print requires around 300DPI, then to print A0, you're looking for around 130mp. But that is resolved resolution, not just potential and the very best full frame cameras are only knocking on the door of 35-40 and that is using hideously expensive Zeiss lenses. A Phase one might get somewhere close, I don't know. But I do know that a phone camera sized sensor is going to be total mush at that size. I know viewing distance needs to be considered but once you get into this 'good enough' scenario, all bets are off as its totally subjective. You can blow images up as big as you like if you don't care what they look like. Yes, they will have some limitations vs better cameras. But for most people most of the time they will surpass their expectations and actual photographic needs.
And all of this also ignores the subject isolation, contrast and 'pop' that larger sensors can deliver.
I'm with you on a decent zoom range being useful, I'm just not sure that the compromises that come with it make it worth bothering with.
Tom_Spotley_When said:
I'd like something that's quite small. I don't want to be burdened by a camera when I'm enjoying a beer in the afternoon.
I don't want to be burdened by loads of lenses and loads of kit that I'll rarely use.
Just picking up on these points. The Sony RX100 mentioned above would seem to fit the bill and is partly what I meant by "compact".I don't want to be burdened by loads of lenses and loads of kit that I'll rarely use.
Just a note, you may find a zoom handy for what you are after though. And also worth checking the video quality, some aren't great at video and you may find you'll want to use it.
Gad-Westy said:
Well honestly, regarding your last question, I'd personally forget Leicas all together at this price. Proper Leicas are lovely but £500 definitely doesn't buy one and I suspect a £500 Leica compact is not the concept you have fallen in love with. They're almost literally a very ordinary panasonic compact with a red sticker on. I don't really have a problem with Leica generally but at £500, you're very much looking at Aston Martin Cygnets here if you know what I mean!
It's hard to answer the zoom question so all I'll do is give you my own experience and I expect it not to help even a small amount!
I have three cameras in regular use and they all have a specific role.
My serious one is a full frame SLR with some big heavy zooms and the odd prime lens. I use this if I'm going out on a trip with the sole intention of taking photos and don't want any compromises. It's mainly landscapes, cityscapes, astro and motorsports for me. The zooms are high quality stuff with limited range but great image quality. It requires a big bag and gives you a sore back! I doubt this appeals to you,
My second camera is a Fuji X100t which has a fixed 23mm lens (equivalent to 35mm in old money). This is pretty compact, doesn't fit in a trouser pocket but slips into any bag or even a big coat pocket. I love this thing as it delivers great IQ, is very tactile and just a joy to use. I personally love the focal length but not for landscapes. If you're happy with the kind of focal length that most phones are, you might like these, it's not far off. Worth looking these up, they're a sexy camera and do have some of the same pure and tactile appeal that made Leicas popular. I take this camera out a lot for family trips or whilst on holiday. It's very portable and discrete.
My last camera might work better for you. It's an Olympus E-M5ii and I pair it with a 14-150mm Mk2 Olympus Lens. The camera and lens combo is small but again not pocketable but you get a huge zoom range from wide to long (28-300mm in full frame terms) and the sensor is big enough to deliver very good image quality. Lenses with such a big range are a slight compromise in terms of ultimate image quality but they're still very good. The reason I have this is that it is weather resistant and can do more or less anything. So I carry it a lot when in the mountains or doing other outdoor stuff. Video functionality is pretty good too.
All that said, most of what you've described, other than your unhealthy Leica obsession, points to a Sony RX100. Very compact, good image quality and a useful zoom range.
Thanks for that; the Olympus and Fuji both look pretty good. I guess in the future I can add different lenses to them. It's hard to answer the zoom question so all I'll do is give you my own experience and I expect it not to help even a small amount!
I have three cameras in regular use and they all have a specific role.
My serious one is a full frame SLR with some big heavy zooms and the odd prime lens. I use this if I'm going out on a trip with the sole intention of taking photos and don't want any compromises. It's mainly landscapes, cityscapes, astro and motorsports for me. The zooms are high quality stuff with limited range but great image quality. It requires a big bag and gives you a sore back! I doubt this appeals to you,
My second camera is a Fuji X100t which has a fixed 23mm lens (equivalent to 35mm in old money). This is pretty compact, doesn't fit in a trouser pocket but slips into any bag or even a big coat pocket. I love this thing as it delivers great IQ, is very tactile and just a joy to use. I personally love the focal length but not for landscapes. If you're happy with the kind of focal length that most phones are, you might like these, it's not far off. Worth looking these up, they're a sexy camera and do have some of the same pure and tactile appeal that made Leicas popular. I take this camera out a lot for family trips or whilst on holiday. It's very portable and discrete.
My last camera might work better for you. It's an Olympus E-M5ii and I pair it with a 14-150mm Mk2 Olympus Lens. The camera and lens combo is small but again not pocketable but you get a huge zoom range from wide to long (28-300mm in full frame terms) and the sensor is big enough to deliver very good image quality. Lenses with such a big range are a slight compromise in terms of ultimate image quality but they're still very good. The reason I have this is that it is weather resistant and can do more or less anything. So I carry it a lot when in the mountains or doing other outdoor stuff. Video functionality is pretty good too.
All that said, most of what you've described, other than your unhealthy Leica obsession, points to a Sony RX100. Very compact, good image quality and a useful zoom range.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 11th February 16:00
It's more that I don't want to be burdened by wandering round with a big SLR type camera all the time. Something that's smaller and more discrete for when I'm having a coffee/drink somewhere is more important to me.
Can't imagine recording video on it, I don't at the moment with a phone and can't see how that would change with a camera, even when I'm out and about at home. I'm also not too concerned by ultimate image quality.
I might want to blow something up and put it on the wall, but if I did, it's likely to be on a small scale rather than large.
Would you go new or used? Seems a big saving on used rather than buying brand new....
Tom_Spotley_When said:
Thanks for that; the Olympus and Fuji both look pretty good. I guess in the future I can add different lenses to them.
It's more that I don't want to be burdened by wandering round with a big SLR type camera all the time. Something that's smaller and more discrete for when I'm having a coffee/drink somewhere is more important to me.
Can't imagine recording video on it, I don't at the moment with a phone and can't see how that would change with a camera, even when I'm out and about at home. I'm also not too concerned by ultimate image quality.
I might want to blow something up and put it on the wall, but if I did, it's likely to be on a small scale rather than large.
Would you go new or used? Seems a big saving on used rather than buying brand new....
Just to avoid any confusion. The Fuji I have (X100T) has a fixed lens. It cannot be changed. There are positive and negatives to that. On the plus side, you don't have to budget for a lens, It's smaller overall and it's a very high quality lens. On the downside, you're stuck with that focal length. I love it for general stuff but it can be limiting. If you like Fuji generally but want interchangable lenses, look at the X-E3, X-T20 etc. All really nice cameras. It's more that I don't want to be burdened by wandering round with a big SLR type camera all the time. Something that's smaller and more discrete for when I'm having a coffee/drink somewhere is more important to me.
Can't imagine recording video on it, I don't at the moment with a phone and can't see how that would change with a camera, even when I'm out and about at home. I'm also not too concerned by ultimate image quality.
I might want to blow something up and put it on the wall, but if I did, it's likely to be on a small scale rather than large.
Would you go new or used? Seems a big saving on used rather than buying brand new....
I bought my Olympus E-M5ii over the cheaper E-M10 because its weather proof. If you don't need that look at the E-M10 offers that HDEW have. Much better value. Or a Pen-F as the other poster mentioned but last time I looked they were still a lot of money.
Most of these (drone pics apart!) were taken with Sony RX100
http://www.stevecarter.com/latest/latesttorridon18...
as were these:
http://stevecarter.com/bertie/bertie2.htm
For £500 you can't really go wrong with said camera. It also fits in jeans pocket.
http://www.stevecarter.com/latest/latesttorridon18...
as were these:
http://stevecarter.com/bertie/bertie2.htm
For £500 you can't really go wrong with said camera. It also fits in jeans pocket.
Another vote for the RX100, but if you want a bigger zoom (for taking pics of stuff that's far away), then save yourself a couple of hundred quid and get a Sony HX90.
It has a smaller sensor than the RX100 but does take more than passable photos. Certainly good enough for most holiday snaps.
All photos below have been resized to pass the 2Mb upload limit, so the quality is affected but they give you an idea
Here's an example of the zoom. These two were taken at minimum and maximum zoom ranges with an HX60, which is an older version but they give you an idea
One more HX60
and a couple with the HX90
It has a smaller sensor than the RX100 but does take more than passable photos. Certainly good enough for most holiday snaps.
All photos below have been resized to pass the 2Mb upload limit, so the quality is affected but they give you an idea
Here's an example of the zoom. These two were taken at minimum and maximum zoom ranges with an HX60, which is an older version but they give you an idea
One more HX60
and a couple with the HX90
Having worked with all camera brands quite a lot I would least recommend Olympus.
The technology is OK but they are the worst from a usability point of view. Overly complex, rely on menus too much and the whole naming/feature stuff is a nightmare. Utterly unsuited to someone starting out IMO.
The technology is OK but they are the worst from a usability point of view. Overly complex, rely on menus too much and the whole naming/feature stuff is a nightmare. Utterly unsuited to someone starting out IMO.
RobDickinson said:
Having worked with all camera brands quite a lot I would least recommend Olympus.
The technology is OK but they are the worst from a usability point of view. Overly complex, rely on menus too much and the whole naming/feature stuff is a nightmare. Utterly unsuited to someone starting out IMO.
Olympus menus are crap I must admit but that's not a beginner problem, that's an issue for people who know exactly how they want to set the camera up. . But honestly what does a beginner need other than the auto exposure modes which are on a dial like nearly all camera or the quick menu accessed by the OK button. This is pretty industry standard stuff, I cannot see what is unsuitable about it. No idea what naming/feature stuff nightmare is. The technology is OK but they are the worst from a usability point of view. Overly complex, rely on menus too much and the whole naming/feature stuff is a nightmare. Utterly unsuited to someone starting out IMO.
Anyway, I'd still say the RX100 is a better bet!
RobDickinson said:
I'm talking about a beginner photographer. Not snapper. For that I mean basic controls of the fundamentals and the usual support for using a digital camera.
Things like selecting iso, exposure comp, histogram, moving focus points etc it's all difficult.
It's all right there on the quick menu. One button press. You really don't need the main menu for any of this stuff. Things like selecting iso, exposure comp, histogram, moving focus points etc it's all difficult.
I would acknowledge that Olympus have packed so much customisability (is that a word?) into these things that if you do decide to set it up for yourself you're in for a very long and frustrating evening but honestly at beginner level it's all set up about right out of the box.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff