small, convenient, not ££££, blows an iphone out the water?
Discussion
does such a thing exist.... am i a lunatic... OK so some context... I have had a few DSLRs in the past and I loved the result and the process, but equally i grew to hate the inconvenience, lugging big bags, and particularly when swapping lenses and so on.
I just want something I can quickly whip out of my pocket and grab an amazing shot. Phones are OK at this and getting better but it's still nowhere near as good. So... is there a camera which is small and convenient, is maybe sub £1k or so, and utterly blows an iphone out the water in terms of picture quality, depth, colour range, light handling and all the things we measure how good a camera is upon?
I am ready to be ridiculed for being ignorant but it's not a segment i am familiar with so...
I just want something I can quickly whip out of my pocket and grab an amazing shot. Phones are OK at this and getting better but it's still nowhere near as good. So... is there a camera which is small and convenient, is maybe sub £1k or so, and utterly blows an iphone out the water in terms of picture quality, depth, colour range, light handling and all the things we measure how good a camera is upon?
I am ready to be ridiculed for being ignorant but it's not a segment i am familiar with so...
Any one of the Fuji X100 series cameras maybe ?
Fixed 35mm equivalent lens, but produces great quality images, very light and fits into a coat pocket (just...)
The latest one, X100V, is about £1200 new, but the earlier versions can be found for much less. Even the very first version takes great photos.
Fixed 35mm equivalent lens, but produces great quality images, very light and fits into a coat pocket (just...)
The latest one, X100V, is about £1200 new, but the earlier versions can be found for much less. Even the very first version takes great photos.
SCEtoAUX said:
i should have been clearer... i don't actually have the latest iPhone. I am looking at upgrading later this year, so maybe i should just do that and not bother with the camera? Are we genuinely saying the compact ish camera market has no future? S1bs said:
Any one of the Fuji X100 series cameras maybe ?
Fixed 35mm equivalent lens, but produces great quality images, very light and fits into a coat pocket (just...)
The latest one, X100V, is about £1200 new, but the earlier versions can be found for much less. Even the very first version takes great photos.
i was looking at X100V actually. They seem available for more like £1050 now.Fixed 35mm equivalent lens, but produces great quality images, very light and fits into a coat pocket (just...)
The latest one, X100V, is about £1200 new, but the earlier versions can be found for much less. Even the very first version takes great photos.
I have a G7X mkii and every time I use it I'm amazed at just how bad it makes modern smart phones look.
My wife has an iPhone and I have a Samsung S10.
Sure it's not the last word in ultimate photography, but like you wanted something small enough to keep in my pocket on holiday and not so expensive to be constantly worried about it or lenses etc.
Got some real good shots out of it over the three years I've had it.
My wife has an iPhone and I have a Samsung S10.
Sure it's not the last word in ultimate photography, but like you wanted something small enough to keep in my pocket on holiday and not so expensive to be constantly worried about it or lenses etc.
Got some real good shots out of it over the three years I've had it.
Blown2CV said:
i was looking at X100V actually. They seem available for more like £1050 now.
Doesn't really look like something that will fit in your pocket unlike even the largest phone. What is wrong with the photos the iPhone takes that you need a 'better' camera for?Have you looked at the pictures current gen smart phones are producing, they are good enough easily for 1 meter + wide print for home display with no issues.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
I snapped this on a pedal bike ride last week, as I was cresting the hill I thought this would make a good photo, stopped, took about 4 shots on the phone, than carried on with the rest of the ride. Unless you are pro making a living from selling photos, am not sure why you would need a better camera than whats on the current iPhone (or similar?). The fact most of us have the phone with us all the time means you really never 'miss' an photo opportunity these days, add in been able to edit on the phone, than upload/back via the cloud, why would you want to waste money and time on a separate camera system?
Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 5th May 17:35
Ambleton said:
I have a G7X mkii and every time I use it I'm amazed at just how bad it makes modern smart phones look.
My wife has an iPhone and I have a Samsung S10.
Sure it's not the last word in ultimate photography, but like you wanted something small enough to keep in my pocket on holiday and not so expensive to be constantly worried about it or lenses etc.
Got some real good shots out of it over the three years I've had it.
I have an S10, great phone and camera, got some good shots from it, a colleague has the new S21 which seems slightly better - but they do have limitations on changing light levels and low light, so I still pull out the DSLR occaisionally. But any modern phone seems to be a camera and internet device first, phone calls are a secondary function.My wife has an iPhone and I have a Samsung S10.
Sure it's not the last word in ultimate photography, but like you wanted something small enough to keep in my pocket on holiday and not so expensive to be constantly worried about it or lenses etc.
Got some real good shots out of it over the three years I've had it.
gangzoom said:
Unless you are pro making a living from selling photos, am not sure why you would need a better camera than whats on the current iPhone (or similar?). The fact most of us have the phone with us all the time means you really never 'miss' an photo opportunity these days, add in been able to edit on the phone, than upload/back via the cloud, why would you want to waste money and time on a separate camera system?
Ergonomics if nothing else. Holding up what is in effect a slippery featureless chocolate bar and prodding various bits of it holds no appeal for me. But I hate (mobile) phones anyway.gangzoom said:
Doesn't really look like something that will fit in your pocket unlike even the largest phone. What is wrong with the photos the iPhone takes that you need a 'better' camera for?
Have you looked at the pictures current gen smart phones are producing, they are good enough easily for 1 meter + wide print for home display with no issues.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
I snapped this on a pedal bike ride last week, as I was cresting the hill I thought this would make a good photo, stopped, took about 4 shots on the phone, than carried on with the rest of the ride. Unless you are pro making a living from selling photos, am not sure why you would need a better camera than whats on the current iPhone (or similar?). The fact most of us have the phone with us all the time means you really never 'miss' an photo opportunity these days, add in been able to edit on the phone, than upload/back via the cloud, why would you want to waste money and time on a separate camera system?
Why? Because some of us care about image quality more than convenience.Have you looked at the pictures current gen smart phones are producing, they are good enough easily for 1 meter + wide print for home display with no issues.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
I snapped this on a pedal bike ride last week, as I was cresting the hill I thought this would make a good photo, stopped, took about 4 shots on the phone, than carried on with the rest of the ride. Unless you are pro making a living from selling photos, am not sure why you would need a better camera than whats on the current iPhone (or similar?). The fact most of us have the phone with us all the time means you really never 'miss' an photo opportunity these days, add in been able to edit on the phone, than upload/back via the cloud, why would you want to waste money and time on a separate camera system?
Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 5th May 17:35
No offense intended, but that photo is a good example to show my case. Your composition is fine but look at the blotchy smudged auto-processing of leaves and textures, the muddy lack of detail especially in the shadows, what could be some nice rays of light in the background are pretty much lost in haze. It might look good on the small screen of a phone, but on a desktop screen... sorry but no. Not your fault, just limited by the equipment.
Of course the best camera is the one you have with you, and I also take photos with my phone while cycling because I don't usually carry a bigger camera on the bike. The output is tolerable in good light (especially for downsized use online etc), but I don't kid myself that the quality compares with my 'proper' cameras and in low light I don't even bother trying because I know its a waste of time. I also have an old RX100 (Mk1!) I sometimes take if I'm riding somewhere with nice views, its no DSLR but it is compact and gives much better results than my phone.
^Interesting view, but that photo looks absolutely fine to me even on a 55inch OLED, and I'll be happy to print that to a canvas for home display.
I don't make a living from photography and have realised all the pixel peeping stuff actually makes zero difference to me. These smart phones let me take good photos (for my personal usage), more often than any other camera system I have ever owned.
My EM5 II + lens haven't been touched for 6 months+ now and I doubt I'll ever use it again.
I agree is you are gunning for wildlife photographer of the year you need the best equipment, but if you just want to take nice photos you don't need anything more than a phone.
I don't make a living from photography and have realised all the pixel peeping stuff actually makes zero difference to me. These smart phones let me take good photos (for my personal usage), more often than any other camera system I have ever owned.
My EM5 II + lens haven't been touched for 6 months+ now and I doubt I'll ever use it again.
I agree is you are gunning for wildlife photographer of the year you need the best equipment, but if you just want to take nice photos you don't need anything more than a phone.
OP,
What exactly do you intend to use the photos for? If it’s going to be just posting on Internet forums and sending to friends/family, your aim for image quality should be far lower that if you want a four metre panoramic displayed on a wall. Obviously.
You’re lucky. There’s so much choice out there at under a grand that it’s all up to you. Go to a decent store, have a play.
Handling and menu systems are important.
What exactly do you intend to use the photos for? If it’s going to be just posting on Internet forums and sending to friends/family, your aim for image quality should be far lower that if you want a four metre panoramic displayed on a wall. Obviously.
You’re lucky. There’s so much choice out there at under a grand that it’s all up to you. Go to a decent store, have a play.
Handling and menu systems are important.
It's an off one to have this debate on a camera forum as honestly i bet it's been done to death a million times. I've had a few DSLR so i know what a decent quality shot looks like. Smartphones use clever software to ape that, and they do an OK decent job... and the underlying physical technology is improving too. No one is saying a smartphone takes a s
t image - so i am not sure why people seem to be getting triggered over that. If smartphones were genuinely better in every way than lower to mid end cameras/compacts, then that market would have disappeared, but it hasn't. I guess you could reframe my question as: at what price point is the quality/depth/colour/light (and whatever dimension you might compare these things) noticeably better to intermediate/advanced hobby photographers.
t image - so i am not sure why people seem to be getting triggered over that. If smartphones were genuinely better in every way than lower to mid end cameras/compacts, then that market would have disappeared, but it hasn't. I guess you could reframe my question as: at what price point is the quality/depth/colour/light (and whatever dimension you might compare these things) noticeably better to intermediate/advanced hobby photographers. Ditched my RX100 mk 6 for a Canon G5X mk 2. Image quality and ease of use much improved.
iPhone 12 pro (which I have) doesn't come close to either. Not in the same universe.
I should add, if you just want view online, the phone is fine, though still not as good. Printing, very different.
iPhone 12 pro (which I have) doesn't come close to either. Not in the same universe.
I should add, if you just want view online, the phone is fine, though still not as good. Printing, very different.
Edited by GetCarter on Thursday 6th May 16:55
GetCarter said:
Ditched my RX100 mk 6 for a Canon G5X mk 2. Image quality and ease of use much improved.
iPhone 12 pro (which I have) doesn't come close to either. Not in the same universe.
I should add, if you just want view online, the phone is fine, though still not as good. Printing, very different.
That's interesting (as someone who hasn't bought a compact camera for years), as you were such an advocate of Sony RX•••• for..... well... years...iPhone 12 pro (which I have) doesn't come close to either. Not in the same universe.
I should add, if you just want view online, the phone is fine, though still not as good. Printing, very different.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff