High end compact cameras

Forums › Digital Imaging › High end compact cameras

andrew027

1256 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537

# 176919 16-Jul-2015 12:09

First, I want to say is that I used to be into photography in a big way, back when 35mm film was the thing. But circumstances change, life gets in the way, and I haven't had much time for it over the last 15 years or so. I now want to get back into it, but now it's all digital, and I am very much a noob as far as the technology and features and acronyms go. So I come here seeking knowledge...

My current question is around high end digital compact cameras. For example (I'm only naming Sony because the store is close to my office and I was in there a few days ago - I'm not necessarily fixated on Sony as a purchase) the DSC-RX1 looks like a great camera with a great fixed focal length lens, but for $3500 ($4000 for the RX1R) I think you should expect great things. At that price it's obviously not designed for the average compact camera audience. Is there a specific purpose or niche that it is supposed to fill, or is it simply to have a professional quality camera that fits in your pocket?

Compare it with the A7, with the same 35mm full frame sensor, which comes with a 28-70mm lens (and the abilty to add/switch lenses if desired) for $2400. The $1100 difference could buy another lens or two, or some other accessories (or a few good dinners or overseas flights or mortgage payments, depending on your priorities). So who is something like the RX1 intended for?

1 | 2 | 3

22146 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4726

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1345346 16-Jul-2015 12:14

One person supports this post

I think they are designed for people that dont know what they are doing, and just want to buy the "best" camera and look at the pricetag to decide what is best. Plenty of people like that. Then they tell all their friends they spend $3500 on a camera, but the friends are too polite to laugh at them.

Richard rich.ms

RileyB

247 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 39

# 1345690 16-Jul-2015 18:48

It's basically as you said, trying to get the most out a tiny body, the fact they can fit a full frame sensor in there is amazing. Personally I'd rather spend the money on a DSLR, but if if want/need something light and small and can live with a fixed focal length then it's probably a great camera

ech3lon

289 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 82

Subscriber

# 1345714 16-Jul-2015 19:27

richms: I think they are designed for people that dont know what they are doing, and just want to buy the "best" camera and look at the pricetag to decide what is best. Plenty of people like that. Then they tell all their friends they spend $3500 on a camera, but the friends are too polite to laugh at them.

It may be the case with a few, but these compact really do amazing photos. A lot serious photographers own compact like these along side their "serious" bulky cameras for their discreet compactness and other reasons.

timmmay

14785 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2750

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1345749 16-Jul-2015 20:15

One person supports this post

Sony RX-100 v3 (or v4 is due soon) is a good option, unless you need more flexibility or narrower depth of field. I have the v1, great little camera.

What are you wanting to do with it? Snaps, art, landscapes, etc?

andrew027

1256 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537

# 1345905 17-Jul-2015 08:36

RileyB: Personally I'd rather spend the money on a DSLR, but if if want/need something light and small and can live with a fixed focal length then it's probably a great camera

Again, I stress that I'm still learning about the practicalities of digital photography so please correct me if I'm wrong, but... my first thought was that a fixed focal length would be an issue, but with the amount of detail something like the RX1 should capture, if I wanted to create prints then blowing up/cropping images to get just what I wanted should still produce good results?

timmmay: Sony RX-100 v3 (or v4 is due soon) is a good option, unless you need more flexibility or narrower depth of field. I have the v1, great little camera.

What are you wanting to do with it? Snaps, art, landscapes, etc?

I didn't really look at the RX100s - maybe I should. I see online that Sony show the v1, 2, 3, and 4.

I'm looking at doing mostly art stuff, maybe some landscapes. One of the reasons I am thinking about this is because I am doing a trip through Europe next year and have this idea of documenting the trip with a series of black and white shots that would be worth faming and hanging on my wall - not just "Here's my wife, smiling, with the Eiffel Tower in the background" but getting some unusual angles and unexpected views, which I did back in the 35mm film days.

I have a friend who lives in Northland who posts on Instagram under the name strangelynormal. That's the kind of thing I'm looking to do...

Edit: The trip is also one of the reasons I started thinking about high end compact cameras in the first place - not wanting to cart bags of gear all over Europe for a month. Something like the A7 with one lens isn't too much, but obviously something like the RX1 is smaller still.

lxsw20

2255 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 703

Subscriber

# 1345908 17-Jul-2015 08:39

timmmay: Sony RX-100 v3 (or v4 is due soon) is a good option, unless you need more flexibility or narrower depth of field. I have the v1, great little camera.

What are you wanting to do with it? Snaps, art, landscapes, etc?

Mk IV has been released.

timmmay

14785 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2750

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1345910 17-Jul-2015 08:42

RX100 is a really capable little camera. A great wedding photographer I know took some really stunning photos with it throughout Europe - he has access to any camera he wants.

kiwi_64

177 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 30

# 1345913 17-Jul-2015 08:45

To be honest, it sounds like you've already got your heart set on spending the $3500 on an RX1

... but really, for the usage you're describing, I too would suggest that you revisit the rx100 offerings ... I use a mk2 for portable/travel shots and it really is an excellent device

RileyB

247 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 39

# 1345915 17-Jul-2015 08:47

You certainly would be able to crop in to get closer, but you would have to stitch multiple images together to get wider which doesn't always work. Alternatively if you got an DSLR you could grab a a 35mm prime, and a zoom lens of some kind (or multiple prime lens) for when the fixed focal length doesn't work. It really depends on how you shoot though for weather a 35mm fixed will work or not, if I really had to pick one focal length only I'd probably pick either 35mm or 50mm.

andrew027

1256 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537

# 1345943 17-Jul-2015 09:21

kiwi_64: To be honest, it sounds like you've already got your heart set on spending the $3500 on an RX1 ... but really, for the usage you're describing, I too would suggest that you revisit the rx100 offerings ... I use a mk2 for portable/travel shots and it really is an excellent device

Ha! I'm certainly not made up on the RX1 - it does look like a great little camera and I'd probably love it, but it's so hard for me to justify spending that much, which is why I thought to ask here about why such a high end/high price option exists in a "compact camera" - a format usually associated with basic family/holiday snaps and probably at risk of being largely replaced by mobile phone cameras. I will certainly look at the RX100 range, especially as the most expensive (v4) is less than half the price of the cheapest of the RX1s!

RileyB: You certainly would be able to crop in to get closer, but you would have to stitch multiple images together to get wider which doesn't always work.

Most of these cameras have a "panorama" shooting mode though - or is that just a gimmick that doesn't really produce decent results?

RileyB

247 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 39

# 1345949 17-Jul-2015 09:26

To be honest, some of the built in panorama modes seem to do a better job then dedicated software running on a computer.

allio

585 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 315

# 1345971 17-Jul-2015 09:43

For some slightly more affordable picks, I'd look at the Ricoh GR/GR II (APS-C, fixed 28/2.8), Fuji X100T (APS-C, fixed 35/2.0) or the Fuji X-T1/T10 (APS-C, interchangeable lens). Those focal lengths are FF equivalent.

timmmay

14785 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2750

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1345974 17-Jul-2015 09:47

For pano's I do it manually in software on the computer. I:
- shoot in manual so that automatic exposure modes don't make a mismatch in color temp/brightness
- I shoot with the camera in portrait, as that gives you a taller image. This way you can crop to standard 3:2 ratio later on, whereas if you shoot landscape you often end up with a super wide shot that you can't easily print
- Stitch in Photoshop, or the free microsoft one

Sometimes I do it in the camera though, but because the cameara's moving when the photos taken it's not always as sharp. Plus if you stitch you can end up with a 60-80MP file.

RX1 I think is fixed lens, which I'd find limiting. You can also consider micro 4/3.

bmoff

114 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 17

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1346533 17-Jul-2015 21:28

If you want compact with zoom, Sony have just released the HX90V. About the same physical size as the RX100 with 30x zoom. Reviewing well, good travel camera.

timmmay

14785 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2750

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1346537 17-Jul-2015 21:44

One person supports this post

Why would anyone need a 30X zoom? The more range a lens has the lower the quality. Just stand closer (professional opinion here).

1 | 2 | 3