LCD screens

[soufiej]

Thanks for your input. I won't argue with your more experienced opinion but only add what has been my experience shopping for a new camera. First, I would say the complexities in controls depend somewhat on the price range. As you may know, I'm trying to get away from carrying my DSLR and all the things that go along with it. Lightweight, portability and, yes, lower price are my objectives with this purchase.

This is putting me mostly in a range of equipment where lenses are not interchangeable and that means the camera's controls also determine how the single, fixed lens operates. With Canon there are controls typically labelled; menu, display, function, plus a control dial and directional arrows. Those are the main controls on the back of the camera. Of course, ISO, zoom, manual focus, exposure compensation, etc are duplicates of several of these controls or are performed by a various combinations of these controls AND the menu settings. And specific functions are done with one control in one situation/setting but another control in another. Or can be performed with several controls depending on where your thumb sits. That's how I read the owners manuals. Possibly I'm wrong since I have yet to get a real camera in my hands.

IMO the manufacturers have built this range of all in one cameras to be as foolproof as possible by adding as many features as possible to appeal to as many potential buyers as possible. From my background in audio, this is similar to what is being done with mass market consumer AV receivers which are sold by way of features and buttons, knobs and remotes and back panel connections, but not audio performance. Where more upscale audio separates; pre amp, power amp, digital transport, DAC, etc will provide significantly higher levels of performance but are quite sparse when it comes to "features". Asking around at several shops and discussing this with the camera owners I know, there is not photographic equivalent to, say, a NAD, Cambridge Audio, Rega line of cameras where the design goal is best performance for the dollar not most features for the dollar. (Since birding and nature shots are a large portion of what I will be shooting, the Canon SX50 is the camera I keep coming back to. It seems to be the acknowledged "go to" camera in this sector.)

Within the limitations of "point and shoots" I've seen some very nice photos being posted on line - within the limitations of this category of camera. So ultimate image quality is not my issue at this time, that's where I think I will end up with a purchase. By building product to be used by a broad range of buyers the manufacturers seem to fill up the system with features which will seldom if ever be used by many owners. I think most of the controls on any of my potential purchases can be ignored or set to default and basically forgotten for the vast majority of my uses. However, I do find the variables of how to make changes within these systems to be redundant or spread over several controls which depend on where other controls have been set or choices made. Again, this isn't so much of a problem with the mid-market DSLR's I might look at but in the fixed lens cameras it seems to be the norm rather than the exception.

Somewhat the same situation exists when it comes to the use of histograms. The smaller sensors in these cameras present certain limitations to the user when it comes to exposure settings. With limited aperture control the lens is limited in its ability to gather light. Combine the lens and sensor limitations and the user must decide how to work around those systems. Auto-focus and metering are, depending on the other settings, either limited or exceptionally broad - depending on where you've set other controls. How you use these controls is dependent upon the general MODE in which you set the camera - of course. I get that using manual control is the ideal but manual control is at times limited to what other controls you've employed which on a DSLR would be taken care of by the lens but now must be controlled by the camera's overall controls. Therefore, bracketing is often times recommended to make the camera more "foolproof". I don't necessarily see the problem with bracketing nor do I view it as a crutch. Certainly no more than what I read of the HDR technique of combining multiple images in post production.

I appreciate the link to the tutorial on histograms since it's been a while since I used them. To those who use their cameras everyday for a living, I think they are common sense, practical aids. There is, though, a learning curve that makes them ... "mysterious" to many.

I would appreciate any comments you might have. While not exactly a beginner in this hobby, it's been several years since I've looked at new equipment and for this purchase a DSLR with its flexibility just isn't what I need.

 

[The_Traveler]

All of that is essentially true.
The problem with these cameras stem from an interaction between the call for many functions, the actual ability to put them in place as a marketing tool and the form factor.
There just isn't room for all the buttons and stuff that a larger body dslr has.
Even the m4/3 have ergonomic issues that are a challenge for anyone with normal adult hands - or I should say the normal-sized hands of an adult. For example, it is very difficult for me to manage the exposure compensation on the Olympus cameras. And since that is a big deal for me, it's a problem.
So the functionality is governed by menus and conditional use buttons.
The end result of the functionality problems is that many users just find a set-up condition they accept and stick with it, rather than manipulate it in real time.

The quality of the image is another matter.
If one can make the camera work for oneself functionally, the images are great, because the technology is good.
Before you invest in a real small camera, look at the sort-of tiny D700.
I just switched to a Sony A7 as the best intersection between body size and quality.

 

[soufiej]

The SX50 has two custom setting buttons which can be programmed for frequently used settings. That's helpful, once you determine the settings.

This D700?

Amazon.com : Sony DSC-D700 1.5 MP Digital Camera with 5x Optical Zoom : Camera & Photo

If so, it's certainly inexpensive enough to have along with the Canon. But a $1700 retail camera can't be selling for that price.

If it is, please tell me about TIFF.

A friend uses the A7 and loves it. He's pushing hard for me to go that route. I just am not thinking that's the price range I want to be in for this purchase.

 

[The_Traveler]

that 1.5 not 15

 

[soufiej]

I'm a bit amazed. A 1.5 Megapixel camera?

 

[KmH]

Yep. Back in the early days of digital cameras 1.5 MP was not uncommon.
That Sony DSC-D700 was new in 1998.
Nikon's first Pro grade DSLR (1999), the D1 had a DX image sensor with 2.7 MP for a retail price (body only) of about $5000.