Upcoming vacation - which small camera?

[jtyson]

Lumix LX100 was on one of the reviews that I watched vs an RX100 mk3 and the reviewer picked the LX100. Browsing the flickr pools for both cameras, I'm impressed. But again, those folks take this stuff very seriously most of the time.

I'm willing to put some time into learning. I don't know if it will be enough, but hell, I might as well. I've been reading articles when I can, but a lot of it doesn't make sense to me, so I'm going to try and dig for some videos.

What I want out of a camera could confuse things even more.

I want something portable. Granted, all cameras can be carried everywhere, but I don't want to be just the camera man. I want to be able to do things as well. For instance, I took a road trip this past summer. 6200 miles, 18 states, 2 provinces. TONS of stuff to see. I took my cell phone obviously, but didn't take more than a couple dozen pictures with it, because I wanted better quality pictures. I took my camera at the time which was a Sony A55. I had the kit lens, a 75-300 telephoto Minolta lens, 50mm or so prime, and a 35-75 macro lens. I left the kit lens on it 95% of the time, because I wasn't willing to carry around the camera backpack. So I lugged around the A55 with the strap wrapped around my wrist through places like Atlanta, DC, Philadelphia, NYC, Montreal, Toronto, Chicago, etc. It was cumbersome. It limited what I could do, because I had a large camera attached to me. The lens flexibility was cool, but only when I was on a full day train ride where the camera bag wasn't as much of a problem.

I like to take pictures of landmarks on vacation. I really like landscape pictures. Panoramas are cool too. I like to take pictures of people. Snow sports and water sports on occasion. I take lots of pictures of my dog. I take pictures of things I build and sell. I like taking pictures of wildlife, birds included, but I'm not necessarily going to be going out and looking for them. It would be more of a spontaneous thing.

I would love to not need a camera that has multiple lenses, but I don't know if it is realistic for what I would like to take pictures of. But then again, if I have to take that much time swapping lenses and playing with settings, it is likely that I won't be catching whatever picture it was that I wanted anyway, as I don't go looking for things to take pictures of, I take pictures of things I happen to see at that particular moment with whatever equipment I have.

Considering that I like taking pictures of landmarks, landscapes and animals, more zoom is better, but not at the expense of image quality. I realize that I can't have both, I'd like to find a happy medium.

Ultimately, I want my money to buy me the best camera for what I'd like. I like to buy used equipment, that way if I don't enjoy it, I can resell it at less of a loss.

The most important things to me in the camera I buy are

Portability - Prefer it to fit in a pocket. Can't be bigger than the NEX cameras I've had, and would preferably be smaller.
Speed - I like candid moments. Spontaneous pictures.
Image quality - It needs to look good. No sense in buying a nice camera to take a crappy picture
Flexibility - Shoot multiple genres relatively well. I don't expect perfection, but it needs to be better than my cell phone.

So far, the cameras I've been looking at are the RX100 mk3, Lumix LX100 and Sony a6000. I have an NEX-3 with the kit lens and a 16mm prime. It does fit in my pocket with the prime, but limits what I can take pictures of. I realize the a6000 is basically an upgraded version of that. I played with one in the store and like the speed of the auto focus. That appealed to me. But portability is sacrificed. I have yet to actually put my hands on the other two cameras.

So, hope that doesn't make things even worse. Throw whatever you want at me.

 

[Light Guru]

I still think that the iPhone can do what you want. A couple of accessories could make it fit your wants a little better.

This is a case that will make more ergonomic to take photos. The case has a nice shutter button in it. SNAP! 6

Some external add on lenses are a definite must. The makers of that case have some lenses but the BEST lenses I have seen that attach to the mobile phone are the Moment Lenses Moment - World's Best Lenses for Mobile Photography they have better optics then you will find in most point and shoot cameras.

Next would be apps. For a quick photo you can access the built in camera from the home screen. If you have a little more time or want more control PureShot is a great app that will give you shutter priority mode and also full manual control.

Another great accessory to get would be this.
GripTight GorillaPod for iPhone, Android & Windows Smartphones

I know you want to quickly be able to take photos and not have to mess around with settings or modes. But as we have shown you can never get away with never doing that. The key here is to use what ever camera you choose A LOT before you are in those key situations where you don't want to miss a shot. You need to use it so much that it becomes second nature to use it, at that point you are no longer having to think about what you are changing on the camera.

Another thing to keep in mind is that every camera, and I mean every camera can produce both good and bad photos. You have said that you have seen great photos from soccer mom point and shoots, yes that is true but keep in mind they also took lots of bad photos that they never showed you. The same is true with a expensive DSLR.

The iPhone cane take AMAZING photos. Here are some good examples.
The most amazing iPhone photos of the year | The Verge

 

[jtyson]

While you are probably right that with those lenses, I could get better results out of my iphone, I've now made my iphone less functional as a phone and now have to carry it in a separate case, or with lenses detached and in separate pockets. This is why I'm leaning towards a dedicated camera. That case is cool though. Unfortunately it is only an email list to be informed of the pre-order.

Plus, after 2 lenses @$100 each and a case that will probably be the same, I'm quite a bit more invested into my iPhone camera than I'd like to be. Resale likely wouldn't be very good when I got to get a new phone this fall.

 

[Light Guru]

While you are probably right that with those lenses, I could get better results out of my iphone, I've now made my iphone less functional as a phone and now have to carry it in a separate case, or with lenses detached and in separate pockets. This is why I'm leaning towards a dedicated camera. That case is cool though. Unfortunately it is only an email list to be informed of the pre-order.

Plus, after 2 lenses @$100 each and a case that will probably be the same, I'm quite a bit more invested into my iPhone camera than I'd like to be. Resale likely wouldn't be very good when I got to get a new phone this fall.

Yea I know that case is new so I don't know exactly how close they are to shipping it. Foe me I would only put that case on for trips.

The great thing about the moment lenses is they will work on just about any phone. All you have to do when you get a new phone is get a new mounting plate that fits the new phone.

 

[jtyson]

I will keep that in mind. I'm just more keen on finding a dedicated camera. Do you know if local camera shops tend to carry any of those lenses you mentioned for the phones? I'd like to see them firsthand. Or at least something similar.

 

[Light Guru]

I will keep that in mind. I'm just more keen on finding a dedicated camera. Do you know if local camera shops tend to carry any of those lenses you mentioned for the phones? I'd like to see them firsthand. Or at least something similar.

They won't have the moment lens, I believe that it is only sold via their website. But you can see lots of sample images on Instagram. I know in the past the Apple Store has carried the Ollo clip, it's probably the most popular add on lens out there for the iPhone, I can say from first had experience that the optics on me Ollo clip are horrible. Plus you have to buy one that is specific to your model phone so you can't move it to a new model.

The moment lenses may look big but they still easily slip into your pocket. I Cary mine with me just about everywhere.

 

[jtyson]

I'm not so concerned with them feeling too big in my pocket, it just goes back to the candid shot thing. I never go searching for a chance to take pictures. It just isn't something I enjoy that much. I like to catch cool stuff happening. Honestly, whether I buy one of the suggested cameras or lenses for my phone or something else entirely, I won't carry it around with me except for on vacations or maybe to special events. But day to day, it just isn't something that I would fill my time with.

 

[Microbois]

I'm afraid that if you want a lot of portability, you will sacrifice just as much on image quality. I had a Panasonic DMC-TS3 water resistant camera, it was the size of a small pack of cigarettes and while it took decent pictures, IQ wasn't up to my satisfaction. My Nikon D40 with the kit lens was miles ahead. It all comes down to sensor size and lens quality/size. Smaller the camera is, harder it gets to maintain IQ, so something has to give...

Looks like you have/had a Sony A55 and a Sony NEX camera. If the NEX camera is still too big or cumbersome for you, a smaller camera will most likely suffer in the IQ department. Unfortunately, I don't know what the market has to offer in the small camera segment, being a Nikon D610+grip shooter, so I'll leave to others the challenge of suggesting cameras that may fit your needs.

The only thing that comes to mind, for higher IQ while remaining highly portable, is that new Sony QX100 lens that attaches to your smartphone. This lens is different in the way that it has its own sensor, but uses your smartphone screen to show what it sees. You should get better IQ than your smartphone, and it's fairly small. It can even be used away from your phone, so for those candid shots you like, you could keep an eye to your iPhone screen and move the lens around until you get the shot you're looking for. People wouldn't even be aware that you are taking pictures of them as you can hide the lens with your hand. I seriously think that would be the best product for you, and its got a manual mode, if you ever want to get into this later.

 

[Microbois]

I read more details on the Sony QX100, and while it has a 20 mpx 1" sensor to deliver much better IQ and low light performances, it does have some quirks. No ISO control, no true manual mode as per say, except through +/- compensation. Most reviews are mixed bags so if you think it can be an acceptable solution, please read as many reviews as possible to make sure those quirks aren't a problem for you.

 

[LakeFX]

Given that image quality (as most photography enthusiasts define it and based on your usage descriptions earlier) isn't very important to you, you might be happiest with something like the Lumix zs45. The sensor is a little small and the lens is pretty slow, but it's very compact and has a huge zoom range in a P&S package. I haven't owned one, but my father in law has owned a series of Lumix super zooms and has been pretty happy with them. More importantly, it's not something that's an add-on to your phone. I completely agree with you about something self contained being easier and faster to use. I haven't used the Sony QX100, but I suspect that bringing up the app on your phone while powering up the unit and then waiting for the two to connect will be too slow for candid shots.

The only first hand recommendation I can give you is that if you are really thinking about the Sony a6000, but the size is an issue, take a good look at the a5000. I just bought one a month ago. The autofocus is a bit slower than the a6000, but not by much in decent light. The sensor is great (better than the older Nikon DSLR it replaced). It's cheap (I paid $300 with the kit 16-55). And it is significantly smaller than the a6000.

Having said that, I don't think you'll be really happy with either option. The zoom range on something like the zs45 (or another compact super zoom) is great, but it won't work well in low light. The bigger sensors that work better in low light require bigger lenses that make them not fit nicely in the pocket.

In terms of sheer image quality, the Panasonic LX-100, Fuji X100 series, or Sony RX100 series are probably the best small cameras out there, but they all have very short zooms or prime lenses, which means more work getting into position to actually capture the shot you want instead of using the zoom. And none of them will be good for wildlife or anything at a distance.

What I have found when traveling is that I actually prefer to have more constraints on my photographic process. What I mean is that I like having a prime lens on my camera and a specific idea of what I'll be taking photos of ahead of time. Before you panic about this being too much work, it's just as simple as deciding if I feel like capturing family candids, landmarks, and landscapes that day or if I want to take pictures of wildlife that I see. I then have the appropriate lens on the camera and I don't really even try to take pictures of anything else. What this does for me is to allow me to fully engage in and enjoy whatever happens and only feel the need to take out the camera if something presents itself that I really want a photo of. I don't capture all of the moments, but I have fewer shots that I look at later and wonder why I even bothered taking a picture.

 

[jtyson]

Interesting outlooks. I do have to agree that anything that requires my phone for camera use is probably out of the picture. Simply because of function and convenience.

I must say it is a bit disappointing to read that the LX100 and RX100 wouldn't be well suited for wildlife or sports. I don't intend to shoot a lot of fast moving things, but I definitely wanted to be able to.

As for zoom range, with the D3100, A55, NEX-3 and NEX 5 I have owned, I rarely felt I couldn't reach out enough with the 18-55 range lenses. Sure on occasion I would have liked more, but not enough to carry a second lens. I did consider buying something like an 18-200mm lens, but I sold the cameras before ever bothering with something like that.

When I travel, I cram as much as possible into whatever time I have, so a prime wouldn't be suitable. I like to take a lot of pictures of a lot of different things. I just don't think that I would be happy with only being able to shoot primarily a single subject matter. That would make things far simpler in terms of both equipment and adjusting things, but it just doesn't offer the flexibility I want.

I will try and take a look at an a5000 as well. If it is really significantly smaller than the NEX 3 I have or the A6000 then maybe that would be a better option. Still though, I'll be in the position where I either have no flexibility with a prime, or have to lug around camera gear.

I'm not entirely sure photography in general is for me. At least not with technology where it is now. I want far more than is offered and the things I'm not willing to sacrifice lead me to dead ends with gear. The cameras that fit my portability needs have poor IQ, range and speed. The cameras that fit my IQ, range and speed standards are not very portable. Guess I was hoping for something that is like the best of both worlds, but it doesn't seem to exist

 

[Light Guru]

I do have to agree that anything that requires my phone for camera use is probably out of the picture. Simply because of function and convenience.

How is the iPhone less convenient? You ALWAYS have it with you, and the camera app is one simple swipe away when at the lock screen.

 

[jtyson]

I do have to agree that anything that requires my phone for camera use is probably out of the picture. Simply because of function and convenience.

How is the iPhone less convenient? You ALWAYS have it with you, and the camera app is one simple swipe away when at the lock screen.

For little stuff that doesn't matter, it is the best camera I have. But for things I want good quality pictures of, it isn't a convenient option. I carry my phone in my pocket. I use it as my cell phone, my GPS, a way to share pictures, videos, etc. It isn't feasible to use it as my camera because that decreases its function as everything else. Plus, having to attach and detach and store lenses every single time I want to use it, eliminates it as an option entirely for candid shots. If I have to carry my phone around in my hand all day, I may as well carry a larger more capable camera around in my hand all day. The point is to be able to have something that I can slip in a pocket and forget about if I want to.

 

[Light Guru]

I carry my phone in my pocket. I use it as my cell phone, my GPS, a way to share pictures, videos, etc. It isn't feasible to use it as my camera because that decreases its function as everything else.

That makes absolutely NO sense at all.

If I have to carry my phone around in my hand all day, I may as well carry a larger more capable camera around in my hand all day.

Why would you have to carry your phone in your hand all day?

The point is to be able to have something that I can slip in a pocket and forget about if I want to.

Hmm that sure sounds like using your phone as a camera to me.

 

[jtyson]

Yes by itself, my phone is my day to day camera. Add a bulky case and lenses I have to take off and put back on, and now I don't have a dedicated phone or a dedicated camera. Sure I can talk or text on the phone with the case and lens attached, but if I want to use it as a camera, have to keep lens attached and in hand. If I want to put it in my pocket, have to take the lens off, store that in its little bag in a separate pocket. If I want to put it on my mount in my truck my for GPS have to take the lens off and store it, take the case off, then use it, but if I see something I want to take a good picture of driving by, I've got to take it off the mount, put it in the case, attach the lens and then shoot. There isn't a snowballs chance in hell that I'd be able to catch anything candid that way. It is essentially the exact same things as keep your DSLR in your back seat in its bag with no lens attached. Imagine passing your phone to your kid or neice/nephew so that they can play a game. Or to your friends/family to share pictures or a video or whatever. Would you want to hand it over with the lens attached? Probably not, so yet another reason to take it off and store it.

It doesn't make sense for me to use my phone as my camera beyond little snapshots I don't care all that much about. I have to ask, do you sell/manufacture these things? You sure do push them pretty hard.