What high quality compact camera suggested?

[cgw]

I think Fuji, like Nikon, is really inadequate when we talk P&S.

Care to qualify that? What's "inadequate" about the X100F? Nikon's p&s selection? I'd agree there. Who else but Nikon makes a super-zoom p&s (P900) the size of a Vitamix blender?

 

[AlanKlein]

I use a Sony RX100iv for 19mb stills and 4K video. There are later models with longer zooms and smaller apertures but with the same pocketable form size. Here are some of my samples.
American Southwest 2018 - Digital

 

[Solarflare]

Hi, i have been taking pictures over 25 years as traveling around the world. I have done a photography course, though I admit I do not know much about photography in the technical sense.
However my photographs are beautifully composed and people like them and me too.

I owned a professional Canon camera 10 years ago, when I did a trip in Asia taking many thousands of photos in a few weeks. I really hated having a big camera (i had a small one too), I was happy to get rid of it.

I love taking pictures and as I usually travel to interesting destinations I would like to get a high quality compact/small camera. What camera would you suggest and why?

I am not a professional photographer nor wannabe, but would love high quality pictures.

Well ... sorry.

At the core of the problem, you can have EITHER small OR high quality, but NEVER both. Physics doesnt allow that.

Good image quality needs a larger sensor, for multiple reasons - good signal to noise, low shot noise of the light, and not limited by diffraction as real compacts are. Okay, just one reason - large individual pixels, which result in all the previously described effects.

Larger sensor means larger lenses. Specifically if you want the same level of image quality as a Canon professional camera, you will need a full frame sensor or at least a crop sensor.

The one variable you have here, is that you can safe a lot of weight and bulk by using prime lenses instead of zooms. Prime lenses also offer more light, both with wider maximum aperture and with better light transmission. And they offer more image quality. All the worlds best lenses are prime lenses.

The most compact option overall for you would be a Fujfilm XF10, but it really only offers a 18mm lens (28mm full frame equiv). I would suggest the XF10 over the Ricoh GR line, because frankly the GR keep dying on you. The only real complaint I have about the XF10 is that it has no flash hotshoe.

The second most compact option would be to go for a crop mirrorless and a relatively dark prime lens trinity, like Fujifilm X-T100 with 16/2.8, 23/2 and 50/2. If you also want autofocus speed, though, you might much more prefer the "real" Fujifilm X cameras, like the X-T3 or the predecessor X-T2. Those wont have problems to even handle sports. Especially if you know how to operate them, because they can be fine tuned to the expected subject behavior.

I keep reading from Canon users, even those who used full frame before, who switched to Fujifilm and are completely happy, so I hope you'll be happy too with such a setup.

Theres a full frame Fujifilm which is also really compact, but that would be Leica M, and those prices are, well, out of this world. They also offer no autofocus, only offer prime lenses and only really lenses from wide angle to short telephoto. Still you would easily have image quality beyond what Canon usually offers.

 

[jogesh debnath]

You can choose the Panasonic Lumix ZS200 / TZ200 because you like to travel.
It is the travel-zoom camera genre - compact cameras that you can fit in a pocket.