GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

I love my Fuji X-E1.
Not for shooting sports, but a great travel camera.
It was only camera I took to Europe this summer and if you look at my signature line below, you will see my other options.

phkowalchuk Loc: Aurora, CO

Try the Sony RX100 III. It is very small (I recommend the aftermarket grip by Richard Franiec http://kleptography.com/rf/#camera_rx100). It has an EVF and a Ziess 8.8-25.7 f1.8 to 2.8 lens. 1-inch sensor. "Selfie" tilt screen. Shoots video. You can read about it here (http://tech.firstpost.com/reviews/sony-rx100-iii-review-far-point-shoots-go-rx100-iii-camera-beat-231839.html). I'm never without it.

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

The lens on the rx100 iii equates to 24-70mm on a full frame (35mm) camera. I have this camera. It's fantastic!

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

or you could get this:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/15/panasonic-lx100-compact-fixed-lens/

more zoom, larger sensor and 4k video. It was just released yesterday

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

That looks really interesting.
$900 at B&H.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

Try this:



A fantastic camera! Also take a look at the Sony A6000... :thumbup:

TeeKay

If you don't want interchangeable lenses you might consider a Canon G16

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

B&H lists the RX100 III at $798
B&H lists the A6000 at $748

Both are somewhat above the OP's original stated limit of $600.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

:roll:

Since you found the need to correct me, let me correct your correction:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1029861-REG/sony_ilce6000_b_alpha_a6000_mirrorless_digital.html

Since MY suggestion was the A6000, I suggest that you address the cost of the other camera with the person who suggested it....

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

By which Cholly is saying the A6000, body only is under $600.

However, the OP just might want a lens to go with that...

If you add a lens you are up to $748

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Mine was not a correction.
It was further information needed to complete the thoughts.
As mentioned elsewhere, a body is basically useless on its own, so I don't see any point to pricing just the body unless it happens to fit the lenses which he already has, which would not be the case for the OP.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

I just bought a Sony a6000 and really like it. I'm learning how to use it. There are a few things I haven't figured out yet, like how to disable the shutter click sound, but over all it does everything my DSLR does. Has a great EVF. On the other hand, ken rockwell has done some great reviews of the Fuji XT-1. (The Sony is half the price LOL)

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

:roll:

AGAIN, the A6000 is LESS than $600.

AND it can use the OP's 18-55mm lens with an with an adaptor.

The fact that YOU didn't see any point in pricing the body means YOU didn't know enough about the camera to TRY to correct MY post. Lesson learned I hope. :thumbdown:

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Used Fuji X100S.

Due to the X100T coming out, there are a glut of these on the buy/sell forums for your price range.

This is my favorite camera in the world...I've owned a bunch of cameras; even 5DIII and the X100S is my desert island camera.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I actually know a fair bit about the Sony family, a lot more than you will give me credit for. I had been thinking about one for my own use, so I went down to Best Buy and even tried to try out both the Nex-6 and the A6000 ... but their display power wasn't up to the challenge.

I had priced just the body ... again originally for my own use, and then looked at adapters so I could use one without buying their lens, but that approach ran into two difficulties:

(1) most adapters do not support auto-focus, and the ones that seem to are costly. I would not take that approach for my own carry-around camera, and I cannot recommend that to the OP (just as I would not recommend one without an evf; in my opinion, he would be better off with the Nikon 1 variant with evf).

(2) a mirror-less camera makes sense as a carry-around camera only with a pancake lens; the standard SLR 18-55mm lens is too big, IMHO, even without an adapter, and if I would not do it myself, I cannot recommend it to the OP.

IMHO, either issue is fatal to the process of using an adapter for the OP's purposes, so I could not recommend he buy just the body, which is why I consider the idea of buying just the body to be DOA, and why I priced the package I considered to be appropriate for the OP.

That is why I did not correct your post, which would imply that there was something incorrect in it; instead I completed it - I knew enough to add information that the OP would need in making his decision - is he able to slip his financial limit up enough to include this camera that is currently the best of the mirror-less lot.

There has been another discussion going - "How Should We Spend Other Peoples Money" - in which the OP, some guy named SharpShooter, raised legitimate questions about our giving advice that goes beyond what is appropriate for the OP. I have tried to keep the advice of that discussion in mind while giving advice here. You may follow a different path if you want to.

The only lesson learned is that sometimes you will create an argument out of nothing. I am not going to argue semantics with you. I am not kymarto; I am not going to run the page count here up to 15 just volleying the same arguments between the two of us. Unless you have something actually new to add, I'm done here.