Best the best ultra slim pocket camera?
Jun 1, 2017 13:56:22 #
Jun 1, 2017 14:35:44 #
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
Sony DSC-RX100M4, which is currently under $900 @ B&H. RAW captures are beautiful.
And the RX100M2, which also captures RAW beautifully, but admittedly doesn't have all the updated bells and whistles -- which may or may not be important to you -- is under $600 at B&H.
Jun 1, 2017 14:42:12 #
Daido Moriyama is a reknowned photographer in his 70's whose work and shows appear in many MOMA's (Museums of Modern Art). Heavily published.
He shoots Point and Shoot and favors the Ricoh GR series. He has many videos on you tube. He did, a while back, change over to a Nikon P&S and wasted little time in rushing back to his Ricoh P&S.
Some of his YouTube videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VViYphLJWOk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foWAs3V_lkg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K1TPIAQw90
These are just a few of Daido Moriyama's YouTube videos and representations of his work primarily with Ricoh P&S camera.
He shoots Point and Shoot and favors the Ricoh GR series. He has many videos on you tube. He did, a while back, change over to a Nikon P&S and wasted little time in rushing back to his Ricoh P&S.
Some of his YouTube videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VViYphLJWOk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foWAs3V_lkg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K1TPIAQw90
These are just a few of Daido Moriyama's YouTube videos and representations of his work primarily with Ricoh P&S camera.
Jun 1, 2017 15:18:03 #
therwol
Loc: USA
Nosaj wrote:
I second this opinion. The Ricoh GR is the superb choice. In its price range, there's nothing equal to it (an that included any of the Sony P&S models!).
I guess if he's okay with the fixed focal length lens, this would be the way to go for superior image quality because of the larger sensor.
Jun 1, 2017 15:40:24 #
Almost without question the best "pocket" camera is the Sony RX100. A word of caution, though, it is not super slim nor will it fit easily into just any pocket. Unless you are big into video the Mark III is the "sweet spot" of price and performance.
I love a true "pocket" camera that will slide easily into any pocket, particularly my front pants pocket. To that end I have to recommend the Canon S120. It has a larger sensor (1/1.7") than most compacts resulting in more low light capability. It shoots in RAW unlike it's successor the S130, JPEG, or both. A great 24-150 lens with a relatively fast f1.8 - f5.7. Plenty of manual features or throw it into Auto and it's a perfect point and shoot. Only drawback is no EVF. Judging by the hard use mine has received it seems very durable.
My 2 cents.......
I love a true "pocket" camera that will slide easily into any pocket, particularly my front pants pocket. To that end I have to recommend the Canon S120. It has a larger sensor (1/1.7") than most compacts resulting in more low light capability. It shoots in RAW unlike it's successor the S130, JPEG, or both. A great 24-150 lens with a relatively fast f1.8 - f5.7. Plenty of manual features or throw it into Auto and it's a perfect point and shoot. Only drawback is no EVF. Judging by the hard use mine has received it seems very durable.
My 2 cents.......
Jun 1, 2017 16:24:53 #
I had wanted a Canon S95 and when the S100 was introduced I wanted that even more. I hesitated as I already had four digital cameras. When the S110 was introduced in 2012 I was able to buy an S100 at an excellent. I have been completely satisfied with it. When I don't really plan to take photos I don't want the bulk and weight of my D7000 so I carry the S100. It's a true pocket camera. It has full controls and will save RAW images. For nitpickers, it is 1.1 inches thick :-)
If you have a chance to buy a good used S100 I suggest this review: https://www.dpreview.com Ken Rockwell loves the S100 (but he loves almost everything.) I agree with 47Greyfox's disappointment about Canon's direction with this series. When my S100 was stolen from my car I bought a used one in excellent condition.
It's great for candid shots where an SLR may be disruptive.
If you have a chance to buy a good used S100 I suggest this review: https://www.dpreview.com Ken Rockwell loves the S100 (but he loves almost everything.) I agree with 47Greyfox's disappointment about Canon's direction with this series. When my S100 was stolen from my car I bought a used one in excellent condition.
It's great for candid shots where an SLR may be disruptive.
Jun 1, 2017 16:44:42 #
BuckeyeBilly wrote:
1" thin or less and shoots RAW, all for less than $1K? Here you go:
Samsung NX Mini
There are numerous cameras available with what you want but are around 1.5" thin.
Samsung NX Mini
There are numerous cameras available with what you want but are around 1.5" thin.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsung-nx-mini
Jun 1, 2017 17:47:55 #
therwol
Loc: USA
elliott937 wrote:
I'm considering a back up camera, and would like for it to capture RAW images, and be thinner than 1". Possible? What has your experience been? And thanks.
I guess I should mention that I ordered a Canon G7X Mark ii a few days ago. I looked at many of the cameras mentioned here. The main criteria was that it had to fit in a pocket and also be better than the Canon SX 230 I bought 4 or 5 years ago. Then I started looking at the cost for value (in my mind, I guess). I looked at every review I could find on the internet, particularly ones that provided full size images for downloading. Only the Sony RX100 V seemed to have slightly better images, and I rejected it for two reasons. The first was that it cost $330 more, and the second was that my son in-law bought one and feels the menus are too convoluted. I also don't need or want 4K video.
I think that these little cameras can't hold a candle to cameras with much larger sensors (I have a Nikon D810, so I know.) I think they serve a purpose. I've used my SX 230 many times when I didn't want to carry the big camera, and it's not bad by any means for casual shooting. I just wanted now to step it up a bit.
Jun 1, 2017 18:02:36 #
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
Sony DSC-RX100M4, which is currently under $900 @ B&H. RAW captures are beautiful.
But, a bit over 1" thick, is it not?
Jun 1, 2017 18:07:12 #
jouster wrote:
I had wanted a Canon S95 and when the S100 was int... (show quote)
I gave up on my beloved S100, after two of its infamous "lens error" incidents, and went with the Sony RX100III. So very glad I did.
Jun 1, 2017 19:15:37 #
Tom G wrote:
Samsung NX Mini review; not good. https://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/review/samsung/nx_mini/553150/
And, for $600.00. No
And, for $600.00. No
Tom, do you see anywhere in my response that says I endorse said camera? I didn't think so. All I did was reiterate what the original poster wanted and simply found a camera that provides a match. It is then up to HIM to decide what's acceptable or not.
Jun 1, 2017 21:21:14 #
Tom G
Loc: Atlanta, GA
BuckeyeBilly wrote:
Tom, do you see anywhere in my response that says I endorse said camera? I didn't think so. All I did was reiterate what the original poster wanted and simply found a camera that provides a match. It is then up to HIM to decide what's acceptable or not.
Of course. No offense intended.
Jun 1, 2017 22:55:54 #
mahldavia
Loc: Iowa
I have the Lumix ZS-40. Great pics and zoom, also takes in RAW. Newer version is out. Not inexpensive, but quality with a Leica lens.
Jun 2, 2017 10:02:49 #
Any reason you have decided in 1" or less, Elliott? The Panny zs50 is only 1.4" and will give you everything you are asking for. I carry mine in my shirt pocket frequently.
Jun 3, 2017 11:26:48 #
Sony is a good bet - or Panasonic Lumix ZS line offering a zoom from 24 - 720mm, EVF and RAW without breaking your credit line.
Phones might be also good - at least you can call somebody to bring you quickly a good camera if you see something worth of picture taking?
Phones might be also good - at least you can call somebody to bring you quickly a good camera if you see something worth of picture taking?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.