Discuss other manufacturers here

Peter

I opened a new category for other manufacturers. This forum will still mainly cover Nikon related topics, but there is nothing wrong discussing other products (I happened to love my Sony RX1, see my first impressions here: http://photorumors.com/2012/12/13/sony-rx1-review-first-impressions/, full review coming soon).

bjrichus

Confession time huh?

I have an Olympus 35RC that is great for street shooting as its small and quick and easy to use in auto mode. Just use it and you look almost invisible.

Now for the real confession... in my past, there was a variety of Panasonic, Sony and other brands that shall remain nameless. I have also used but not owned a Leica (my uncle had one of those in the 1950's), a Hassy, a Pentax, but have never felt happier than using Nikon.

I am TRYING to get back into the format I started out with (120 film) and have an old Ansco/Agfa folder - but of course, there is no such thing as a Nikon 120 film camera, is/was there?

Msmoto

I acquired an Olympus E-PL2 from Ritz when they went out of business.  Managed to crack the rear screen last night.  Maybe I should not throw my purse around with a camera in it.  Ya' think?

NSXTypeR

I really, really like my cousin's Sony RX100.  It's pretty fast at autofocusing and has good manual controls and even has a PASM mode dial- which took Nikon a while to figure out what to do with the 1 series.

I used to like Sony cameras but hate memory stick, but now that they've gone SD as well, there's nothing stopping me from buying Sony cameras now, aside from the price.

But even then, at $650, that's the same price I paid for my D40 kit in 2008.  And it does mostly what the D40 could do, except much smaller.  

Besides subject isolation and macro stuff, it would do 90% of what the D40 could do and better in some ways. 

There's really nothing in Nikon's product line that can touch the RX100.  

And do I need to mention that I recommended the RX100 to two family members and they both LOVE the camera?

Gab

In the past few weeks I found myself in the unpleasant situation of not having a camera with me when I saw something interesting. So to remedy that I started looking for something cheap and small with raw support, then it came to my attention that all Canon compact cameras can be hacked and are able to save in Dng(raw) thanks to that. So I bought a Canon A530 for about 30$ and it works better than expected. The Cannon hack is brilliant, there is hdr bracketing, 10bit raw and various other features, like motion detection for lightning catching , zebra strips and in camera raw conversion too and considering its built to save tiny jpeg files the raw saving times are pretty reasonable.

shawnino

@NSXTypeR: Is Sony RX100 superior to Nikon v1 with 2-3 lens kit? (Asking: I have no opinion.)

jonnyapple

I would love the RX-1, Peter. Someday when I am quite rich I'll own one (or maybe the RX-2). How long have people been asking for just such a camera? I don't think the big two took that kind of a camera seriously, but hopefully the success of the RX-1 will get some attention.

Shawnino, maybe you don't care, but I think the fairer comparison is V1 vs NEX (6 or 5R). From my limited experience with the Nikon 1, NEX wins hands down. I'm continually impressed by my 5N's performance.

NSXTypeR

@NSXTypeR: Is Sony RX100 superior to Nikon v1 with 2-3 lens kit? (Asking: I have no opinion.)

Wow, sorry for the super late reply- I would agree with johnnyapple and say that they're different classes of cameras.

But considering that they're well within $200 of each other if not the same price depending on what Nikon 1 you buy, I'd pick the RX100 if I were choosing between the two.

If I wanted a compact camera, I'm not going to want to fumble around with lens changes- I'd go straight to my DSLR. The RX100 is far more compact and the AF is quick. Definitely not as fast as the AF on the Nikon 1 cameras, but as compact cameras go I've seen far far worse AF.

That being said, the NEX 5N is a serious, serious camera. Fast AF, really easy to use. It's a bit of a shame that the lens selection is somewhat small. However, the powered zoom thingy might be interesting.

That RX100 is definitely a great compact camera- great build quality, great image quality, quick AF, easy to use.

The only negative I can pick is that it's expensive.

[Deleted User]

Bought the Sony NEX-7 in april last year, because sometimes I want to travel light and have a quality camera with me. The camera is super, because I took the time to work myself through the menu's. The noise in high ISO (800 and on) is very disappointing for this 24mp super sensor and the focus speed is slow compared to DSLR.

Compared to my D600 now, it is a pity that I bought it to travel light. Maybe not fare to compare a mirrorless with a DSLR, but they advertise that you can leave your DSLR at home, if you do you miss a lot of shots.

The second unbeleivable thing is, there are no quality lenses, o.k. one 24mm Zeiss (1000 euro), but I don't need this one. I bought the 30mm f/2.8 Sigma (169.- euro), which turned out to be a super lens, I get good quality out of it. But that's it for lenses. The 18-200mm does the same as my 18-200mm DX on my D70, which I bought 7 years ago, a nice vacation lens, that is all.

You can buy connectors to use all sorts of lenses you want to put on the NEX-7, but then you are back in the dark ages of photography, all camera functions are gone, I didn't spend 1200.- euro for that.

In short super camera no lenses, like an expensive stereo installation but no boxes and Sony keeps anouncing new NEX bodies but still no quality lenses.

Never thought it should happen, but my hope is now on Sigma for NEX lenses.

Oh, I only photograph in RAW, always had the feeling that taking photo's in JPG is to take the picture, process and reduce it to 1/3rd in the camera and throw away the negative.

Oh 2, @ Peter thank you for the Sony RX1 review, very clear review.

Msmoto

@ Ton

In a similar mode...I have an Olympus E-PL2. Very nice, shoot RAW, even the standard kit lens is decent. But, as I go up from about ISO 800 the noise becomes a bit more evident, and at 3200...it is almost not worth shooting. However, for a 4/3 sensor camera it is impressive and useful for a wide variety of quick shots, as long as the light is present.

I think when we see the DX or FX mirrorless from Nikon, then we can stick on a simple 20mm f/2.8 or something, and still have it small enough to keep in my very large purse.

[Deleted User]

@ msmoto

We can make photo's because we always have a camera with us.
That is the main thing and lets face it, we are spoiled.

NSXTypeR

@ Ton

In a similar mode...I have an Olympus E-PL2. Very nice, shoot RAW, even the standard kit lens is decent. But, as I go up from about ISO 800 the noise becomes a bit more evident, and at 3200...it is almost not worth shooting. However, for a 4/3 sensor camera it is impressive and useful for a wide variety of quick shots, as long as the light is present.

I think when we see the DX or FX mirrorless from Nikon, then we can stick on a simple 20mm f/2.8 or something, and still have it small enough to keep in my very large purse.

To be fair the E-PL2 isn't really the newest of the Olympus offerings. The E-PL5 should be the one to go for if you want the best performing Olympus camera that's not the EM5.

I'd like to give the Panasonic GX1 or GH3 a try.

Msmoto

@ NSXTypeR

For sure the E-PL2 is not the latest...but for $200 when Ritz went under...could not resist.