Carry Everywhere Camera

NSXTypeR

Hi all,

@aquarian_light I'm not sure what the Pens can do. Thom Hogan talks about them at his site and he uses one, I'm not sure which.

The G3 and GH2 generally work about the same, but the GH2 edges the G3 on additional features, but really, there isn't much difference in the images that they produce.

As you well know, there are a ton of choices out there, and most of them reasonably take good photos, I'd recommend holding the camera in your hands and seeing if the controls make sense to you. That will make your picture taking experience more pleasurable than anything else.

Best of luck and and my best,

Mike

He uses the OM-D EM5 the GF5 and GH3/GF5. The Olympus and GH3 certainly aren't cheap.

His gear is all on the right hand column of his site. It's interesting that he doesn't use DX anymore really, he just uses M4/3.

Godless

Without further ado, what I'm looking for....
1-Highly Portable.
2-At least decent image quality.
3-Under or around US$400
4-Focus speed is paramount.
5-The look and feel of the camera are mildly important. I like classic looks

----

The Fuji X20 fits the bill nicely. Aint too expensive and is more than decent in all respects. Produces surprisingly clean high ISO images as well, without being overly aggressive in the noise recuction department.

----

I would recommend m4/3, but that may be dangerous (you´ll fall in love with the Olympus m.Zuiko 12mm, 45mm and 75mm and the 60mm macro as well - and the budget goes out of the window..)

aquarian_light

Fuji X20... interesting suggestion. Hadn't even thought of that because new ones go for US$600, but amazon has em used for around US$500. It's got an F2-2.8 zoom, the excellent x-trans sensor... hmm. I'll have to do some searching on this one. Thanks alot @Godless. And an optical viewfinder which I'm not terrible fond of. The 'rangefinder' style optical viewfinders especially when paired with zooms lenses are hard to use; unless the OVF zooms in with it, I found myself preferring the LCD for framing when testing other cameras with OVF's at the shop.

TaoTeJared

I've often been looking for the same thing.

Fujifilm X20, Canon G15 or a COOLPIX P7700 would be my suggestions for a "almost" DSLR controls. I have a canon G11 but for an almost pocketable (coat jacket) camera it works well (controls that is - sensor has showed it age now.)

The thing I have always looked at is either an Olympus E-PM1 ($300 with 14-42) or the E-PL3 ($400 with 14-42) since they have Image Stabilization (shift sensor) built into both of them. These are the smaller cameras, not the larger Pens. Panasonic's are good, but they don't have the IS in the body. At those prices, they are a hell of an option for better IQ even if it is at a loss of some of the dials.

You can of course use panasonic lenses - Micro 4/3 LEICA DG SUMMILUX 25mm/F1.4 ASPH. for instance is a highly regarded lens. The LUMIX® G X VARIO PZ 14-42mm / F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / POWER O.I.S. Lens is a compact 14-42 lens that is much more pocketable.

Msmoto

My Olympus E-PL2 has the image stabilization in camera. And I got it at Ritz when they closed for about $200. The resolution is super, but it is a point and shoot. Very difficult to adjust via the menus. Perfect for non-moving subjects and some macro as I posted. But, I would never have paid the $600 retail for it.

John

I've read a lot of positive comments about the new Fuji X20.
It's small in size, has a decent zoom range (28-100+ 35mm equivalent), has no AA filter, focuses quickly, has a more advanced rangefinder style viewfinder and offers good high iso abilities.
If I were to buy a small compact camera to take with me when not shooting with my D800 it would probably be that camera.
It also offers a few jpg "looks" that resemble old Fuji film types. Might be fun for some nostalgic shooting.
Finally, the silver version look reminds me of old fashion cameras and has a bit of a Leica look to it.
(Not that you should chose a camera based on its looks but it's just a bonus)

I don't own one and haven't shot one but it does seem to fit the bill quite well.

Vipmediastar

I'm in the same situation. Bad neck and back from previous several accidents. I do street shooting with the D800 and 24-70 and that plus my back pack is heavy and come the warm weather I will sweat plenty. I love the combo but I spent this weekend with some heat pads for my neck and back. I have the blackrapid sports strap and that helps a lot but I stopped using it since I got paranoid and it felt flimsy. After reading a story on how it separated the bottom part of d800 and Nikon was unable to fix it I bought a different strap that helps much more than the Nikon strap. I also have a wrist strap that helps a little bit. Overall I would not trade that setup and use my smartphone or a point and shoot but the smartest decision I could make is to get a compact camera. I could walk more with less pain and enjoy it even more.
Last week I was shooting near the subway entrance and a group of "questionable" teenagers kept eyeing my camera and making comments.

I think I would go for a Fuji x series camera for my city walks. Possibly the x-20 or x-100s.
I would consider the Olympus om-d but maybe the next gen or the x-e1 or x-pro.

Msmoto

Interestingly enough, with Black Rapid strap or similar, one can carry a heavy camera on the waistline over the rear and it makes the weight disappear, and the camera is not seen from the front....or when pulled around in front it hides it from the rear. Makes even a pro body with heavy lens a "carry around".

MikeGunter

Hi all,

@NSXTypeR - How embarrassing. I think (and hope) he used a smaller pen earlier.

@aquarian_light - As usual, we're ready to spend other's money in a New York second.

A lot depends on you and what you really want to do - how meaningful this is really going to be to you, and how much it's all going to be to you.

I mean, if you really want to put up with gear around your waist or neck, and $$$ more than you really had in mind for snapshots, why not just tote the D800? Or just get a D90 or a used D7000? There has never been more good camera gear to buy and choices are just temping all of us.

One thing you might consider is this: You can get a brand new D5200 with a lens for under $700 from Amazon that will likely blow away any of the cameras mentioned and be portable, reasonably light and somewhat compatible with the gear you have. The sensor is rated topnotch at DXO, for what that's worth, and it is pretty good in low light and it will have a very comfortable feel to it, with notable exceptions, that won't be anything unlike other cameras mentioned.

It would be a worthy backup - should that mean anything, and it will be capable of good video (although not with the DOF control that the D800 you have).

As always, my best,

Mike

edited for mechanics and usage...

aquarian_light

That's definitely a thought @MikeGunter, A D5200 with say the 50/1.8 I've already got would make a fine pair for street shooting that's pretty decently small. @ironheart already suggested a 3200... I'm not sure though. These other camera's I've been speculating on would be for pure joy only, no professional work. If I'm going to even consider these cameras as 'backups' they're gonna have to really be knockouts. I always have my local camera store on speed dial if I need to rent a d800 body incase my primary one craps out at a photo shoot. Provided they are open and I am shooting in town, I can get a second body inside of 30 minutes. If the shoot is out of town or at a late evening time I just rent the body and factor that into the price quote to the client. If I'm going to forgo that in lieu of having a 5200... it's gotta get the job done with little to no sacrifice. Pixel level resolution is not a terribly big deal. I regularly only print 11x14 with the occasional 20x30; a 24mpx sensor in the 5200 will get that done with absolutely no problem. I'm just going to have to look at ISO performance and get my hands on some raw files to see if the sensor holds up. I'm sure it will... but confidence in the camera is important as I'm sure you working pros understand.

BabaGanoush

@A_L, I own a D800 but I also have a Panasonic G3 MFT camera that I use for an occasional change of pace. The body of the G3 is very compact, and I'm sure it's priced very reasonably now that the camera is at the end of its product cycle. With a good lens attached, in my experience it turns out excellent pictures for the uses you mentioned. However, it's not good for landscapes...not enough resolution. The touch screen on the G3 is superb. The main problem I have with the G3 is its buttons. They are tiny dimples that barely stick out from the body and so they are hard to locate when you're feeling around in the dark with your thumb or finger. The buttons on the G3's successor, the G5, are larger and much easier to locate by feel in the dark, but the body of the G5 is also considerably bigger than that of the G3. Based on the studio tests I've seen, the sensor in the G5 is a slight upgrade to the G3, but not by much, despite exaggerated claims of some enthusiastic G5 fanboys. Neither camera performs all that well at high ISO past 1600. The Panasonic GX1 is also compact like the G3 and another possibility you might consider. It uses the same sensor as the G3, although Panasonic claims to have tweaked it a bit to improve its performance. Tests published at DPR seem to confirm that. The GX1 is available at a huge discount now. I've ordered one for myself. It's supposed to be delivered either today or tomorrow. I'm planning to use it this summer as my main travel camera in Europe, along with the G3 as a backup body. (For lenses, I will be taking a Panasonic 7-14mm f/4 I have on order from Amazon, my Olympus 12mm f/2 and/or my Panny 14mm f/2.5, and my Panasonic 14-140mm. I'll be leaving my Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 and 100-300mm lenses at home). All that said, later this week I plan to buy a Sony RX100. It's a shirt-pocket stuffer camera that's perfect for travel, it has a decent 1" sensor, it gets great reviews even from die hard MFT users, it shoots raw, and the pictures I've seen at sites like DPR are impressive for such a small camera. One knock on the RX100 is its menu system. However, I've read through the RX100 user guide and watched several videos on-line, yet I see nothing seriously wrong with the Sony menu layout. It's a little "different" but nothing that I can't easily get used to.

MikeGunter

I always have my local camera store on speed dial if I need to rent a d800 body incase my primary one craps out at a photo shoot.

Hi,

I was re-reading and noticing a ton of minor errors (I should have read it with more scrutiny the first time), but the point was not so much as a backup - that wasn't so clear - but the familiarity of the camera's controls and the quality of the results.

I don't know if it has a motor for lenses that don't have the motor built in, but other than that, it should be a decent mix for handling. It has the same Expeed 3 sensor as the D7100, and it's really, really good. The kit lens is the 18-55mm, which is not as bad as some folks lay on it. The VR is good, but a 35mm 1.8 is pretty cheap and makes a normal perspective lens in the DX world - I would likely not want to use the 50mm as it is a bit too telephoto.

My best,

Mike

aquarian_light

It almost seems like for the money, a d5200 is a much better buy. I still just can't get over the fact that MFT doesnt have any cheap fast primes. I can get a full frame nikon50mm 1.8 for 200 but the cheapest fast-fifty-equivolent MFT has is the pany 20mm/1.7 for 348?? with the crop that's about 40mm... how does a MFT lens cost more for a roughly equivalent field of view than a full frame? I'm sure there's reasons that someone can point out, still doesn't make sense.
It seems a used 5100 (I'd really almost prefer the 16mp sensor in the 5100 to the 24mp sensor in the 5200 for workflow reasons) goes for around 499, plus 200 for the 30/1.8G still comes out for near the same price a decent MFT set up. But I do prefer to have something the size of a compact. There's just no compact really worth the price point image quality wise when cameras like the 5200 and 3200 exist. If I could get a good PEN with an f2 lens or faster for 300, then I'd jump on that. But I just can't see that being an option with the price of the MFT lenses.

shawnino

I'm betting the lack of cheap MFT primes has something to do with being a (relatively) early adopter of physically smaller tech. 50mm 1.2/1.4/1.8/etc. FX tech is very old (and apparently none is recommended for the D800E, but I digress).

aquarian_light

lol cept some of my sharpest images I've gotten from my B800 where from my 50/1.8, only beaten by my 85/1.8, but that's a whole other story. I just can't justify no matter how you spin the dice paying as much as olympus and panasonic want for their normal 2.8 primes and their 3.5-5.6 zooms. I shoot my big boy with almost exclusively f/2 or faster primes with the exception of the 70-200/2.8. 28/1.8, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2, and 70-200/2.8 are the lenses I have in my bag for say a wedding. The most expensive one being the 70-200/2.8, which is only just barely more expensive than a good portion of the MFT lenses, my for-fun camera just doesn't deserve that much financial burden lol But the cheaper options in point and shoots just throw out crappy detail and ISO performance. (considering how spoiled i am by my d800). The 3100 and 3200 are a bit too basic, so there may be a used 5100 in my future... i dunno, a entirely not for work camera is hard to justify what so ever, given I could use that money on a new light, or a softbox. But having a camera I can take with me always is going to get me shooting more and help make me a better photographer... so it's a tough decision, as I would bet it is for any pro with a limited budget.

BabaGanoush

"The most expensive one being the 70-200/2.8, which is only just barely more expensive than a good portion of the MFT lenses"

Not true in the US. The most expensive MFT zooms cost less than half the price of the N70-200 f/2.8 VRII, and the highly sought-after MFT primes even less. The best MFT prime, the Olympus M.Zuiko 75mm f1.8, sells for USD $900 (which is about the top of the range of prices for the best MFT zooms); the next best prime lens---the Olympus 45mm f/1.8---sells for just $350; while the Nikon 70-200mm goes for around $2400 these days (which is what I paid for my copy a few years ago). In any case, a complete camera system is not built in a day but over time, and spread over time these costs are not so huge.

aquarian_light

Is so true lol the Panasonic 35-100/2.8(70-200 equiv) retails for $1,498, the Tamron 70-200 VC (which is what's on my shopping list) is the exact same price. The panasonic 7-14/4 (12-24 equiv) is 1,000. The point still remains that there are full frame lenses with more, bigger glass that cost less.

Godless

Is so true lol the Panasonic 35-100/2.8(70-200 equiv) retails for $1,498, the Tamron 70-200 VC (which is what's on my shopping list) is the exact same price. The panasonic 7-14/4 (12-24 equiv) is 1,000. The point still remains that there are full frame lenses with more, bigger glass that cost less.

Well what did you expect? That those devices would be given for free with the camera body? I would not mind that, but it ain´t gonna happen, ever. Quality has its price and the m4/3 consumers pay for portability as well. Companies exist for profit only, and that is it.

John

I just wanted to add that dpreview posted a review of the Fuji X20.
It does compare multiple "pocket sized" cameras.

aquarian_light

Cept there's a difference between making a profit and hiking up the price because your consumers are pro's that are used to paying a 'pro' price. But we digress. No matter how you shape it MFT is still too expensive for my budget. I've been reading around and I really.... very much dislike the tilt screen on the 5100 and 5200. I never use them other than just flat and they tend to get in the way and ad the the bulk of the camera. So maybe @ironheart was on to something. a d3200 just might be the ticket. I'd want better glass than the kit zoom, but that's not hard to find cheaply. Especially if the kit lens get sold to at least partially fund say the 35/1.8DX, and I've got plenty of FX glass that will work beautifully on it. There's just not much in the way of affordable compact, even the X20 that puts out the kind of image quality I'm used to. With the smaller DOF, the greater resolution and dynamic range, the all around faster performance and responsiveness compared to the compacts in the same price range... the nikon DX line is looking pretty good for fitting my needs. I'll just have to find a store with one and get my hands on it. It's remarkably strongly marketed towards very beginners in the DSLR market, it's just a matter of whether or not that limits a pro from getting full functionality from it.

MikeGunter

Hi all,

@aquarian_light

"very much dislike the tilt screen on the 5100 and 5200"

To each his own, but as a working journalist, I would have killed for one. Being able to put the camera up high or low with a remote and see or get a really good idea via screen of what I was getting would be pure ice cream, but if it doesn't float _your boat_, it doesn't.

"It's remarkably strongly marketed towards very beginners in the DSLR market, it's just a matter of whether or not that limits a pro from getting full functionality from it."

:-)

Of course, there are many amateurs kicking some major a$$ with D4s. I remember that Ansel had some Polaroid cameras in his house, too; the point and shoot kind.

My best,

Mike

Ironheart

"It's remarkably strongly marketed towards very beginners in the DSLR market, it's just a matter of whether or not that limits a pro from getting full functionality from it."

A pro should be able to get whatever shot they want from either a D3200 or a D4. The main difference is the D4 (and other pro bodies) have dedicated controls for all of the various settings one might want to adjust. On the D3200 and other consumer cameras, you may have to menu surf a bit to get to what you want. The "info" screen lets you get to all major variables in a click or two.

As I mentioned above, I love my D3100 with the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens. Small, light, fast, and sharp. Don't sell the 18-55 short though, it is also small, light, a fast focus (although not fast glass) and sharp. And for a carry-round DX it really can't be beat for the price. I'll put it in Auto or one of the scene modes when I don't want to be a photographer, but just a participant in a social event with a camera. Takes reasonably good photos this way with zero thought process. Then if you want/need to get serious, M is always available.

aquarian_light

Well, how I meant by getting full functionality from it is if there are key controls missing. Like not being able tto manually set white balance, like not being able to do automatic time lapse or auto bracketing, or not being able to set ISO to 1/3rd stops but just whole stops, needing shutter speeds above 1/4000th in bright sunlight, etc... I'm aware I'll be able to take any sort of image capturing device and get something good out of it, I've turned a popcorn tin into a pinhole camera and exposed directly onto photopaper lol it's just a matter of having specific control when I need it. If it doesn't have that kind of control I'll be slightly disappointed when I try to change that setting it doesn't have and miss a decisive moment. Not saying that's the case, just that I need to findout if it is or not.

Ironheart

You are talking yourself into a second D800, and changing your requirements. We call that "scope creep" in the real world :-) originally you said you just wanted to be able to adjust EV, now you want 1/3 stop ISO, bracketing, time lapse and less than 1/4000 shutter. Not gonna happen on a D3100 or D3200, and probably not all of these features on many of the MFT cameras we've been discussing.

aquarian_light

I am kinda pigeon holing myself aren't I? I'm just thinking aloud and my thoughts don't tend to go in a strait line lol