Good compact rant

[Lemaildetom]

Hi all,

I've been looking at getting a smallish compact camera and the ones I seem to really like are the Canon g5 x mark ii and the Lumix lx100 mark ii.

The first rant all these cameras are from 2019 and I looks like there is no planning for mark iii. So is this it? Is this branch dead? Both cameras were very good but both were still needing a few more upgrades to become perfect.

The second rant, it's the price of these, I know they are premium but:
- the canon g5x ii is at £850 new or best second hand not trashed is £710
- the lumix lx100 mk ii is at £750

Now the canon look great but £850 for a 1inch sensor seem very steep and £750 for the lumix is a bit cheaper but it was really not much of an upgrade, the lens is the same as the 2014 model and sensor dust is still an issue and that what killed my first Lx100 after 12-18 months use.

I think it's because they have no replacement that the price is still this high a mark iii of both of them would have drove the price of the mark ii down?

 

[swanseamale47]

I suspect theres little market for them these days, that and getting the chips is maybe still an issue.

 

[snerkler]

I've been looking at the same sort of camera (Sony RX100 VI) but I refuse to pay £850 for a compact camera too.

 

[Lemaildetom]

The sony rx100 vi is the obvious third choice, I didn't include it in my intro because I think the body would be a bit small and gripless for me so I would rather try the canon. But that sony seems to have a much better AF than my two choices. But yes these three models seem very expensive for what they are, especially knowing they are all from 2019. And there is always phone catching up with dedicated lenses, brand new sensor,...

 

[woof woof]

I went for the Panasonic TZ100 (1" sensor compact with a 25-250mm zoom) rather than a Sony RX as I disliked the thought of having to pop the built in VF up and down, the TZ's VF is built in and in the corner and that's what I wanted. Might be small for you? I don't know. I manage ok with mine. There's a nwer TZ200 too.

I have always fancied a LX100 but held off because of a possibly irrational fear of getting sensor contamination. When I eventually ordered a used one off ebay it did indeed have a badly contaminated sensor so it went straight back.

Good luck choosing.

 

[Don153]

And there is always phone catching up with dedicated lenses, brand new sensor,...

That is the issue.
Mobile phones have taken an enormous chunk out of the market. It just isn't economically viable to make compact cameras any more.

My wife has an old Canon, from about 2006. We recently decided to get her a replacement, but we couldn't find anything suitable. She is learning to use her mobile phone instead, and is getting used to the idea.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

I don't understand what there is to rant about, here.

If your pictures have sufficient impact, nobody other than the magnifying glass brigade will care what sensor was used. I've seen A0 prints from 1/2.3 cameras in an exhibition, which I doubt anyone could distinguish from the full frame images next to them. It's the picture that matters, not the pixel count.

I still carry an Ixus 70 around with me and nobody's made negative comments when images from it have been used in various contexts...

 

[Craikeybaby]

I think compact camera users, and certainly buyers, are in a minority. I don't really like using a phone camera, but I have a Fuji X100V, which is just about compact but has an APS-C sensor, so I feel like it justifies the price.

 

[ancient_mariner]

As already said, compacts are now a tiny market segment, and it's probably as expensive to make a compact as it is to make any other mirrorless camera of decent quality.

If you need something small then it may be better to look at M43 range finder types.

 

[Lemaildetom]

I went for the Panasonic TZ100 (1" sensor compact with a 25-250mm zoom) rather than a Sony RX as I disliked the thought of having to pop the built in VF up and down, the TZ's VF is built in and in the corner and that's what I wanted. Might be small for you? I don't know. I manage ok with mine. There's a nwer TZ200 too.

Serious zoom range on that, apparently the tz200 is 26-390mm this is crazy for such a tiny camera.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Serious zoom range on that, apparently the tz200 is 26-390mm this is crazy for such a tiny camera.

Even tinier and with an equivalent focal length range of 24~720mm is the Sony HX90. Panasonic's own TZ70 has the same zoom range in a shell only slightly larger...

 

[woof woof]

Serious zoom range on that, apparently the tz200 is 26-390mm this is crazy for such a tiny camera.

If you are interested there's a TZ100 thread.

Panasonic TZ100

Perfect, many thanks. I'll go for a fondle over the next few days ... Another thing... It's nice that the camera charges quickly when plugged into the computer via the USB, by the time I've transferred the pictures to the pc and processed them it's charged and good to go again :D

www.talkphotography.co.uk

 

[wornish]

Mobile phones these days meet the needs of the vast majority of people who take "snapshots" or record shots as old school 'togs seem to call them.
The image quality they produce is equal to (if not better) than what most compact camera users achieve.

If you want to go into specialised photographic areas (some call this Pro photography) then M43 systems are the lightest followed by APC and then Full Frame.

Take your pick.

I think compact cameras are approaching their End Of Life no company is willing to invest in a shrinking market.

 

[snerkler]

Even tinier and with an equivalent focal length range of 24~720mm is the Sony HX90. Panasonic's own TZ70 has the same zoom range in a shell only slightly larger...

View attachment 369655

They do have a good zoom but they have small sensors and relatively poor lenses.

 

[snerkler]

Serious zoom range on that, apparently the tz200 is 26-390mm this is crazy for such a tiny camera.

It is to say it has a 1” type sensor, however the lens is pretty slow as a result.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

... but they have small sensors and relatively poor lenses.

Nonetheless, many people are both happy to use them and happy with the results they provide...

 

[snerkler]

Nonetheless, many people are both happy to use them and happy with the results they provide...

View attachment 369672
View attachment 369673
View attachment 369674
View attachment 369675

This is true, but also many aren't either including myself. I made the assumption that the OP is one of the ones that aren't too being as they've been looking at the larger sensor compacts and have based my replies on this

 

[d00d]

If you need something small then it may be better to look at M43 range finder types.

Yes.

There are some small lenses, and if/when the camera body gets updated, then the lenses will have a new lease of life.

I was considering the LX100 but ended up with the GX80 kit. I now have a further 6 lenses. Loving it.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I don't understand what there is to rant about, here.

If your pictures have sufficient impact, nobody other than the magnifying glass brigade will care what sensor was used. I've seen A0 prints from 1/2.3 cameras in an exhibition, which I doubt anyone could distinguish from the full frame images next to them. It's the picture that matters, not the pixel count.

I still carry an Ixus 70 around with me and nobody's made negative comments when images from it have been used in various contexts...

View attachment 369582
View attachment 369583

Your illustrative argument for discarding the compact camera as a tool for photography is very powerful.

 

[LCPete]

As already said it’s not worth the camera manufacturers developing compacts anymore
for scenes and people snaps the Sony RX100 is excellent, I still use my MK 1 the later models are quite expensive though
if I want to travel light and take pictures that need a zoom lens I use my Canon 550D and 55-250 lens the later versions of that lens are excellent and cheap , can pick up that combination cheaply nowadays and get really good picture quality better than a compact camera in my opinion and can be carried in a small bag

 

[LG9K]

I have "solved" this with two compacts.
An RX100vii (I know this doesn't meet the value for money aspect but it does take very good photos, even in my hands, and much better ones when in good hands.
An HX99, which has the benefit of huge zoom, and it shoots raw, so can be tidied up very well indeed.

Even the HX99 wasn't particularly cheap - I got a refurbished model, but I've just seen these are £430 new - definitely not worth that much.
I previously had an HX60, which was a lovely little thing and got me started on my photography journey.

 

[woof woof]

Truly compact cameras have three advantages for me. Firstly they are not phones so I don't have to hold an oblong screen at half arms length in front of my face and jab at it with a finger. Secondly they'll fit in a coat pocket if not a trouser pocket and lastly I feel more comfortable using them in some situations in which even a relatively small mirrorless camera like my MFT cameras or my Sony A7 may attract too much attention or be too intrusive.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Your illustrative argument for discarding the compact camera as a tool for photography is very powerful.

How nice of you to say so....

 

[woof woof]

How nice of you to say so....

I'm sorry to say this but this criticism is IMO justified Andrew as the pictures you often post are... lets say... technically challenged. This doesn't seem to matter to you but other people may well have different expectations about the technical quality of pictures that they're willing to accept.

 

[RichardC27]

Nonetheless, many people are both happy to use them and happy with the results they provide...

View attachment 369672
View attachment 369673
View attachment 369674
View attachment 369675

The thing is, a high-spec smartphone from the past couple of years, such as a Galaxy S22 Ultra with all its different zoom lenses, would take better images than these. The market for small-sensor compacts has been completely overtaken by phones. I used to have a small Sony camera for days out and holidays, but it got to the point both mine and my wife's phones took much better photos so we sold it.

For just snapshots and general everyday photos a decent phone camera is a better choice for 99% of people. I can shoot, edit and share my photos in minutes, all from one device. If I'm going to carry around a separate camera all day I want really good image quality from it, which most small sensor compacts never had.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

This doesn't seem to matter to you but other people may well have different expectations about the technical quality of pictures that they're willing to accept.

To which I can only reply: so what?

The purpose of a picture, for me as for most people, is to illustrate the subject. How sharp it is, or how "grainy", is only of interest to me when it gets in the way of that primary purpose.

If a few people object to pictures that don't meet their "high standards", they can always put me on ignore...

 

[woof woof]

Just some TZ100 pictures taken at various distances and focal lengths.

 

[woof woof]

To which I can only reply: so what?

The purpose of a picture, for me as for most people, is to illustrate the subject. How sharp it is, or how "grainy", is only of interest to me when it gets in the way of that primary purpose.

If a few people object to pictures that don't meet their "high standards", they can always put me on ignore...

So what? So people might look at the pictures you posted and think they can get better quality from a 10 year old phone. The camera that you took those pictures with could still be an option despite the question mark over the image quality, that's true, and people do need to know the plus and minus points to be fully informed and make good and informed choices

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

The thing is, a high-spec smartphone from the past couple of years, such as a Galaxy S22 Ultra with all its different zoom lenses, would take better images than these

If you mean less grainy and with higher apparent sharpness, I agree with you.

For just snapshots and general everyday photos a decent phone camera is a better choice for 99% of people.

Again, I agree with you.

If I'm going to carry around a separate camera all day I want really good image quality from it, which most small sensor compacts never had.

This is also true but...

...the very best camera in all the world is always the one you have in your hand when the picture you wish to capture is in front of you.

 

[cambsno]

I think compact camera users, and certainly buyers, are in a minority. I don't really like using a phone camera, but I have a Fuji X100V, which is just about compact but has an APS-C sensor, so I feel like it justifies the price.

Similar for me. I have 'come down' from FF Nikon (D750) as I preferred the portability of the Fuji (XT3) range for my more serious stuff. My 'compact' is the X100V as that is a beautiful camera and use that a lot. But my iphone 13 Pro is very, very good in many situations and have no qualms going out just with that.

I do think that the days of the compact are limited. A new phone is arguably as good, and always with you. If you want better, then the mirrorless or DSLR is the way to go.

 

[Fuji Dave]

My compacts are the GR3 LX100 II and RX100 III, but I still use my Galaxy Ultra S22 that is always with me.

Moored Up by Rohan, on Flickr

Marina Flats by Rohan, on Flickr

I even have a Macro lens that clips on the phone that is cool.

 

[snerkler]

To which I can only reply: so what?

The purpose of a picture, for me as for most people, is to illustrate the subject. How sharp it is, or how "grainy", is only of interest to me when it gets in the way of that primary purpose.

If a few people object to pictures that don't meet their "high standards", they can always put me on ignore...

To be honest I think the point is, if you are trying to put an argument forward for something then it would carry more weight if these are backed up with decent examples. It's not a case of high expectations it's a case of what's good, bad and anywhere in between. Whatever your expectations are most enthusiasts etc can tell the difference between good image quality and bad image quality

 

[snerkler]

My compacts are the GR3 LX100 II and RX100 III, but I still use my Galaxy Ultra S22 that is always with me.

Moored Up by Rohan, on Flickr

Marina Flats by Rohan, on Flickr

I even have a Macro lens that clips on the phone that is cool.

These stand up pretty well to be fair, especially when viewed on Flickr. I'd be happy to use this for the times I don't have my camera with me

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

To be honest I think the point is, if you are trying to put an argument forward for something then it would carry more weight if these are backed up with decent examples. It's not a case of high expectations it's a case of what's good, bad and anywhere in between. Whatever your expectations are most enthusiasts etc can tell the difference between good image quality and bad image quality

What on earth makes you think I'm "putting an argument forward"?

I suggested alternatives and showed pictures that I've made with them. They were shown as examples of what the OP could expect from such cameras and not presented as "Great Art", whatever that is when it's at home.

 

[woof woof]

What on earth makes you think I'm "putting an argument forward"?

I suggested alternatives and showed pictures that I've made with them. They were shown as examples of what the OP could expect from such cameras and not presented as "Great Art", whatever that is when it's at home.

TBH Andrew I don't think the pictures you've posted do show what you can expect from these cameras. I'm convinced people can expect better from these cameras.

I very briefly had a TZxx (I forget what model) but I sent it back because there was contamination on the sensor but while I had it I took some test shots and they were quite good and in fact I think that as whole pictures taken in good light they rivalled my TZ100. The pictures you posted don't. I don't know why.

 

[snerkler]

What on earth makes you think I'm "putting an argument forward"?

I suggested alternatives and showed pictures that I've made with them. They were shown as examples of what the OP could expect from such cameras and not presented as "Great Art", whatever that is when it's at home.

It’s a turn of phrase, you put a case (argument) forward for the use of compacts and how some are happy with the results.

 

[Ed Sutton]

The purpose of a picture, for me as for most people, is to illustrate the subject. How sharp it is, or how "grainy", is only of interest to me when it gets in the way of that primary purpose.

I agree. Up to a point. And that point at which image quality gets in the way of showing things will vary from person to person and subject to subject. But a lot of the pictures you post as examples of what small sensor cameras are capable of do get in the way of that primary purpose.

I find the key to using a small sensor compact is to work within its limitations. Doing that I can get pictures which are almost indistinguishable (to an untrained eye) from pictures taken with a full frame camera and certainly a match for 4/3 cameras. But once I go beyond the limits the pictures start looking like the poor quality ones you post. And in that case a modern phone, with it's processing wizardry, is likely to produce better looking images. Although the latest video of a 'big cat' shot on a phone might suggest otherwise!

By the way, your 'Crows' are Jackdaws.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

But a lot of the pictures you post as examples of what small sensor cameras are capable of do get in the way of that primary purpose.

You are, of course, welcome to your opinion.

 

[Lemaildetom]

Thanks for all the ideas about. The fuji looks good indeed, I wish they did one which is not a fixed focal.
I might be buying a sony 24-105 f4 to go with my sony a7iii. And just carry on using my phone (google pixel 4A) for pocketability.

 

[wornish]

Hmm, this thread is interesting. Having gone through it I can't see where Andrew has posted examples of where compact images are bad.
If a compact camera works for you then fine.