Small Compact Camera For Street Photography.

ianbarber

ianbarber

Suspended / Banned
Messages
882
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
Ok, Im going to throw this in the air to see what feedback I get.

I have decided to sell my Nikon D300 and External Battery Grip and use the funds to buy a small compact camera for when I am wandering around the streets.

carrying the D3s around the streets is just not working,

A) it's a little on the big and bulky side
B) I am attracting a lot of attention.

So what am I looking for....

Something small and lightweight that produces good image quality.

I am not a fan of looking at the back of an LCD to compose the shot so it is going to have to have a view finder.

What I have my Eye on....

The panasonic GF1 seems to be able to stand on its own two feet but I am not sure if the optional electronic viewfinder can.

The one I keep going back to is the Fuji X100. I know this camera has had its problems, sticking blades and poor auto focus but from several reviews I have read these appear to have been improved with the latest firmware.

Over to you for your comments..
 
I would get the nex7 or wait for the lower priced nex6 next month. Stick with the aps-c if i was you. The electronic viewfinder on the gf1 is no where near as good as the nex7's. The x100 is still a great camera though.
 
Last edited:
I've had no problems with the X100, I think the newer batches are fine. When I've done street photography with it, I have still felt too self conscious to use the viewfinder, which is the main reason I bought it, I ended up just hip shooting.
 
If you're going interchangeable lens, I'd look at the lens lineup first and choose the body second. As far as I can see, u4/3 has the best lens lineup at the moment.... Bodies will evolve over time - good glass will last. I think Sonys range of lenses is particularly poo at the moment for example (£800+ for a fast 24mm, and no fast zooms).

Image quality is pretty much of a muchness with u4/3 and APS-C CSCs unless you are pushing ISO or dynamic range....
 
I am happy using a small cheap DSLR and a small prime. You have the other extremes of DSLR using the camera you use as they are definitely huge!
I have tried an X100 (only borrowed for very short time) but I found it to slow (I tend to see a shot and compose in my head then quickly bring camera to face and take shot) - the X100 didn't seem to react quickly enough.
The IQ even from an entry level DSLR is good enough for my needs (and certainly a match for any compact cameras)
I don't really get the fact that people feel they need a rangefinderesque camera for taking photos in the street, especially when something like an M9 is probably bigger that my DSLR and an X100 is not exactly small either. It is not as though it becomes invisible, people can still see you taking photos...
 
An M9 or X100 is smaller than a DSLR with a lens, and attracts a lot less attention. An X100 or XPro1 is what I'd get depending on budget.
 
Laudrup said:
An M9 or X100 is smaller than a DSLR with a lens, and attracts a lot less attention.
Click to expand...

An M9 really isn't that much different in size than a small DSLR (In fact it is 10mm wider!)

http://camerasize.com/compare/#213,98

If you saw someone holding the M9 to their face it is pretty much the same size so not sure why it attracts less attention?
A small DSLR with a 40mm pancake on is small enough. I walk around the streets with camera in hand taking shots of all and everything and I have never attracted any attention. I am note really sure where people get that from?
As I said, a D3 size camera with a presumably large lens is in a different league though.
 
There are so many variables to which is the best camera for YOU. I've been shooting street and urban for a few years, love it, have a passion for it, and by far my favoured combination is my Nikon D300 with 24 or 35mm lens - albeit it is too noisy close up. I have big hands and many of the smaller compacts slow me down, and like you, I want a viewfinder. A black D300 with 24mm prime is relatively large but it's not a 5x4 :-) - I have thought about reducing that to a D80/D90 actually - but the DSLR is both versatile, fast in operation, the controls are not buried in viewfinders, touch screen and menus. Unless I could afford a £1500-2500 X-Pro with interchangeable lenses, I doubt i would beat this combination.

Do I use that all the time? No, I have a Fuji X100 and a Canon G11. The G11 has won me competitions, the quality is fine, it's great for a single shot but has the slow motorised and noisy zoom. It's slow shot to shot and gives no idea what it is focussing on. The X100 is an excellent camera, the new firmware speeds it up but controls are easily pressed and mistakenly moved and again not always clear if you have taken the shot or not. The battery life is appalling - only a couple of hours continuous shooting. The 35mm equiv. lens means you have to be in pretty close which many 'concious' street photographers daren't do. The sticky blade issue is meant to be resolved on cameras built after the end of 2011 but Fuji have said the will always change the lens for this issue.

Many of these cameras take on a different meaning when used for a particular purpose which also depends how you work so a camera can be a very personal thing. Many of these lens heavy tiny body compacts with no viewfinder and trying to squint at an LCD are totally unsuitable for anyway I work. Incidentally I have also tried many film cameras such as the 35mm rangefinders which are also quite good for street work but frustrating waiting for results when we are noew used to it in minutes.

Being concious with a camera is a bit of a state of mind. Blend in with dark clothing, don't stare at people as such, don't look like you are the police, the tax man or the social security photographing someone on the sly(!), smile if challeged... difficult for me as I am a big chap, easily spotted, but amazed sometimes what I get a way with a few feet away.

Hope all that waffle gave you some thouights.

PS meant to say I would seriously look at a Fuji X10. manual zoom, large viewfinder, good sensor (albeit small) - not used one in the field but looks a tempting combination.
 
Last edited:
BlackCloud said:
Being concious with a camera is a bit of a state of mind. Blend in with dark clothing, don't stare at people as such, don't look like you are the police, the tax man or the social security photographing someone on the sly(!), smile if challeged... difficult for me as I am a big chap, easily spotted, but amazed sometimes what I get a way with a few feet away.
Click to expand...

Spot on. A camera is a camera, it is about the person using it. Although have to admit a noisy shutter on a DSLR does make it obvious you have taken a shot but I live with that!
 
arad85 said:
If you're going interchangeable lens, I'd look at the lens lineup first and choose the body second. As far as I can see, u4/3 has the best lens lineup at the moment.... Bodies will evolve over time - good glass will last. I think Sonys range of lenses is particularly poo at the moment for example (£800+ for a fast 24mm, and no fast zooms).

Image quality is pretty much of a muchness with u4/3 and APS-C CSCs unless you are pushing ISO or dynamic range....
Click to expand...

As Gary Barlow once song, have a little patients! :)
 
Last edited:
Try a camera with an articulated rear screen. I've got a Canon G11 with just this handy device and I sometimes use it like a waist level finder on a medium format camera. If you don't have a camera covering your face and you are looking down, no-one will notice you.

Mike
 
Not behaving like you are doing something wrong is a lot more effective (and cheaper) than switching cameras.

Shoot -> optional smile/thumbs up -> move on.

If you look embarassed/uncomfortable when people catch your eye, they'll pick up on it and react accordingly.
 
ernesto said:
An M9 really isn't that much different in size than a small DSLR (In fact it is 10mm wider!)

http://camerasize.com/compare/#213,98

If you saw someone holding the M9 to their face it is pretty much the same size so not sure why it attracts less attention?
A small DSLR with a 40mm pancake on is small enough. I walk around the streets with camera in hand taking shots of all and everything and I have never attracted any attention. I am note really sure where people get that from?
As I said, a D3 size camera with a presumably large lens is in a different league though.
Click to expand...

A DSLR attracts more attention because a lot of people think any DSLR is a 'pro' camera, even if it is some entry level 1000D with an 18-55mm on it. They are noisy to shoot and pretty big and chunky. It's no comparison to something discrete like an M9 or an X100. The X100 is what I'd get as the XPro1 you are paying 2-3 times the money over a used X100.
 
I'd go with X100 - set it to f/4 for a reasonable dof, put it on servo focus and shoot from hanging round neck. Also gives you option to use excellent optical / digital viewfinder.

It is slower than a dslr, but it's a super bit of kit with excellent optical quality.

Phil
 
Laudrup said:
A DSLR attracts more attention because a lot of people think any DSLR is a 'pro' camera, even if it is some entry level 1000D with an 18-55mm on it. They are noisy to shoot and pretty big and chunky. .
Click to expand...

That is what many seem to say but it is not my experience. I have used very small cameras such as Ricoh GRDs and also mid sized SLRs and find no difference in attention received.
Again, attention is more about how you are acting than what camera you are using.

And for me the performance of the camera is more important and when I tried an X100 (an owned an X10) they were just too slow for spur of the moment shots.
 
Laudrup said:
A DSLR attracts more attention because a lot of people think any DSLR is a 'pro' camera, even if it is some entry level 1000D with an 18-55mm on it. They are noisy to shoot and pretty big and chunky. It's no comparison to something discrete like an M9 or an X100. The X100 is what I'd get as the XPro1 you are paying 2-3 times the money over a used X100.
Click to expand...
The m9 is not small and the xpro1 is even bigger again.
 
rjbell said:
As Gary Barlow once song, have a little patients! :)
Click to expand...
And just hope that something comes out that is good and works well? That's not a particularly smart strategy....

Missing from the Sony lens lineup:

  • Wide angle zoom - 10-22mm equivalent. Speed not important. NEX has nothing. u4/3 has 2 lenses: Pan 7-14 or Oly 9-18.
  • Fast walkaround lens. Canon 17-55 equivalent - i.e. f2.8 with IS. NEX has nothing. u4/3 has Pan 12-35 (which is a bit short at 35, but...)
  • Low cost fast primes scattered through the range. NEX has the 16mm 2.8 - not very fast and terrible performance, 28mm that's ultra expensive, 30mm macro that's slow and the 50mm which seems to be OK. u4/3 has (very good) primes at 12, 14, 17, 20, 25, 45, 75 as well as a couple of manual focus lenses from Voigtlander at 17.5 and 25 (both of which are f0.95)
  • Decent fast telephoto. Actually, both formats are missing this, but the u4/3 35-100 f2.8 should be released "soon" (I'm hoping.
  • Super telephoto. NEX: nothing beyond 300mm effective (55-210 is the longest I can see). u4/3 goes up to 600mm effective

So, whilst the EVF may be funky, I'm limited to kit lens like performance and a 50mm fast prime and/or shelling out L lens prices for a decent 28mm prime. Couple that with lenses that are similar in size to an SLR lens (the sensor size limits the compactness of the lens) and the fact there isn't anything to aspire to owning. I might just as well pick up something like a 1100D. At least there is access to all Canons EF lenses should you want them plus the body isn't much bigger....
 
I'd wait until after 3pm today to see what Sony has to offer for Nex;

16-50 f/3.5-5.6 OSS retractable
10-18mm f/4.0 OSS (non pancake)
35mm 1.8 OSS prime lens

The walkabout isn't particularly exciting (apart from being smaller) but the other 2 will be depending on price.

Cheers
Steve
 
arad85 said:
And just hope that something comes out that is good and works well? That's not a particularly smart strategy....

Missing from the Sony lens lineup:

  • Wide angle zoom - 10-22mm equivalent. Speed not important. NEX has nothing. u4/3 has 2 lenses: Pan 7-14 or Oly 9-18.
  • Fast walkaround lens. Canon 17-55 equivalent - i.e. f2.8 with IS. NEX has nothing. u4/3 has Pan 12-35 (which is a bit short at 35, but...)
  • Low cost fast primes scattered through the range. NEX has the 16mm 2.8 - not very fast and terrible performance, 28mm that's ultra expensive, 30mm macro that's slow and the 50mm which seems to be OK. u4/3 has (very good) primes at 12, 14, 17, 20, 25, 45, 75 as well as a couple of manual focus lenses from Voigtlander at 17.5 and 25 (both of which are f0.95)
  • Decent fast telephoto. Actually, both formats are missing this, but the u4/3 35-100 f2.8 should be released "soon" (I'm hoping.
  • Super telephoto. NEX: nothing beyond 300mm effective (55-210 is the longest I can see). u4/3 goes up to 600mm effective

So, whilst the EVF may be funky, I'm limited to kit lens like performance and a 50mm fast prime and/or shelling out L lens prices for a decent 28mm prime. Couple that with lenses that are similar in size to an SLR lens (the sensor size limits the compactness of the lens) and the fact there isn't anything to aspire to owning. I might just as well pick up something like a 1100D. At least there is access to all Canons EF lenses should you want them plus the body isn't much bigger....
Click to expand...

Yes i'm not arguing that panasonic has more lenses or even getting into the argument of m4/3 and aps/c again with you. Your right Sony lenses are lacking but it looks like there is finally some lenses on the way thats what i was refering to by have some patients. A 35 f1.8, 10-18mm and a collapsible kit lens all with Stabilisation. I was answering the OP's brief with something and compact that performs well which doesn't mean a bag full of glass. As for the argument i "just as well pick up a 1100d" its a very valid point that I asked myself the same question not so long ago then sold my nex. This also applies to any CSC yours included.
 
Last edited:
rjbell said:
This also applies to any CSC yours included.
Click to expand...
And that's why I have gone u4/3 and sold all my Canon stuff - the performance is 95% the way to a full frame, decent lenses are available and most importantly, they are small. If I wanted to have the 24-70 ff equivalent, I have:

u4/3: 12-35 IS - 68 x 74mm, 305g
APS-C: 17-55 IS - 83 x 110, 645g
FF: 24-70 (no IS) - 83 x 124 - 950g

The decision was simple once I realised the picture quality is "good enough" for what I want.
 
rjbell said:
The m9 is not small and the xpro1 is even bigger again.
Click to expand...

Compared to a DSLR + lens they are, plus the M9 is full frame and the XPro gives you quality to rival or surpass the 5D MK II at higher ISO. I'd still go with an X100 for budget, discreteness and quality reasons though.
 
Laudrup said:
Compared to a DSLR + lens they are, plus the M9 is full frame and the XPro gives you quality to rival or surpass the 5D MK II at higher ISO. I'd still go with an X100 for budget, discreteness and quality reasons though.
Click to expand...
M9 with lens maybe. Not the xpro with a 35mm prime and say a 1100d with a 40mm prime.
 
Last edited:
Laudrup said:
the XPro gives you quality to rival or surpass the 5D MK II at higher ISO.
Click to expand...
But the sensor design means that de-mosaicing the sensor is a right pain and isn't good in all cases with a standard development flow...
 
Debating whether a size difference of 10mm makes a camera pull attention or not is a bit silly really. There are all very visible cameras and if someone looks at you they will see that you are taking a photo of them.

Agree that the X100 is more discreet as a DSLR is relatively noisy, but it is not cheap and it doesn't perform as well as even an entry level DSLR. You also can't choose the lens with you prefer to use, not everyone wants a 35mm equivalent.

I would say the best thing to do is borrow an X100 (as you are leaning to it) and go out in the street with it for an hour and see if it performs to the level you require as if it does then it would be a good choice.
 
Street work, captured instants, done on bloody tlrs, slow film cameras years ago, should be minimal processing, could be shot on any camera, perfect technical images aren't the point... don't get too deep with it. Not street photography as accepted by many to mean street anyway.

Re the x100 being slow, as I posted earlier, the newest firmware makes the camera much better. Closest I can get to an affordable ideal digital non dslr at the moment.
 
I've owned the X100 for nearly 2 months and I've been more than impressed with it. It's lightweight, jpegs are fantastic out of the camera, Panoramic capability is so easy, video is not full HD but it is still great quality and there is no more loud shutter CLUNK. You can even shoot from the hip with it while on your shoulder. It is not noticeable nor does it make noise.

Coming from a D3/D300 line of cameras, The X100 is such an enabling camera. I carry it everywhere. It easly fits in a backpack or on one's shoulder or neck. To have this capability in a small package with a large sensor is truly a game changer in many ways.
 
stevelmx5 said:
I'd wait until after 3pm today to see what Sony has to offer for Nex;
Click to expand...
Yay! Another camera body and no new lenses... Have they got more bodies than lenses yet? :naughty: Yes, I know they are coming, but you get my point... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top