with camera should I buy?

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
TimBlom
New MemberPosts: 5
Like?
with camera should I buy?
9 months ago

Hi

I have plan to buy a new camera before I go to Vienna to vocation.  With camera sholud I buy. I will have a camera that is small to have in my pocket but still take great photos.  The camera can cost form 200 to 1000 us dollar.

Thanks

/Tim

afterswish1
Contributing MemberPosts: 606
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

The Ricoh GR.

-- hide signature --

Gravity will make you crazy until you get the hang of it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TimBlom
New MemberPosts: 5
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

Thanks! Why should I choose The Ricoh GR? Do you has personal experience of the camera?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
zigi_S
Senior MemberPosts: 2,033
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

Get an eos m. I heard B&H sells the camera with the 22mm pancake lens for 299$. With the rest, buy yourself a nice wide.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
afterswish1
Contributing MemberPosts: 606
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

TimBlom wrote:

Thanks! Why should I choose The Ricoh GR? Do you has personal experience of the camera?

I do have personal experience with it yes, a friend of mine let me borrow one for a day. I didn't want to give it back

There are plenty of alternatives, both more and less expensive and more or less pocketable, but this would be my personal choice if I didn't already own a K-01. The GR has an APS-C sensor, which apart from the flagship Sony full-frame compact, is the largest-sized sensor you can get in a small body that fits in your pocket. With the tasty 28mm f2.8 lens, the large sensor means you get great quality in low light, and can also obtain reasonably thin depth of field shots like a DSLR much more easily than smaller sensored compacts.

Have a look in the Ricoh forum for more info, I think you'll be impressed.

-- hide signature --

Gravity will make you crazy until you get the hang of it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Eddaweaver
Senior MemberPosts: 2,188
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

The Sony RX100 II or Sony Nex-6.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chris R-UK
Forum ProPosts: 11,449Gear list
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

TimBlom wrote:

Hi

I have plan to buy a new camera before I go to Vienna to vocation. With camera sholud I buy. I will have a camera that is small to have in my pocket but still take great photos. The camera can cost form 200 to 1000 us dollar.

If you ask this question of 20 different people you will probably get 20 different answers.  Mine would be the Sony RX100 (which somebody else has already recommended so perhaps you will get 19 different answers.

My reasons for recommending the Sony RX100 are:

  • It is small
  • It has a reasonable zoom range for a travel camera and for general purpose photography
  • It has got a large sensor which means that it will be good in low light

I think that it is very important that at some stage you go into a camera store and try out a few of the recommendations given to you, especially to get some idea of camera size.

-- hide signature --

Chris R

 Chris R-UK's gear list:Chris R-UK's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EthanP99
Contributing MemberPosts: 876Gear list
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

Another vote for RX100 or RX100M2

 EthanP99's gear list:EthanP99's gear list
Sony RX1R Canon EOS-1Ds Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony SLT-A99 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Red5TX
Senior MemberPosts: 1,567
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to EthanP99, 9 months ago

EthanP99 wrote:

Another vote for RX100 or RX100M2

+1. The Ricoh GR, while excellent, is a fixed lens camera. You need to know what you're getting into when you buy a camera that only shoots 28m equiv.  (And if you don't understand that sentence, you *definitely* shouldn't buy a GR.)

The RX100II (stupid name) should be more than good enough for your needs.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron AKA
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,859Gear list
Like?
Sony RX100 original (not the RX100 II)
In reply to TimBlom, 9 months ago

I would get the Sony RX100, the original version not the II. The original has a better sensor. I would avoid any non zoom camera. Too limiting to take as a single camera.

This said if you go with the RX100 buy it as soon as you can to get some experience using it. It takes a while to use it to the full capability.

 Ron AKA's gear list:Ron AKA's gear list
Sony RX100 Epson Stylus Photo R3000 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to zigi_S, 9 months ago

zigi_S wrote:

Get an eos m. I heard B&H sells the camera with the 22mm pancake lens for 299$. With the rest, buy yourself a nice wide.

Wow, how are they able to sell them so cheap?  That was too good to pass up. I just ordered one simply for very low light scenarios to compliment my Sigma DP Merrill series cameras. Thanks for the heads up.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
afterswish1
Contributing MemberPosts: 606
Like?
Re: Sony RX100 original (not the RX100 II)
In reply to Ron AKA, 9 months ago

I think you can look on the restrictions imposed by the fixed lens of the GR either as a blessing or curse. 28mm is a very good focal length for general use. If ever need a lot of reach you're obviously not going to be that happy, and in that respect any zoom is clearly more flexible, even though to get serious telephoto you'll still need to rely on a big camera.

Ask yourself honestly what kind of situations you're buying the camera for, and how important ultimate image quality is versus convenience. When it comes to image quality, prime lenses are still favoured over zooms, and there's less to go wrong. Zooming with your feet works pretty well in many situations, and the camera also has a 35mm crop mode feature should you desire.

I'm sticking to my recommendation but many people do swear by the RX100 though, so I doubt that would be a bad choice either.

-- hide signature --

Gravity will make you crazy until you get the hang of it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jim King
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,543Gear list
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to Basalite, 9 months ago

The EOS M is a flawed product, and is probably being dumped due to poor market performance.

-- hide signature --

Jim King - Retired Colormonger - Suburban Detroit, Michigan, USA; GMT -4h (EDT)
Pentaxian for over 50 years.
* * * * *
There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey.
- John Ruskin
* * * * *
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
- Sir Winston Churchill
* * * * *
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
- Albert Einstein

 Jim King's gear list:Jim King's gear list
Leica M9 Ricoh GXR S10 24-72mm F2.5-4.4 VC Ricoh GXR Mount A12 Ricoh GXR A16 24-85mm F3.5-5.5 Pentax K-5 IIs +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Eddaweaver
Senior MemberPosts: 2,188
Like?
Re: Sony RX100 original (not the RX100 II)
In reply to Ron AKA, 9 months ago
The original has a better sensor.

How is that?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Eddaweaver
Senior MemberPosts: 2,188
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to Basalite, 9 months ago

Upgrade the firmware. It's the only way the EOS-M can focus at a respectable rate.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron AKA
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,859Gear list
Like?
Re: Sony RX100 original (not the RX100 II)
In reply to Eddaweaver, 9 months ago

Eddaweaver wrote:

The original has a better sensor.

How is that?

The original sensor is a front lit traditional large area sensor. The new RX100 II uses a back lit sensor of the type used in cell phones etc. It does provide more light sensitivity, but the jury is still out on whether or not it provides the same resolution/noise in higher light situations. See this post.

Also the new version is a larger and heavier camera. I have the RX100 and consider it slightly too big/heavy already for pocket use. For that priority the RX100 II is going in the wrong direction. However for those that want to add on all the bells and whistles and forego pocketability the new version is more capable. There is a preliminary comparison at Imaging Resources.

 Ron AKA's gear list:Ron AKA's gear list
Sony RX100 Epson Stylus Photo R3000 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sdribetahi
Contributing MemberPosts: 819
Like?
Re: Sony RX100 original (not the RX100 II)
In reply to Ron AKA, 9 months ago

Ron AKA wrote:

Eddaweaver wrote:

The original has a better sensor.

How is that?

The original sensor is a front lit traditional large area sensor. The new RX100 II uses a back lit sensor of the type used in cell phones etc. It does provide more light sensitivity, but the jury is still out on whether or not it provides the same resolution/noise in higher light situations. See this post.

Also the new version is a larger and heavier camera. I have the RX100 and consider it slightly too big/heavy already for pocket use. For that priority the RX100 II is going in the wrong direction. However for those that want to add on all the bells and whistles and forego pocketability the new version is more capable. There is a preliminary comparison at Imaging Resources.

So the old sensor is better, even though the jury is out?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
zigi_S
Senior MemberPosts: 2,033
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to Jim King, 9 months ago

Well the video I saw where the camera was updated with the newest firmware, the AF didn't look that slow. In the neighbourhood of sony nexes. And the NEXes sell well. But to me the canon eos looks like the best mirrorless solution. Especially when it's gonna be updated with the new dual pixel af.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron AKA
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,859Gear list
Like?
Re: Sony RX100 original (not the RX100 II)
In reply to sdribetahi, 9 months ago

sdribetahi wrote:

Ron AKA wrote:

Eddaweaver wrote:

The original has a better sensor.

How is that?

The original sensor is a front lit traditional large area sensor. The new RX100 II uses a back lit sensor of the type used in cell phones etc. It does provide more light sensitivity, but the jury is still out on whether or not it provides the same resolution/noise in higher light situations. See this post.

Also the new version is a larger and heavier camera. I have the RX100 and consider it slightly too big/heavy already for pocket use. For that priority the RX100 II is going in the wrong direction. However for those that want to add on all the bells and whistles and forego pocketability the new version is more capable. There is a preliminary comparison at Imaging Resources.

So the old sensor is better, even though the jury is out?

That's my opinion. The jury can buy what they like...

 Ron AKA's gear list:Ron AKA's gear list
Sony RX100 Epson Stylus Photo R3000 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EthanP99
Contributing MemberPosts: 876Gear list
Like?
Re: with camera should I buy?
In reply to zigi_S, 9 months ago

dual pixel is hardware, why would buying eos m now matter in getting new hardware later?

 EthanP99's gear list:EthanP99's gear list
Sony RX1R Canon EOS-1Ds Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony SLT-A99 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads