o_23: I would vote for Canon EOS M. It has very intuitive touchscreen. Compact solid magnesium body. Compatible with all Canon lenses. Excellent IQ. Focusing is very accurate and pretty fast after June firmware update. I bought 2 cameras for $399 (kits with flash and 2 lenses). If you subtract prices of kit lenses and flash, the price of a camera is just ridiculous. I also prefer Canon colors, specifically skin tones look much more natural than from other cameras. Though I like Full Frame camera more for better bokeh, but I am tired to carry heavy FF lenses. My backpack is 3 times lighter now.
I bought one for $299 not that long ago. Is it perfect? No, but it is an awfully good camera for that price, and the image quality is excellent.
People like Ben Lowy and Annie Liebowitz are just fine with the iPhone. No, they don't use it for everything, but they use it. Face the fact that it is one more useful tool that can produce real photographs.
The smart phone by the way is not just a point-and-shoot. It is far better. Why? Form factor and apps and connectivity.
rdscibilia: One uses a smartphone because there are certain photos you can only get with a smartphone. Anyone who thinks you cannot make a good photograph with an iPhone not only has been asleep the last few years but is likely to remain asleep. The Revolution is here whether you like it or not. It is not whether the iPhone offers the best absolute quality, it is that you choose the right tool for the circumstances. The reality is that the iPhone can do the job more times than you may think. Do not dismiss this tool to quickly.
As soon as you lift a traditional camera to your eye it changes the whole context of the photograph. That should be obvious to everybody here. I never said that smart phones were the right tool for every photographic circumstance, but for some they are all but essential.
Hello Kitty? See, this is what I mean. Just arrogant ignorance. If you think only really crappy photos are being shot with an iPhone you are truly out of it. I see a lot of threatened, frightened photographers here. And too many guys in love with tech. Good photography is not about tech.
Go on being dismissive, even venomous. I realize you think you are defending quality photography, but in fact you do not understand that a lot of traditional cameras are just obtrusive.
One uses a smartphone because there are certain photos you can only get with a smartphone. Anyone who thinks you cannot make a good photograph with an iPhone not only has been asleep the last few years but is likely to remain asleep. The Revolution is here whether you like it or not. It is not whether the iPhone offers the best absolute quality, it is that you choose the right tool for the circumstances. The reality is that the iPhone can do the job more times than you may think. Do not dismiss this tool to quickly.
rdscibilia: This is better than the EOS M I bought for $299 how exactly?
A lot of palaver here about market value. Tell me how the Nikon DF is worth $3000. Tell me how the Leica is worth its price. What someone is willing to pay does not necessarily reflect the objective realities of quality or even utility. What it reflects is desire,
Well, calking, I own and have used many cameras. I use the best tool for the photography I want to do. For me, honestly, this is the iPhone. You would have to look at the photos I take to understand why. I have written extensively on a professional level about consumer technology, and I have found that there is an overemphasis on specs. I realize that technically the smart phone is not as good as a regular camera, but I also realize that there photos you simply cannot get with the traditional camera that you can get with an iPhone.
I never said it was the best camera available. I do think that $1300 is an excessive price for what you're getting here. "Retro cool" does not justify a $1000 price differential.
I will match my work against yours any time, and by the way I generally use an iPhone. :) You geek types are funny. Photography is not about specs. If you want to pay $1300 for that camera go right ahead. I don't think you know much about the EOS M. Maybe you read a review somewhere. Better image quality?
Name three. Then i will counter.
The focusing system is probably superior, but anything else? The price differential is huge.
This is better than the EOS M I bought for $299 how exactly?
rdscibilia: What about comparing this to the EOS M.
Not that slow--i have one--same size and half the price, with a bigger sensor. I am not saying it is a perfect camera, just that it deserves to be compared with this group of compacts.
Iit's the small APS-C camera I bought for $299--and you didn't.
What about comparing this to the EOS M.
Elaka Farmor: WHY using 1080/60i instead of 60p ?? Because interlaced is superior progresive? So it must be! I learn new things every day.
Compare to EOS M at $299?
It is not about "retro," it is about changing the emotional coloration of the image.
So much anti-mobile snobbery.. Would love to see all the great "real" photography I am being denied.
PC Wheeler: I think the "snapshot" is becoming the province of cell phone cameras. My wife uses hers that way a lot, and only uses a "real camera" (aka dedicated camera) when we're traveling. She also often shoots and then immediately shares the image via email or text message.
I'm older and more of the old school. I most always have a camera and seldom shoot with my iPhone.
He could not be more mistaken. Has he ever looked at the galleries on Instagram?