Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras

Thanks !

although I get your point, I doubt you'd settle for a bad camera just because it has a cover - otherwise you wouldn't even be reading this section. an elegant solution for you, are those add-on auto-retractable covers.

Thanks for the replies and tips. Camera arrived and I am anxious to play with it, but I have too much work to do. I hope to find some time during the week to cuddle up with the manual and read it before even turning the camera on.

And the G1X is known for being quite sluggish and for having poor macro capabilities.

It is strange the G1X wasn't included in the comparison (too big? too expensive? you tell me) but according to the reviews it's poor AF speed is a big draw back.

Thanks, Tord, I really appreciate your advice. My spine is my primary problem and an eyelevel view finder is not as valuable to me as an articulated screen.

I think Panny was running a special on the LX7 in the US for $299. But it wasn't clear how long the special would last until it expired the other day. I saw B&H advertising it at $299 while Amazon has it at regular $449, so I went to B&H and bought it immediately. The price went back to $449 on B&H's site literally that evening. Maybe they still have it at $299 at the store, call them up!

While I was at B&H, I did spend the time to check out most of the cameras above, plus Nikon V1, which is not much bigger w/ the 10mm lens. Nikon is giving it away at $299 w/ 1 lens, $399 w/2, plus $149 for an additional lens with purchase. The Panny GX1 is $449! I bought the LX7 because of the deal and I don't want to deal with changing lens. It's meant for quick snapshots. I like to have additional control over it, but not too much. It's NOT meant to 'replace' my DSLR. I like the RX100, but extra $ can be used for a decent prime. In a year, there will be another test like this one! :)

Lab tests are one thing, but what are the challenges that you run into in real life? Yesterday I was filming my little daughter's Christmas show, and a camera I was using was constantly hunting to focus and the pictures came out pretty bad (noisy). When the going gets tough, which of these cameras will deliver? I suspect that sensor size will trump all, as they all have relatively fast lenses in this roundup.

There's also another option you can consider: just spending the extra money on an underwater camera. That's what I did, for a Pana TS3 (although, when not shooting underwater, I'm not impressed with DPR's award winning underwater camera).

The travel zooms are nice cameras for, well, travel.

I have a Canon SX30HS, and while the Nikon 7700 will surely beat it pixel peeping at equivalent focal lengths, the 480mm equivalent gets a lot of shots that I would not get even with 200mm equivalent, such as flowers on balconies, details of ornaments on buildings, etc. Also, at 8x10, I bet there is no difference in the prints between the two cameras. There probably is at 13x19, but I rarely print that size.

I thought the travel zooms were crap, but there is a place for them. The Canons, Panasonics, etc. fit in my pocket without a problem. Just a thought.

I love the fact that I can put a screw-on filter on the P7700 right out of the box. I've hardly used the lens cap since I got the camera; it's always ready to shoot.
You'd think every manufacturer would want to do this -- it isn't magic.

@Kodachrome200 I didn't check, but maybe you have to like them on Facebook to get the deal? That's how it used to be, anyway.

$499 here to... Show me $299 amd I'll buy it now...

Guys, again, I didn't check, because I'm not buying the LX-7, but to get the special prices from Panasonic in the past, you had to like Panasonic on Facebook, then go to the Panasonic Facebook page and click "Fans-only deals" or "Friends-only deals" (something like that), at which point you saw the special deals. I'm not saying it still works that way, but it did when I was shopping for a GH2 and FX150 . Maybe OP is full of it with this price, I don't know.

Nowadays, my choice would (indeed is) a mirrorless camera. They have become so tiny that they are as convenient as a compact. If I had to pick one, it would be the Olympus XZ2, but an E-Pm2 isn't that much bigger when used with a pancake lens.. You can even put a 28-84mm power zoom pancake on it ! Or the 15mm body lens cap.

There is no clear winner regarding IQ between compact and mirrorless.
I currently compare a Nikon V1 and an XZ-1 and the former really struggles... Indoors - where you need lots of DOF - bright compacts can be excellent.
But then there are those superb mFT lenses...
One of my priorities is size and weight and an XZ-1/2 offers excellent versatility in a small and light package.

Same zoom range but with a much larger sensor, 2/3", is the Fuji X-S1.

Looking at the images on the web the FZ200 consistently outperforms the XSi due to having a better (brighter and sharper) lens nullifying the sensor size difference.

@Doughbm2: where did you get that information? both have a f2.8 on the wide end. contrary to popular belief, the pana is not f2.8 throughout - leaving out the tele number is just misleading advertising. it's maximum opening is f2.8... and as you go tele, that becomes a smaller proportion of total length, hence the number increases and aperture regresses - it's a mathematical equation - you can't circumvent that.

This is a very useful review, but I would like to see a section on viewfinders. In Australia or anywhere there is harsh light, a viewfinder is an important consideration. They can also be useful at performances where a bright screen might be distracting.

My VF2 viewfinder was originally purchased for $200 to fit an m43 camera, but I can also use it on my XZ-1, and presumably on the XZ-2 as well, so the cost is amortised over a longer period. Something to consider.

ROTFL - ever tried using your cellphone inthe sun? ;-p

Even with a G12 viewfinder available, I found it OK to just cup my free hand over the articulated screen in bright light. Only once in 2 years did I find it too bright and that was a Central Otago (NZ) blue-dome high noon that was making my skin prickle.
The other use of a view-finder was when I was trying to get pix of my grandson. The only way was to put the camera on 'motor drive' and follow him in the viewfinder. No camera's digital screen can keep up with a 4-year-old.

Because you wrote that it is only 6MP. that is pretty much night scene. EXR isn't just all about night scene.

I confess that I haven't tried the EX2F. I think my point was more to give attention to good lenses and sensor size.

I do think though, that not pitting the S110 against the others because it's a bit smaller, is really splitting hairs on camera size.

Plus, I think that you may be going about things the wrong way. In the vast "compact" category, it may be more pertinent to split the categories along sensor size, instead of body size. This has two advantages: it educates the general public, beginners, about the importance of a good sensor, and placing it more in the forefront tells manufacturers to up their game instead of complacency and withholding progress. If a compact camera has a bigger sensor, brighter lens, and gives you all the manual controls of a larger camera, why would the unnecessarily large one be sheltered from comparison with it?

They actually talk about it on this very website. 2 of the EXR modes are 6mp, one of the EXR modes is 12MP. But the way it was written in the conclusion of this roundup, suggests (to those who didn't weed through the original X10 review - which is most of us), that EXR does _only_ 6MP. Just seems a little biased.

I did not understand you complaint till your last comment. When you talk about EXR, you refer to the sensor name, while in this review it appeared quite clearly to me DPR was talking about EXR modes. Beside it's in the spec sheet that the sensor can deliver 12mp images.

It makes far more sense to split categories by body size over sensor size.
1st of all, sensor size, actually says nothing about image quality. How many pixels have they fitted, how tightly have they fitted them, what is the individual sixe of each pixel, and the sensor actually nay good at all. And then we have the optics, that could easily ruin a great big sensor.

2ndly, this is a review of "pro"-compacts, those are often used as complements to better cameras, and then size is often a prioroty, otherwise people would just bring the better camera they have.
or people are checking this out, cause they've understood that their mobiles dont give them much of low light performance, and thus are willing to invest in a pro compact to complement the mobile, and therefore want something they can pocket.

Sure, one can find size out for themselves, but there are thousands of cameras in DPs database, and really no way to filter out the best current pocketable ones for "pro" use.

I don't think it's a matter of what camera is 'best' as I'm sure a lot of people choose a camera based on features. While the RX100 may have the best IQ, for my second camera I would like the 200 mm range, an articulated LCD and macro of at least 2cm. I carry two cameras so they compliment each other. This would let me shoot fast and without lens change from 15 -200mm. I now have a Canon G12 and have never used the optical viewfinder, so that's a non issue for me. Others find it essential.

Thanks guys for your responses. The thing is I want a small and capable camera as a second, carry-everywhere, leave-it-mostly-at-Auto care-free point-and-shooter. I have a DSLR for when I try to be an enthusiast amateur. Right now my second small camera is a Panasonic TZ-5 which I REALLY like but carrying it with me for some years in my sports etc, it has gathered many dings and a partially black LCD, but otherwise it works brilliantly. So I'm thinking about giving the poor thing some rest as I don't want it to die. I feel the Q with its interchangeable lenses might not be quite robust for where I want to take it. So, for now I'm between the RX100 and the LX7. It's not urgent though, come spring I'll decide and choose.

The Q has a tiny sensor! Don't expect too much from it. More like a toy interchangeable lens camera. If you're on a photography site like this, it is because you are a little more discriminating than what is offered in the cheap 1/2.3" sensor sizes.

Precisely, if you provided full reviews of these cameras as DPReview did in the past, your excuse about space limitation in today's world of web pages is a rather weak response.
I may consider mutiple off camera flash is more important than others but that does not give a reviewr an excuse to not cover it.
As a reviewer give the facts, all the facts, we can then decide.
-
Your defensive posture to my sincerely given remarks to this article is a bit of a shock to me in what it reveals.
-
Stick to full proper reviews.