compact camera with large aperture and sensor?

I need a new compact camera. I mostly take pictures of my kids, travels, etc. I don't need full manual control nor do I need an articulating screen. I do need to get action shots and low light shots. It doesn't matter to me if the camera is big or small. If I need a pocket camera, I can use my phone.

Sounds easy - except I'm not looking to put $800 into this. More like $300. Maybe $400.

I've looked at approx. 1 million specs sheets and reviews and it's all running together in my mom brain.

Some of the ones I jotted down:

Sony a5000

Panasonic LX7

Fujifilm XQ1

samsung wb350f

canon n100

nikon Coolpix p340

Canon S120

Canon G15 or G16

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100

Nikon Coolpix AW130

Fujifilm XQ2

Canon SX710

Canon SX700

Olympus Stylus 1

Wow, those are all over the freaking place. Lets try a methodical approach. Realize that bigger sensor = more dollars. AND bigger sensor = bigger camera. AND most importantly bigger sensor = LESS zoom.

First, determine portability.

Pocketable means a compact camera that its lens retracts and auto-caps. Super convenient to use.

ANY interchangable lens will not be in that category. No matter how tiny the camera, the lens does not retract or autocap. So, you cannot pocket it.

Secondly, determine zoom capability. How much do you need? What I am REALLY asking is "how much are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of zoom"? Zoom isnt "free", so saying "the more zoom the better" is not accurate at all.

This gets you into the right CATEGORY of camera. You can go Enthusiast Compact Zoom, or can go with a smaller superzoom or all-in-one style camera. Or you decide to go with a mirrorless/dslr style. With your budget, Id avoid interchangable lens cameras for now.

Some options for enthusiast compact zoom:

RX100 mark 1 has a big 1 inch sensor but weak 3.7X zoom. Big aperture for low light and background blur. Getting a used one or the older mark 1 is in the budget. its pocketable easily.

Recent competetors are above 500 bucks, so are out.

Lower-end compact zooms are an option. Lumix LF1 has 7.1x zoom and a 1/2 inch sensor or so. A bit bigger than bottom barrel. Decent aperture. Canon S120 is in that category too, as are several others.

In the superzoom category the FZ200 is liked. 26x zoom. tiny sensor but pretty big aperture. A small camera too, for a superzoom.

Stylus 1 and FZ1000 and RX10 are in the all-in-one category. Good amount of zoom plus a bigger sensor. But they are out of the price range, and are large.

I would prefer at least 4x zoom, but I don't need super zoom - rather get clear quality of my kids with enough zoom to not disrupt them when they are playing nicely.

I do NOT want interchangable lens or dslr. Too big, too bulky, too expensive. Only thing I love about shooting with a dslr is how fast it responds.

It doesn't need to be pocket sized - I just don't want to be carrying a gear bag around with me. I want to be able to turn it off and slip it in my bag or whatever.

Joseph Mama said:

Wow, those are all over the freaking place. Lets try a methodical approach. Realize that bigger sensor = more dollars. AND bigger sensor = bigger camera. AND most importantly bigger sensor = LESS zoom.

First, determine portability.

Pocketable means a compact camera that its lens retracts and auto-caps. Super convenient to use.

ANY interchangable lens will not be in that category. No matter how tiny the camera, the lens does not retract or autocap. So, you cannot pocket it.

Secondly, determine zoom capability. How much do you need? What I am REALLY asking is "how much are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of zoom"? Zoom isnt "free", so saying "the more zoom the better" is not accurate at all.

This gets you into the right CATEGORY of camera. You can go Enthusiast Compact Zoom, or can go with a smaller superzoom or all-in-one style camera. Or you decide to go with a mirrorless/dslr style. With your budget, Id avoid interchangable lens cameras for now.

Some options for enthusiast compact zoom:

RX100 mark 1 has a big 1 inch sensor but weak 3.7X zoom. Big aperture for low light and background blur. Getting a used one or the older mark 1 is in the budget. its pocketable easily.

Recent competetors are above 500 bucks, so are out.

Lower-end compact zooms are an option. Lumix LF1 has 7.1x zoom and a 1/2 inch sensor or so. A bit bigger than bottom barrel. Decent aperture. Canon S120 is in that category too, as are several others.

In the superzoom category the FZ200 is liked. 26x zoom. tiny sensor but pretty big aperture. A small camera too, for a superzoom.

Stylus 1 and FZ1000 and RX10 are in the all-in-one category. Good amount of zoom plus a bigger sensor. But they are out of the price range, and are large.

Click to expand...

Joseph Mama said:

Wow, those are all over the freaking place. Lets try a methodical approach. Realize that bigger sensor = more dollars. AND bigger sensor = bigger camera. AND most importantly bigger sensor = LESS zoom.

First, determine portability.

Pocketable means a compact camera that its lens retracts and auto-caps. Super convenient to use.

ANY interchangable lens will not be in that category. No matter how tiny the camera, the lens does not retract or autocap. So, you cannot pocket it.

Secondly, determine zoom capability. How much do you need? What I am REALLY asking is "how much are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of zoom"? Zoom isnt "free", so saying "the more zoom the better" is not accurate at all.

This gets you into the right CATEGORY of camera. You can go Enthusiast Compact Zoom, or can go with a smaller superzoom or all-in-one style camera. Or you decide to go with a mirrorless/dslr style. With your budget, Id avoid interchangable lens cameras for now.

Some options for enthusiast compact zoom:

RX100 mark 1 has a big 1 inch sensor but weak 3.7X zoom. Big aperture for low light and background blur. Getting a used one or the older mark 1 is in the budget. its pocketable easily.

Recent competetors are above 500 bucks, so are out.

Lower-end compact zooms are an option. Lumix LF1 has 7.1x zoom and a 1/2 inch sensor or so. A bit bigger than bottom barrel. Decent aperture. Canon S120 is in that category too, as are several others.

In the superzoom category the FZ200 is liked. 26x zoom. tiny sensor but pretty big aperture. A small camera too, for a superzoom.

Stylus 1 and FZ1000 and RX10 are in the all-in-one category. Good amount of zoom plus a bigger sensor. But they are out of the price range, and are large.

Click to expand...

Very well summarized ...

You need to go into a camera store and try out some of the cameras that Joseph has recommended.

Note that one of the cameras in your original list, the Sony A5000, is an interchangeable lens camera.

Canon SL1 with 50 mm/f1.8 prime lens. "ZOOM" can be accomplished via cropping from a higher image quality.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4966601607/dpreview-gear-of-the-year-canon-rebel-sl1-eos-100d

The SL1 is often found in Canon's direct sales/refurbished department at a reduced cost.

The Fuji X-E1 is also linked to that same article.

soufiej said:

Canon SL1 with 50 mm/f1.8 prime lens. "ZOOM" can be accomplished via cropping from a higher image quality.

Click to expand...

1.) That probably doesn't meet her definition of compact.

2.) An 80mm equivalent lens can't "zoom out" for the often tight quarters of a small room.

trekkeruss said:

soufiej said:

Canon SL1 with 50 mm/f1.8 prime lens. "ZOOM" can be accomplished via cropping from a higher image quality.

Click to expand...

1.) That probably doesn't meet her definition of compact.

2.) An 80mm equivalent lens can't "zoom out" for the often tight quarters of a small room.

Click to expand...

It's a good to great camera - as evidenced by the included comments. The body lens combo is negotiable. There's a 40 mm and a 24 mm if desired. Both are "pancake" style/size. Either, along with the 50 mm, is a "compact" package with better quality all around than most true compacts - plus room to grow if desired. Any zoom lens will have less overall image quality IMO - even Canon's own kit lens.

Why are you arguing for her? Let her look and decide, eh?

soufiej said:

Why are you arguing for her? Let her look and decide, eh?

Click to expand...

She said she doesn't want an DSLR/ILC, so why recommend one? She also doesn't want to spend more than $400. Two or three primes + body isn't anywhere near her budget.

trekkeruss said:

soufiej said:

Why are you arguing for her? Let her look and decide, eh?

Click to expand...

She said she doesn't want an DSLR/ILC, so why recommend one? She also doesn't want to spend more than $400. Two or three primes + body isn't anywhere near her budget.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm not suggesting two or three primes.

DUH!

One prime lens - which one is up to the op - and a compact body. Read the article I linked to my post. The SL1 takes up minimal space in a bag and can be even more portable with a single prime lens.

The op says, "I do NOT want interchangable lens or dslr. Too big, too bulky, too expensive. Only thing I love about shooting with a dslr is how fast it responds.

It doesn't need to be pocket sized - I just don't want to be carrying a gear bag around with me. I want to be able to turn it off and slip it in my bag or whatever."

The very small body of the SL1 is "compact". It is anything but "bulky". The sensor is "big" by compact camera standards. The single prime lens makes for a fast, very nice quality lens with superior optics and with a shallow, lightweight profile. The camera system is fast to respond.

I recently saw the SL1 on Canon's refurbished site for $299 with the kit lens. Here's the current listing; http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/c...-digital-slr-cameras/eos-sl1-body-refurbished

The 50 mm can be had for about $100. The 24 mm for $149. Put the kit lens in a drawer for now if it comes with the deal. I don't care what the op does with it.

Why are you arguing? Let the op look!

Another (inexpensive) choice in lens for the SL1; http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1076531289/yongnuo-creates-canon-ef-35mm-f-2-clone

Thanks for your help everyone!

I think I have it narrowed down to:

canon n100

Canon S120

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 - amazon warehouse

Canon G7x if I can find refurbrished

Thoughts?

jwkjwk said:

Canon S120

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I have owned a Canon S110 and its sensor quickly became contaminated. It's still perfectly usable at wider apertures but not stopped down. Looking around the web I found the Canon S1xx series seems quite prone to the problem.

If you were considering the likes of the Canon S120, I'm curious why you struck the Panasonic LX7 off your list as I think it's an absolute bargain and a much more capable compact camera, even more so with the EVF2 accessory. It's been treated in much the same way as my Panasonic LX2 was, stuffed in pockets, used in dusty, damp, dirty environments and hasn't suffered the same fate as the Canon.

I put some LX7 shots in another thread yesterday ... http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3835853

jwkjwk said:

Thanks for your help everyone!

I think I have it narrowed down to:

canon n100

Canon S120

Click to expand...

They have bright lenses at the wide end, but the sensor is relatively small.

jwkjwk said:

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 - amazon warehouse

Canon G7x if I can find refurbrished

Click to expand...

These two cost more because of the larger sensor. For low light, these are better choices. The Sony has been out for awhile and has proven to be a good camera. The G7X is still new; it should be as good as the Sony.

The G7X will be the best choice. It has the same sensor as the RX100, except a better lens.

It has a 24-100mm range, which matches the RX100 mark 1 and 2. However, its aperture starts at 1.8 at wide end, but only drops to 2.8 at 100mm, vs 4.9 on the rx100.

What this means is that when you zoom in with the rx100, you lose your low light ability and background blur really fast. The G7x will allow you to zoom in and take pictures closeup without getting distortion (big nose, small ears), while maintaining a big aperture.

In other words, you can use it as a good portrait lens as well, at around 80-100mm with decently large aperture and get some background blur.

It also articulates 180 so you can do family pictures and selfies a bit easier.

However the RX100 mark 1 might be quite a bit cheaper.

Id still get the rx100 mark 1 over the Canon S120 and its ilk if you can afford it.