What is the substitution of discontinued 1" 24-70 profi compacts?

DirkPeh said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

Klaus dk said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

I can only answer for myself, but I think enthusiasts will want dedicated cameras with most of the basic controls we know from our ILCs, but in a more compact and lighter package.

My FF system is too large when I'm not "on assignment" (like shooting for others), but when traveling or doing other social activities, I still want more versatility (zoom) and more control (PASM) than I can get from a phone camera.

I think I'm not alone with that wish.

ATM, I'm on the fence whether I want the RX100 VA or the RX100 VII.

Click to expand...

Oh but my point is not if there are advantages or not on smaller dedicated cameras for us. It's that I don't see this resurgence taking place on a relevant volume on the overall market.

Click to expand...

If you mean mainstream non photographers ok, but amongst photographers there is a resurgence. Things do not need to be mainstream to make a company money.

DirkPeh said:

What we have is some survivors, for some different reasons/appeals, and I wonder how such resurgence would take place on a world where smartphones took the bulk of the market and that the general understanding is that there's no need for more than a good smartphone anymore (which I strongly disagree on quite some contexts, by the way).

Click to expand...

They aren’t survivors. The GR series has had like 11 models since the 90s. The X100 series has had 6 models since 2011. They just keep getting more popular.

Click to expand...

Waiting…

If a large Japanese clothing chain, UNIQLO, offers two different t-shirts showcasing the GR, it can’t be that niche… Was really surprised finding these two years ago, I don’t think Ricoh payed for these, but not sure.

Click to expand...

I have both of those shirts, but that doesn’t mean they are mainstream. Bigger in Japan of course… but the camera has a big following for 30+ years. Uniquo makes a lot of t shirts that are weird though. Sometimes they tap into non mainstream stuff.

--
https://www.johngellings.com
Instagram = @johngellings0

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

Well, the Ricoh GR series is sold out, the X100 series (not as pocketable but compact) is sold out… Leica made a new dlux. I think other brands will take notice. Panasonic tried with the S9 too. Small cameras are making a comeback.

Click to expand...

I see them as last survivors or (very) niche staying ones.

Click to expand...

Niche is not bad. Niche cameras have been some of the most important cameras in the history of the medium.

John Gellings said:

Unfortunately. As I was answering Klaus just before, it-s not that I don't see advantages (I do), but just that the overall situation of the market on the last decade shows quite the opposite to a "resurgence". At least a relevant one.

Click to expand...

Because for you relevancy is mainstream users in mass. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a resurgence of small cameras amongst those who are serious about photography.

John Gellings said:

I have the feeling very feel will stay, at a very high price, not relevant on volume and influence on the market. Unfortunately. :-(

Click to expand...

Why is it unfortunate? Obsession with volume as the only metric that matters is short sighted. These are great cameras. A great phone camera is not cheap either. I mean, serious users pay $1500 for a top of the line iPhone. Great gear costs money.

Click to expand...

I guess you guys are much more optimistic than me haha

John Gellings said:

DirkPeh said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

Klaus dk said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

I can only answer for myself, but I think enthusiasts will want dedicated cameras with most of the basic controls we know from our ILCs, but in a more compact and lighter package.

My FF system is too large when I'm not "on assignment" (like shooting for others), but when traveling or doing other social activities, I still want more versatility (zoom) and more control (PASM) than I can get from a phone camera.

I think I'm not alone with that wish.

ATM, I'm on the fence whether I want the RX100 VA or the RX100 VII.

Click to expand...

Oh but my point is not if there are advantages or not on smaller dedicated cameras for us. It's that I don't see this resurgence taking place on a relevant volume on the overall market.

Click to expand...

If you mean mainstream non photographers ok, but amongst photographers there is a resurgence. Things do not need to be mainstream to make a company money.

John Gellings said:

What we have is some survivors, for some different reasons/appeals, and I wonder how such resurgence would take place on a world where smartphones took the bulk of the market and that the general understanding is that there's no need for more than a good smartphone anymore (which I strongly disagree on quite some contexts, by the way).

Click to expand...

They aren’t survivors. The GR series has had like 11 models since the 90s. The X100 series has had 6 models since 2011. They just keep getting more popular.

Click to expand...

Waiting…

If a large Japanese clothing chain, UNIQLO, offers two different t-shirts showcasing the GR, it can’t be that niche… Was really surprised finding these two years ago, I don’t think Ricoh payed for these, but not sure.

Click to expand...

I have both of those shirts, but that doesn’t mean they are mainstream. Bigger in Japan of course… but the camera has a big following for 30+ years. Uniquo makes a lot of t shirts that are weird though. Sometimes they tap into non mainstream stuff.

Click to expand...

True, I kind of like them compared to other large chains. This year they had Daido Moriyama and Saul Leitner among others. BTW it’s UNIQLO, I always have to check this. In German UNIQLO means “Toilet for students”

But back on topic, I think it’s very likely that DJI will disrupt the camera market. They already offer a very capable 1” video-camera that is in high demand for 500,-. It’s rumoured that they enter the market for ICL-cameras. They are part of the L-mount alliance and hold the main stake of Hasselblad. Could shake the entire camera market as much as Sony with mirrorless cameras a decade ago.

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

Well, the Ricoh GR series is sold out, the X100 series (not as pocketable but compact) is sold out… Leica made a new dlux. I think other brands will take notice. Panasonic tried with the S9 too. Small cameras are making a comeback.

Click to expand...

I see them as last survivors or (very) niche staying ones.

Click to expand...

Niche is not bad. Niche cameras have been some of the most important cameras in the history of the medium.

PHAER said:

Unfortunately. As I was answering Klaus just before, it-s not that I don't see advantages (I do), but just that the overall situation of the market on the last decade shows quite the opposite to a "resurgence". At least a relevant one.

Click to expand...

Because for you relevancy is mainstream users in mass. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a resurgence of small cameras amongst those who are serious about photography.

PHAER said:

I have the feeling very feel will stay, at a very high price, not relevant on volume and influence on the market. Unfortunately. :-(

Click to expand...

Why is it unfortunate? Obsession with volume as the only metric that matters is short sighted. These are great cameras. A great phone camera is not cheap either. I mean, serious users pay $1500 for a top of the line iPhone. Great gear costs money.

Click to expand...

I guess you guys are much more optimistic than me haha

Click to expand...

Well, do you really think there won’t be dedicated cameras of all shapes and sizes because they aren’t mainstream? Manufacturers keep pumping out models despite the popularity of cell phones. Why? Because it still makes $.

--
https://www.johngellings.com
Instagram = @johngellings0

Puppy2007 said:

I have Sony A7C as my main camera, but the LX15 comes handy sometimes, especially with the F1.4 at the wide end.

Buying another copies of discontinued cameras makes no sense, as they're out of warranty and possibly post warranty repairs too. I already got it serviced two times (the automatic lens cap broke and cleaning dust inside the lens).

Click to expand...

that's the beauty of 2nd hand cameras bought from a store as they come with a full years warranty at least where i shop in the uk away.

But then again the pen from OM systems is still current or theres the zve-10 from sony with its apsc sensor

DirkPeh said:

John Gellings said:

DirkPeh said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

Klaus dk said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

I can only answer for myself, but I think enthusiasts will want dedicated cameras with most of the basic controls we know from our ILCs, but in a more compact and lighter package.

My FF system is too large when I'm not "on assignment" (like shooting for others), but when traveling or doing other social activities, I still want more versatility (zoom) and more control (PASM) than I can get from a phone camera.

I think I'm not alone with that wish.

ATM, I'm on the fence whether I want the RX100 VA or the RX100 VII.

Click to expand...

Oh but my point is not if there are advantages or not on smaller dedicated cameras for us. It's that I don't see this resurgence taking place on a relevant volume on the overall market.

Click to expand...

If you mean mainstream non photographers ok, but amongst photographers there is a resurgence. Things do not need to be mainstream to make a company money.

DirkPeh said:

What we have is some survivors, for some different reasons/appeals, and I wonder how such resurgence would take place on a world where smartphones took the bulk of the market and that the general understanding is that there's no need for more than a good smartphone anymore (which I strongly disagree on quite some contexts, by the way).

Click to expand...

They aren’t survivors. The GR series has had like 11 models since the 90s. The X100 series has had 6 models since 2011. They just keep getting more popular.

Click to expand...

Waiting…

If a large Japanese clothing chain, UNIQLO, offers two different t-shirts showcasing the GR, it can’t be that niche… Was really surprised finding these two years ago, I don’t think Ricoh payed for these, but not sure.

Click to expand...

I have both of those shirts, but that doesn’t mean they are mainstream. Bigger in Japan of course… but the camera has a big following for 30+ years. Uniquo makes a lot of t shirts that are weird though. Sometimes they tap into non mainstream stuff.

Click to expand...

True, I kind of like them compared to other large chains. This year they had Daido Moriyama and Saul Leitner among others. BTW it’s UNIQLO, I always have to check this. In German UNIQLO means “Toilet for students”

Click to expand...

I knew that and I still made a typo …

--
Instagram = @johngellings0

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

Well, the Ricoh GR series is sold out, the X100 series (not as pocketable but compact) is sold out… Leica made a new dlux. I think other brands will take notice. Panasonic tried with the S9 too. Small cameras are making a comeback.

Click to expand...

I see them as last survivors or (very) niche staying ones.

Click to expand...

Niche is not bad. Niche cameras have been some of the most important cameras in the history of the medium.

John Gellings said:

Unfortunately. As I was answering Klaus just before, it-s not that I don't see advantages (I do), but just that the overall situation of the market on the last decade shows quite the opposite to a "resurgence". At least a relevant one.

Click to expand...

Because for you relevancy is mainstream users in mass. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a resurgence of small cameras amongst those who are serious about photography.

John Gellings said:

I have the feeling very feel will stay, at a very high price, not relevant on volume and influence on the market. Unfortunately. :-(

Click to expand...

Why is it unfortunate? Obsession with volume as the only metric that matters is short sighted. These are great cameras. A great phone camera is not cheap either. I mean, serious users pay $1500 for a top of the line iPhone. Great gear costs money.

Click to expand...

I guess you guys are much more optimistic than me haha

Click to expand...

Well, do you really think there won’t be dedicated cameras of all shapes and sizes because they aren’t mainstream? Manufacturers keep pumping out models despite the popularity of cell phones. Why? Because it still makes $.

Click to expand...

There's no pumping of new models compared to what that exact category was. Reality is that nowadays there is just a very little fraction of it, which plenty of info, charts and figures proving that.

You can argue that the the higher slice of the market (higher end and higher price) was also smaller than the mainstream before, which is true. But my point is: if you can't pay for the higher slice, you no longer had options as before. As consumer, I disagree that having less options/competition is good.

The ones that can pay much more? Yes, they had very few problem with market changes, no disagree on that.

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

Well, the Ricoh GR series is sold out, the X100 series (not as pocketable but compact) is sold out… Leica made a new dlux. I think other brands will take notice. Panasonic tried with the S9 too. Small cameras are making a comeback.

Click to expand...

I see them as last survivors or (very) niche staying ones.

Click to expand...

Niche is not bad. Niche cameras have been some of the most important cameras in the history of the medium.

PHAER said:

Unfortunately. As I was answering Klaus just before, it-s not that I don't see advantages (I do), but just that the overall situation of the market on the last decade shows quite the opposite to a "resurgence". At least a relevant one.

Click to expand...

Because for you relevancy is mainstream users in mass. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a resurgence of small cameras amongst those who are serious about photography.

PHAER said:

I have the feeling very feel will stay, at a very high price, not relevant on volume and influence on the market. Unfortunately. :-(

Click to expand...

Why is it unfortunate? Obsession with volume as the only metric that matters is short sighted. These are great cameras. A great phone camera is not cheap either. I mean, serious users pay $1500 for a top of the line iPhone. Great gear costs money.

Click to expand...

I guess you guys are much more optimistic than me haha

Click to expand...

Well, do you really think there won’t be dedicated cameras of all shapes and sizes because they aren’t mainstream? Manufacturers keep pumping out models despite the popularity of cell phones. Why? Because it still makes $.

Click to expand...

There's no pumping of new models compared to what that exact category was.

Click to expand...

If no new sensor is made, they can exactly do anything new. The latest Sony exists and is basically the best example of that type of camera.

PHAER said:

Reality is that nowadays there is just a very little fraction of it, which plenty of info, charts and figures proving that.

Click to expand...

Fraction of what? Look at how many new cameras came out in recent years. Flagships for every brand. They just aren’t making cameras with small sensors because there hasn’t been a new sensor in years.

PHAER said:

You can argue that the the higher slice of the market (higher end and higher price) was also smaller than the mainstream before, which is true. But my point is: if you can't pay for the higher slice, you no longer had options as before.

Click to expand...

You have used options and there are still dirt cheap mirrorless cameras out there. Phones are more expensive too.

PHAER said:

As consumer, I disagree that having less options/competition is good.

Click to expand...

Again, look at how many new cameras came out in recent years by all manufacturers.

PHAER said:

The ones that can pay much more? Yes, they had very few problem with market changes, no disagree on that.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/11117239@N08/

Click to expand...

--
https://www.johngellings.com
Instagram = @johngellings0

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

Well, the Ricoh GR series is sold out, the X100 series (not as pocketable but compact) is sold out… Leica made a new dlux. I think other brands will take notice. Panasonic tried with the S9 too. Small cameras are making a comeback.

Click to expand...

I see them as last survivors or (very) niche staying ones.

Click to expand...

Niche is not bad. Niche cameras have been some of the most important cameras in the history of the medium.

John Gellings said:

Unfortunately. As I was answering Klaus just before, it-s not that I don't see advantages (I do), but just that the overall situation of the market on the last decade shows quite the opposite to a "resurgence". At least a relevant one.

Click to expand...

Because for you relevancy is mainstream users in mass. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a resurgence of small cameras amongst those who are serious about photography.

John Gellings said:

I have the feeling very feel will stay, at a very high price, not relevant on volume and influence on the market. Unfortunately. :-(

Click to expand...

Why is it unfortunate? Obsession with volume as the only metric that matters is short sighted. These are great cameras. A great phone camera is not cheap either. I mean, serious users pay $1500 for a top of the line iPhone. Great gear costs money.

Click to expand...

I guess you guys are much more optimistic than me haha

Click to expand...

Well, do you really think there won’t be dedicated cameras of all shapes and sizes because they aren’t mainstream? Manufacturers keep pumping out models despite the popularity of cell phones. Why? Because it still makes $.

Click to expand...

There's no pumping of new models compared to what that exact category was.

Click to expand...

If no new sensor is made, they can exactly do anything new. The latest Sony exists and is basically the best example of that type of camera.

John Gellings said:

Reality is that nowadays there is just a very little fraction of it, which plenty of info, charts and figures proving that.

Click to expand...

Fraction of what? Look at how many new cameras came out in recent years. Flagships for every brand. They just aren’t making cameras with small sensors because there hasn’t been a new sensor in years.

John Gellings said:

You can argue that the the higher slice of the market (higher end and higher price) was also smaller than the mainstream before, which is true. But my point is: if you can't pay for the higher slice, you no longer had options as before.

Click to expand...

You have used options and there are still dirt cheap mirrorless cameras out there. Phones are more expensive too.

John Gellings said:

As consumer, I disagree that having less options/competition is good.

Click to expand...

Again, look at how many new cameras came out in recent years by all manufacturers.

John Gellings said:

The ones that can pay much more? Yes, they had very few problem with market changes, no disagree on that.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I'm ok with such different view on how the changes (or not really changes) are taking place, but I really don't understand how you can point at "look at how many cameras came out in recent years" when the figures show the opposite!

https://www.dpreview.com/products/c...w.dpreview.com/products/cameras/all?view=list

Just have a look on how the number and the types of cameras released has only decreased dramatically on the last decade. The word "pump" pushes to something very different than that.

Makes all the sense, if you want to keep having them.

If you like so much the LX, buy more and keep use them, if not, you have your A7C and your phone.

You were unlucky or careless ( lens cap, dust) but this type of camera it's usually resilient and will work for years and years.

I believe It will pay off ( generally speaking) and you be able to recoup that investment even if you take it as a "crazy" thing to do.

So, no downsides.

By the way, wonderful photos you have on your website!!

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

PHAER said:

John Gellings said:

I’d say the RX100 MK3 would probably be ok used. In the coming years I think we will see a resurgence of small high quality cameras. They will not be cheap though.

Click to expand...

You mean pocket cameras? May I ask why you think that?

Click to expand...

Well, the Ricoh GR series is sold out, the X100 series (not as pocketable but compact) is sold out… Leica made a new dlux. I think other brands will take notice. Panasonic tried with the S9 too. Small cameras are making a comeback.

Click to expand...

I see them as last survivors or (very) niche staying ones.

Click to expand...

Niche is not bad. Niche cameras have been some of the most important cameras in the history of the medium.

PHAER said:

Unfortunately. As I was answering Klaus just before, it-s not that I don't see advantages (I do), but just that the overall situation of the market on the last decade shows quite the opposite to a "resurgence". At least a relevant one.

Click to expand...

Because for you relevancy is mainstream users in mass. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a resurgence of small cameras amongst those who are serious about photography.

PHAER said:

I have the feeling very feel will stay, at a very high price, not relevant on volume and influence on the market. Unfortunately. :-(

Click to expand...

Why is it unfortunate? Obsession with volume as the only metric that matters is short sighted. These are great cameras. A great phone camera is not cheap either. I mean, serious users pay $1500 for a top of the line iPhone. Great gear costs money.

Click to expand...

I guess you guys are much more optimistic than me haha

Click to expand...

Well, do you really think there won’t be dedicated cameras of all shapes and sizes because they aren’t mainstream? Manufacturers keep pumping out models despite the popularity of cell phones. Why? Because it still makes $.

Click to expand...

There's no pumping of new models compared to what that exact category was.

Click to expand...

If no new sensor is made, they can exactly do anything new. The latest Sony exists and is basically the best example of that type of camera.

PHAER said:

Reality is that nowadays there is just a very little fraction of it, which plenty of info, charts and figures proving that.

Click to expand...

Fraction of what? Look at how many new cameras came out in recent years. Flagships for every brand. They just aren’t making cameras with small sensors because there hasn’t been a new sensor in years.

PHAER said:

You can argue that the the higher slice of the market (higher end and higher price) was also smaller than the mainstream before, which is true. But my point is: if you can't pay for the higher slice, you no longer had options as before.

Click to expand...

You have used options and there are still dirt cheap mirrorless cameras out there. Phones are more expensive too.

PHAER said:

As consumer, I disagree that having less options/competition is good.

Click to expand...

Again, look at how many new cameras came out in recent years by all manufacturers.

PHAER said:

The ones that can pay much more? Yes, they had very few problem with market changes, no disagree on that.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I'm ok with such different view on how the changes (or not really changes) are taking place, but I really don't understand how you can point at "look at how many cameras came out in recent years" when the figures show the opposite!

Click to expand...

Because I’m talking quality not quantity. We’ve lost a lot of cheap and boring cameras, but we’ve gained a lot of really nice cameras. The problem is they all cost a lot. That’s true. As with everything these days, we are not going back to 2015 prices.

PHAER said:

https://www.dpreview.com/products/c...w.dpreview.com/products/cameras/all?view=list

Just have a look on how the number and the types of cameras released has only decreased dramatically on the last decade.

Click to expand...

Yet they are amongst the nicest cameras ever made.

PHAER said:

The word "pump" pushes to something very different than that.

Click to expand...

True that was hyperbole, but I stand by my point that a lot of great cameras have been released in recent times. They just aren’t cheap and there just aren’t as many low end choices.

PHAER said:

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/11117239@N08/

Click to expand...

--
https://www.johngellings.com
Instagram = @johngellings0

PHAER said:

By the way, wonderful photos you have on your website!!

Click to expand...

Thank you very much.

The Panasonic G100 comes with an excellent compact 12-32 lens -- 24-64 equivalent -- for around $550 last time I looked. For a little extra reach add the collapsible 35-100 for a very flexible compact kit.

A little larger than the 1-inch jobs, but takes all m43 lenses. Very versatile little camera.

Gato

John Gellings said:

True that was hyperbole, but I stand by my point that a lot of great cameras have been released in recent times. They just aren’t cheap and there just aren’t as many low end choices.

Click to expand...

The problem is just that, a lot of great cameras are being made, great cameras as in big cameras, cumbersome cameras, not practical cameras to be used every day or on grab and go status, you don't need a FF or APSC to shoot everything, everywhere, every time.

And even if you opt for more compact setup like a pancake lens or a 35mm or a 50 mm, what's the point then? You are limiting yourself to the type of shots you can take .

Smaller sensors offers much more versatility for every day use and for much more situations than a current camera could

Just in other day i missed a shot with a 100mm lens, cause i didn't want to enter in digital zoom territory, so, i "zoom in" with my feet to frame the shot but doing so i lost the angle to catch the light the way i first saw it , if i had my compact with me like i usually do, i only had to zoom in properly not with my feet, no way i'm going to use my 100-400mm lens as i use my compacts.

It's just not being expensive but they lack versatility, and let's be honest, on top of that, they aren't as "disposable" as more compact cameras are.

Or are you willing to risk damaging or your equipment being stolen ( phone included) in a casual shooting, this factor alone will only limit yourself to take with you your camera as often as you could .

In the past 2 weeks i have a camera with me every day even if my life, lately, is just work to home and home to work, i'm not doing that with an APS-C or FF, specially if it's an expensive setup.

Personally i only use the bigger sensors when i want to shoot a specific thing or i reserve a morning or afternoon to shoot with them or if i'm in a new place to me.

lomoapontaechuta said:

lomoapontaechuta said:

True that was hyperbole, but I stand by my point that a lot of great cameras have been released in recent times. They just aren’t cheap and there just aren’t as many low end choices.

Click to expand...

The problem is just that, a lot of great cameras are being made, great cameras as in big cameras, cumbersome cameras, not practical cameras to be used every day or on grab and go status, you don't need a FF or APSC to shoot everything, everywhere, every time.

And even if you opt for more compact setup like a pancake lens or a 35mm or a 50 mm, what's the point then? You are limiting yourself to the type of shots you can take .

Smaller sensors offers much more versatility for every day use and for much more situations than a current camera could

Click to expand...

I get it, but the Sony RX series still exists.

lomoapontaechuta said:

Just in other day i missed a shot with a 100mm lens, cause i didn't want to enter in digital zoom territory, so, i "zoom in" with my feet to frame the shot but doing so i lost the angle to catch the light the way i first saw it , if i had my compact with me like i usually do, i only had to zoom in properly not with my feet, no way i'm going to use my 100-400mm lens as i use my compacts.

Click to expand...

Thats great and all, but if you really need that type of reach, use proper equipment.

lomoapontaechuta said:

It's just not being expensive but they lack versatility, and let's be honest, on top of that, they aren't as "disposable" as more compact cameras are.

Click to expand...

You are talking to the wrong guy. I basically use lenses between 40-85mm only, so the industry is looking fine to me. But if you want a pocket camera with a super zoom, sure you’ll be disappointed.

lomoapontaechuta said:

Or are you willing to risk damaging or your equipment being stolen ( phone included) in a casual shooting, this factor alone will only limit yourself to take with you your camera as often as you could .

Click to expand...

Yes, photography is important to me, so I risk actually using my cameras. I have my Ricoh GR3x if I want to go small and then I use FF and medium format digital cameras. Life is too short and photography too awesome to be scared all the time.

lomoapontaechuta said:

In the past 2 weeks i have a camera with me every day even if my life, lately, is just work to home and home to work, i'm not doing that with an APS-C or FF, specially if it's an expensive setup

Click to expand...

Fear is a horrible thing…

lomoapontaechuta said:

Personally i only use the bigger sensors when i want to shoot a specific thing or i reserve a morning or afternoon to shoot with them or if i'm in a new place to me.

Click to expand...

That’s your personal philosophy and not a rule.

There is a theme that recurs regularly on the forums here, that the equipment is so valuable or precious that the photographer has serious concerns about going out into the wide world with it.

This is a self-imposed problem. I had a look along my equipment shelf and the most expensive camera presently there cost me about £150. I am therefore fairly relaxed about taking it out of the house. This is not to say I am careless - I take care of my kit as I want it to last as long as required.

John Gellings said:

lomoapontaechuta said:

John Gellings said:

True that was hyperbole, but I stand by my point that a lot of great cameras have been released in recent times. They just aren’t cheap and there just aren’t as many low end choices.

Click to expand...

The problem is just that, a lot of great cameras are being made, great cameras as in big cameras, cumbersome cameras, not practical cameras to be used every day or on grab and go status, you don't need a FF or APSC to shoot everything, everywhere, every time.

And even if you opt for more compact setup like a pancake lens or a 35mm or a 50 mm, what's the point then? You are limiting yourself to the type of shots you can take .

Smaller sensors offers much more versatility for every day use and for much more situations than a current camera could

Click to expand...

I get it, but the Sony RX series still exists.

Click to expand...

As other series, i use the HX over RX ( mainly for the RX lack of reach ), TZs, Nikon A's and others.

John Gellings said:

John Gellings said:

Just in other day i missed a shot with a 100mm lens, cause i didn't want to enter in digital zoom territory, so, i "zoom in" with my feet to frame the shot but doing so i lost the angle to catch the light the way i first saw it , if i had my compact with me like i usually do, i only had to zoom in properly not with my feet, no way i'm going to use my 100-400mm lens as i use my compacts.

Click to expand...

Thats great and all, but if you really need that type of reach, use proper equipment.

Click to expand...

I normally do, but that time, it was just a quick walk the dog, so i only took a camera... and regretted

John Gellings said:

John Gellings said:

It's just not being expensive but they lack versatility, and let's be honest, on top of that, they aren't as "disposable" as more compact cameras are.

Click to expand...

You are talking to the wrong guy. I basically use lenses between 40-85mm only, so the industry is looking fine to me. But if you want a pocket camera with a super zoom, sure you’ll be disappointed.

Click to expand...

we are clearly in opposite sides of the spectrum.

John Gellings said:

John Gellings said:

Or are you willing to risk damaging or your equipment being stolen ( phone included) in a casual shooting, this factor alone will only limit yourself to take with you your camera as often as you could .

Click to expand...

Yes, photography is important to me, so I risk actually using my cameras. I have my Ricoh GR3x if I want to go small and then I use FF and medium format digital cameras. Life is too short and photography too awesome to be scared all the time.

Click to expand...

I normally use a 24-720mm. 140mm,180mm or a 100-400 mm for APS-C and FF...

John Gellings said:

John Gellings said:

In the past 2 weeks i have a camera with me every day even if my life, lately, is just work to home and home to work, i'm not doing that with an APS-C or FF, specially if it's an expensive setup

Click to expand...

Fear is a horrible thing…

Click to expand...

it's not just for fear i don't use them as often, but yes, i can't replace them as easy or as often as my compacts

John Gellings said:

John Gellings said:

Personally i only use the bigger sensors when i want to shoot a specific thing or i reserve a morning or afternoon to shoot with them or if i'm in a new place to me.

Click to expand...

That’s your personal philosophy and not a rule.

Click to expand...

It's the same as yours, and probably the same as the majority of other people, apparently, with this conversation, the only thing we may differ is in our favourite focal range

Brian Chichester said:

There is a theme that recurs regularly on the forums here, that the equipment is so valuable or precious that the photographer has serious concerns about going out into the wide world with it.

This is a self-imposed problem. I had a look along my equipment shelf and the most expensive camera presently there cost me about £150. I am therefore fairly relaxed about taking it out of the house. This is not to say I am careless - I take care of my kit as I want it to last as long as required.

Click to expand...

Gear it's expensive, but it's not just for being expensive or not, protecting your gear, taking care of your gear, you are protecting the output of your creativity, your perspective.

The "tools" may not be equal even in the same series, updates can literally make it or break it , changes in image processing, colour rendering, colour pallet, in some cases, lenses ( fixed lens cams), in some cases you can be close with what you had, in other cases it will be harder...either way it will be slowing down the workflow and the fun

Gear it's just a "tool", this is an excuse often given by the pros. The last one i saw was quite recently .

His cam had worn down corners, no letters in the buttons, cracked evf glass, his beaten up sigma 150-600mm had duck tape on top of the focus ring because the screws inside the barrel were loose.

If it works, it works, but... i mean, for some reason he still hangs on to it ( as other pros do ) at this point i can argue he's ( as others) protecting something more than a "tool", probably more in the lines he's "protecting" something meaningful to him.

I'm just a hobbyist in an expensive hobby, you bet i'll protect my gear the best i can, i'm coming from from a lesson that i learned the hard way (sadly).

this is the typical case of do what i tell you to do not what i do.

The pros downplay their gear a lot, it's just a tool but then they use it until the "wheels" come off and in some cases pass that point.

yeah, tools...right. If they are only tools why they hang on to them the way they do?