How would you rate Compact System Cameras for portable photography?

Question

How would you rate Compact System Cameras for portable photography?

Answer 1

Well, you can easily find compact cameras with more than 4mp now. You should probably go for 7mp or higher. Remember that you want something to serve you in the long run. I recommend that you pay attention to the file formats in which the camera can save your pictures before you buy one, and prefer the ones that can save in raw format. That's an uncompressed format that will keep the image's quality top notch, unlike the jpeg. The ISO is the equivalent to the sensivity of an analogic film. In digital cameras it means you can select the ISO that works better for what you want, the same way you'd choose a film with a particular ISO for photographing in a particular situation, according to its luminosity. For example, a lower ISO, let's say of 100, will serve you just fine for outdoor situations with lots of light because it's a less sensitive film that takes up more light, meaning that you can have longer exposures hence increasing the amount of gray tones in your photograph. On the other hand, if you want to take a photograph in a darker place, you need a higher ISO (400 or upwards to 1600, for example, depending on how dark it is), meaning you have more sensitivity to light, meaning you don't need so much light to "burn" the film. I'd go with a camera with an ISO potion if I were you. The less limitations, the better. As for the Noise, I'm not sure, but it might be some sort of grain simulation, or just a control tool to reduce the amount of defects on your images. I can't really recommend you a specific compact camera because there're so many and new ones coming out all the time. To some research on the web and see which cameras have the better price-quality ratio. A friend of mine said he could find better quality cameras for lower prices online than on any store he went to. Good luck.

Answer 2

The Sony rx100 is more expensive (around $650) than some DSLRs, but from what I hear it takes amazing pictures. Most pros that I know consider it to be the best compact on the market. The lens can open up to f/1.8!

Answer 3

I've gone back to the bridge camera from DSLR once before, and it may well happen again. It changed my whole attitude to taking photos from potential chore to a pleasure and a willingness to work with the camera to get the result.



There comes a time when you don't want to be carrying as lot of junk around and compact system cameras still have that junk element only smaller. The absolutely essential thing is to have a viewfinder and a manually zoomable lens that will take a ND filter or Polarizer and the Fuji s9600 filled just that slot for me for several years. I'd take a look at what they're offering today.



Now a more 'logical' person might say I can do filters in RAW or Photoshop CS, so what I really need is a Canon G1X

http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g1x

Answer 4

I disagree with the others above. Sometimes size matters, but you still want quality. For my lighter travel I have an Olympus EPL3 with 14-42mm kit lens plus 40-150mm lens, plus FL36R flash, that fit in a Lowepro Aventura 140 case. Leave out the flash and the telephoto, and it could fit in a Rezo 60 case.

You should consider the Olympus E-PL5.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_PEN_E-PL5/



BTW, both of those cases come with very flimsy shoulder straps. I have added a better Op/Tech strap to the case. Also an Op/Tech wrist strap to the camera.



The lightness of the CSC can carry over to other accessories. The 40-150mm M. Zuiko is light enough that it doesn't sag as I'm locking down my Manfrotto 494RC2 ballhead. With a Nikon D90 with a heavier 18-200mm or 55-300mm on it the lighter head is harder to adjust, and I want something like my 804RC three way head to work with it.

My Promaster T525P 5-section carbon legset with 494RC head weighs 1357g, and it fits in the detachable daypack of my Eagle Creek pack.

That legset with 804RC2 head weighs 1783g and goes in the extra medium size pack I bring when traveling heavier.

Answer 5

It would be a waist of money. You would not be happy.

I got a little camera as a back up and I hated it. There is no features and stuff.

The picture quality is different too. You will not like it.

Once you go to a DSLR you will never want to go back.

I used that little camera for about 10min and I was really unhappy.

If you are set on getting a little camera get a Nikon Coolpix A.

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/coolpix/a/a/



For a little camera it is great. If you want a little camera get that.

It does have a huge price tag though.

Answer 6

Waste of money. If you want something just to carry around, I'd get a bridge camera.

The Nikon 1 lacks a viewfinder that you can look through. I have small hands and found it uncomfortable to hold.

Fujifilm Finepix has some nice bridge cameras at a reasonable cost.

Answer 7

Im saying the sam thing as the others, its a waste of freaking money even if you buy one from a pawn shop (second hand store.) I thought that it would be a cool idea to keep a small camera in my pocket in case i didnt have my dslr. the very few times that I kept it in my pocket (because its kinda uncomfortable) I didnt really use it, the times i did have to use it just made more work for me fixing that crap in photoshop.



I dont know to much about the nikon 1 whatever. but thats still kinda pointless cuz its still big and expensive enough to were you'd probably want a case and that makes it more annoying, unless you just plan to leave it in your car then go for it.

But honestly I dont think itll be much use, based on my personal experience.



and besides if you want a portable camera, get a cell phone with a better than average camera, my HTC One has a better camera than most point and shoots that ive used.

Answer 8

I have a Nikon V1 along with a Nikon D7100 DSLR. The V1 is my backup camera.



The Nikon 1 cameras are actually good cameras, and even with a smaller sensor, they are rated in DxOMark about in the middle of the M4/3 cameras. And they autofocus a lot faster than M4/3 and compact cameras as they use a hybrid contrast/phase detect (DSLRs use phase detect, but virtually all M4/3 and compact cameras use the slower contrast detect).



And the Nikon 1s have a very low shutter delay - faster than even most entry level DSLRs. The most ardent critics of the Nikon 1 cameras are those that have not even used one - it's just biased opinion without having the facts.



The MSRP price is way too high though on the Nikon 1s. I'd only buy one if I could get them for the discount you mentioned. I would not recommend them at the MSRP.



The V1 comes in handy when I want to take photos but not lug my DSLR. I take both on cruises - or I will as I just bought the D7100 (replacing my D90 which has been on 7~8 cruises).



The Nikon 1 is a good compromise between a DSLR and compact camera. There are those that do not like the Nikon 1s, but I like them. But I would be the first one to say they are overpriced at retail. I bought my V1 on discount last Dec for $299.



But you can buy J1 and V1 now refurbished here:



Refurbished V1:

http://www.cameta.com/Nikon-1-V1-Digital-Camera-Body-with-10-30mm-VR-Lens-Black-Factory-Refurbished-69688.cfm



Refurbished J1:



http://www.cameta.com/Nikon-1-J1-Digital-Camera-Body-with-10-30mm-VR-Lens-Silver-Factory-Refurbished-72221.cfm



One thing to consider with a Nikon 1 (either J or V). You can buy the optional FT-1 adapter and you can use your DSLR lenses (you may need to upgrade the firmware though - which is easy).



There may be some limitations though; for instance you have to use spot focus. But with the 2.7x crop factor, my Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5~5.6 becomes a focal length equivalent to a whopping 189~810mm lens, with no loss in aperture (can't say that for a teleconverter).



Here is a webpage comparing photos taken with a Nikon V1 using the 10mm pancake lens, 10-30mm lens, the 30-100mm lens, and the 70-300mm lens using both the FT-1 adapter and with the 70-300mm on a DSLR.



http://www.althephoto.com/lenses/v1-lens.php



And here is a review on the V1 itself. Other than a few goodies like an electronic viewfinder, the image quality of the J1 should match the V1 as they use the same sensor:



http://www.althephoto.com/cameras/v1.php



So my take is if you want a second camera, and especially one that can share your DSLR lenses, the Nikon 1 series should be considered - if you can get them for a decent price.