Best bang for buck point and shoot?

[Rob587]

I'm sure the answer changes often, so I'm asking here.

I mainly photograph watches, but also occasional pics of the family, landscapes etc. I just want something that can take incredible photos easily. I'm tired of the average images my iPhone 6+ takes.

I love the quality I see from people who use DSLRs, but I'm assuming there are some point and shoots capable of comparable quality these days, right? I just want easy. Also, compact is nice for traveling.

 

[AleXXXa]

I have a Sony RX100 mk. III. It's great. Takes good pictures and videos (1inch sensor - pretty big for a compact camera, great optics and low light performance) and it's so small it fits in a coat pocket with no problem.

I see the mk. IV is around $1000, pretty expensive, but the mk. III is still available at a good price on amazon and bhphoto ($750-$800) and mkII at around $500.

 

[r.harris1]

I'm sure the answer changes often, so I'm asking here.

I mainly photograph watches, but also occasional pics of the family, landscapes etc. I just want something that can take incredible photos easily. I'm tired of the average images my iPhone 6+ takes.

I love the quality I see from people who use DSLRs, but I'm assuming there are some point and shoots capable of comparable quality these days, right? I just want easy. Also, compact is nice for traveling.

There are a number of options, and you're right, those do change, but what about the photos that you get with your phone do you consider average? What is the optimal photo to you? Maybe simply a matter of tweaking things in post processing to get what you are looking for? For example applying a filter, a little sharpening, etc? After all, the phone (from whatever vendor) is ultra portable and most of them do a good job of capturing what you are after.

I actually got a little time on the DXO One over the holiday via a relative, which attaches to the iPhone. It was fantastic for what it does. A little pricey at 550.00 US or so, but good quality stuff. And very, very portable. I always have my phone with me and the One is a very small attachment you can throw in your pocket.

That said, you'll get a lot of suggestions here, I think. Good luck!

 

[Cheffy Dave]

Canon PowerShot Digital Elph, had one for 10 years, still takes amazing pix, here's the newest flavor
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerSh...451870908&sr=1-9&keywords=cannon+digital+elph

 

[Rob587]

I have a Sony RX100 mk. III. It's great. Takes good pictures and videos (1inch sensor - pretty big for a compact camera, great optics and low light performance) and it's so small it fits in a coat pocket with no problem.

I see the mk. IV is around $1000, pretty expensive, but the mk. III is still available at a good price on amazon and bhphoto ($750-$800) and mkII at around $500.

Thanks! I've heard good things about the RX100 MK IV. What about this RX100 for $398 on Amazon? Not as good? http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX10...TF8&qid=1451871201&sr=1-1&keywords=sony+rx100

There are a number of options, and you're right, those do change, but what about the photos that you get with your phone do you consider average? What is the optimal photo to you? Maybe simply a matter of tweaking things in post processing to get what you are looking for? For example applying a filter, a little sharpening, etc? After all, the phone (from whatever vendor) is ultra portable and most of them do a good job of capturing what you are after.

I actually got a little time on the DXO One over the holiday via a relative, which attaches to the iPhone. It was fantastic for what it does. A little pricey at 550.00 US or so, but good quality stuff. And very, very portable. I always have my phone with me and the One is a very small attachment you can throw in your pocket.

That said, you'll get a lot of suggestions here, I think. Good luck!

Because the iPhone is meant to be so wide angle, close ups looks a little off. Also, the auto focus seems kind of wonky, and low light photos look terrible (blurry and distorted). I feel like a decent point and shoot would be more versatile. Thanks for the response!

 

[r.harris1]

Thanks! I've heard good things about the RX100 MK IV. What about this RX100 for $398 on Amazon? Not as good? http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX10...TF8&qid=1451871201&sr=1-1&keywords=sony+rx100



Because the iPhone is meant to be so wide angle, close ups looks a little off. Also, the auto focus seems kind of wonky, and low light photos look terrible (blurry and distorted). I feel like a decent point and shoot would be more versatile. Thanks for the response!

++ on the Sony mk iii - awesome.

 

[LiveM]

The Consumer Electronics Show kicks off in a day or so, so keep your eye on that.

For point-and-shoot, I would recommend the Leica X-Vario or for pocketable the Leica C if you can get it. The Sony RX100 is a great camera, just not at the same level.

 

[kenoh]

I have had a number of cameras and I have to say for a point and shoot the RX100 series are very good. I think that a good deal can be had on the MK II now which is still a VERY good camera.

 

[MCAsan]

You can sort cameras by their sensor size.

http://www.dxomark.com/cameras/laun...Options=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankDxo

 

[TheDrift-]

Another vote for a sony RX100 Mk?

The ? depends on how much you want to spend, later marks have more features but cost more...

 

[Flunkyturtle]

I don't have a point and shoot, i have a Nikon D750 but honestly i'd just recommend getting a cheaper DSLR.

It's not rocket science to use the different priority modes or go manual if your brave enough.

You'll learn more as well.

Just my two cents.

 

[phrehdd]

Perhaps a visit to the DPreview site would be in order. It seems you have four items to check off

1) ease of use
2) close up capability for photos of watches
3) portability
4) better than iphone images

There are a vast number of point and shoots out there. Some have been mentioned here and others you may find elsewhere. Canon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Nikon and the list goes on. You may also try other sources. Most here will give reasonable advice but often enough "we" are tainted by our own purchases or merely that is what we are used to shooting with.

Btw, there are multiple photo sites that have yearly awards for best cameras in a category. We just got through 2015 so lists may be up already. - Just be sure the listed cameras fulfill your needs.

 

[fathergll]

For point-and-shoot, I would recommend the Leica X-Vario or for pocketable the Leica C if you can get it. The Sony RX100 is a great camera, just not at the same level.

It's $2,000. I've never used the Leica myself(I use a RX1 as my pocketable) but the slow lens on the Leica would have me worried. Besides it's way too much money for the OP. The OP could buy a dedicated macro DSLR setup for just watch photography and a point and shoot for much cheaper than the Vario alone.

RX100 - $400
DSLR - $400
Macro lens -$400
---------------------------
Total - $1200

 

[monokakata]

Thanks! I've heard good things about the RX100 MK IV. What about this RX100 for $398 on Amazon? Not as good? http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX10...TF8&qid=1451871201&sr=1-1&keywords=sony+rx100

Looks to me as though that's the original RX100, which means it's three generations old.

I have the RX 100 mk 2, and it's an excellent camera. I wouldn't go earlier than the mk 2.

After the mk 2, Sony went wider (on the lens) but also shorter out at the tele end. Be sure to think about what you'll be doing with the camera before deciding.

The Sony (all models) can shoot RAW, and if you want to manipulate your images, that can be a big plus.

 

[fathergll]

Thanks! I've heard good things about the RX100 MK IV. What about this RX100 for $398 on Amazon? Not as good? http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX10...TF8&qid=1451871201&sr=1-1&keywords=sony+rx100

I believe the macro capabilities were improved on RX100 MK III. I would google "RX100 macro".

 

[kenoh]

I have a MK I and a MK III RX100. I shoot Sony full frame and Leica M9. I was a Canon user. So I have narrow experience.

I will say though that if you are not a full frame DSLR shooter, then any RX100 will be PLENTY of camera for you. That link to Amazon is not a good price though. You can get better.

 

[LiveM]

It's $2,000. I've never used the Leica myself(I use a RX1 as my pocketable) but the slow lens on the Leica would have me worried. Besides it's way too much money for the OP. The OP could buy a dedicated macro DSLR setup for just watch photography and a point and shoot for much cheaper than the Vario alone.

RX100 - $400
DSLR - $400
Macro lens -$400
---------------------------
Total - $1200

The X Vario is $800 less used from B&H. Leica C is a lot less again, and then there are the D-Lux models. A used model will fetch a similar amount resold in the future, so the real cost could be much less than a Sony.

If not point and shoot, the Samsung NX500 would be my pick. Its sensor is generations ahead of anything else and it shoots probably the best 4K non-raw video available, plus the lenses are of a similar optical quality to Leica and Fujifilm. Amazingly, it's $500 with the 16-50mm power zoom lens.

 

[soulreaver99]

I just picked up a Sony RX100 m3 on ebay for $475 on eBay. With patience you can find a great deal on it! If you want to spend even less, you can find a Canon S110 for almost next to nothing and that takes fantastic photos for the price as well.

 

[Rob587]

I just picked up a Sony RX100 m3 on ebay for $475 on eBay. With patience you can find a great deal on it! If you want to spend even less, you can find a Canon S110 for almost next to nothing and that takes fantastic photos for the price as well.

After looking at a bunch of sample test shots, I seem to prefer the quality/look of what the Canons produce. Again, I'm not a pro, but the G7 or even the S110 seem to have a more cinematic quality compared to the RX100s. Am I crazy, or do the Canons tend to produce a more DSLR like photo? Even the macros look good to me with background blur.

Right now, I think I'm between a Canon S110, G7 or maybe even a Canon EOS Rebel T5 (even though its a DSLR its light, small, and $399).

 

[dwig]

If you want/need "compact" then do not consider any dSLR, period.

I would suggest looking at some of the smaller "mirrorless" interchangeable lens cameras, particularily the Panasonic and Olympus Micro 4/3rds series camera, and at the premium fixed lens offerings such as the Canon G series and Panasonic LX models. Nikon also has a history of making rather good premium models in their Coolpix line. I've printed a number of images from a Nikon Coolpix P7100 (a few years old now) in the 30"x40" to 48"x72" range with rather good results.

 

[kenoh]

After looking at a bunch of sample test shots, I seem to prefer the quality/look of what the Canons produce. Again, I'm not a pro, but the G7 or even the S110 seem to have a more cinematic quality compared to the RX100s. Am I crazy, or do the Canons tend to produce a more DSLR like photo? Even the macros look good to me with background blur.

Right now, I think I'm between a Canon S110, G7 or maybe even a Canon EOS Rebel T5 (even though its a DSLR its light, small, and $399).

I think you have hit the nail in the head. We are all crazy in different ways. There is no wrong answer here which is what makes it so difficult to make the call on. If you like the look of the Canons, then you have a winner.

Then it is down to aesthetics. You said pocketable is a key req originally so this would suggest the S110 but the G7 is a newer camera with a bigger 1" sensor. S120 is the new version of 110. T5 is a great starter DSLR but beware... you are stepping into our world where we constantly crave new lenses

 

[scottgoh]

iphone 6?
best bang for buck as you can also use it as a camera and phone. - i am serious.

 

[kenoh]

iphone 6?
best bang for buck as you can also use it as a camera and phone. - i am serious.

He has a 6+ already...

 

[Rob587]

I think you have hit the nail in the head. We are all crazy in different ways. There is no wrong answer here which is what makes it so difficult to make the call on. If you like the look of the Canons, then you have a winner.

Then it is down to aesthetics. You said pocketable is a key req originally so this would suggest the S110 but the G7 is a newer camera with a bigger 1" sensor. S120 is the new version of 110. T5 is a great starter DSLR but beware... you are stepping into our world where we constantly crave new lenses

Great! lol Now I'm getting sucked in to the DSLR after looking at this image comparison. http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/canon/s120/vs/canon/t5/image-quality

 

[dwig]

Great! lol Now I'm getting sucked in to the DSLR after looking at this image comparison. http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/canon/s120/vs/canon/t5/image-quality

The image quality difference in this comparison has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the better performing camera is a DSLR. The difference is primarily the result of the sensor size difference and possibly somewhat the difference in the optical quality of the lenses.

You can get a substantially more compact camera which the same "larger" sized sensor in a much more compact camera by choosing either one of the "mirrorless" interchangeable lens cameras from Panasonic, Olympus, Sony, Fuji... or one of the premium fixed lens offering that use the APS-c size sensor (e.g. Fuji Finepix X100S, ...). Even the better cameras with slightly smaller sensors (e.g. Sony RX100) perform excentlly.