Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Suggest a P&S for a pro photographer??
- Thread starter Crawn2003
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree with Abstract, I like Fuji compacts and their performance in low-light, can't be beat. I'd recommend either the F30/31fd if you can still get one for a reasonable price, or go with the F100fd which sounds decent, and has a 28mm wide-angle (although the sample picture seems to have quite a bit of barrel distortion). I find 28mm immensely more useful than 35/36mm on the wide-end.
Have a look at this camera. Might be what you're after, just here to provide you with more options. Our practise bought this as a new point ant shoot camera last summer when it came out, and is quite an easy but in-depth camera to use.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmclx2.asp
You can shoot in 4:3, or in 16:9 with it's widescreen CCD. Is has 10.2 megapixels, and also has an option to save in RAW. Has it's drawbacks if they apply, but I've found it an easy camera to use creating some very photos.
Up to you, you've got lots of good suggestions here, jsut throwing in another.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmclx2.asp
You can shoot in 4:3, or in 16:9 with it's widescreen CCD. Is has 10.2 megapixels, and also has an option to save in RAW. Has it's drawbacks if they apply, but I've found it an easy camera to use creating some very photos.
Up to you, you've got lots of good suggestions here, jsut throwing in another.
Hmm... So what's the difference?
So what's the big difference between the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 and the Leica D-Lux 3?
Maybe I'm just blind reading the specs but they seem to be the exact same camera, just different manufactures and different price tag. I understand they co-developed the camera but is there some huge technical difference between the two?
~Crawn
So what's the big difference between the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 and the Leica D-Lux 3?
Maybe I'm just blind reading the specs but they seem to be the exact same camera, just different manufactures and different price tag. I understand they co-developed the camera but is there some huge technical difference between the two?
~Crawn
Physically, they are the exact same camera (barring minor cosmetic differences). They are the exact same size and weight and have the same internals. The image processing and menus are a little different. That's it.
The two are the same except that the Leica has an aluminum alloy body where the Panasonic uses plastic and the Leica build quality is higher. The same great Leica lens is in both cameras.
I have a PowerShot G7 and and it seems to work great (I've only had it for a few weeks). For a P&S, it has a lot of higher end features you might see on a DSLR. It's small compared to a DSLR, but it's not really a "pocket" camera. It also has a viewfinder which I find very nice!
Honestly, if you go to a store and try using a G9, I doubt you'll walk out of there with anything else. It's the perfect compact compliment to an SLR. Has pro features in a compact size, can record in RAW, and takes fantastic shots as long as you don't go over 400 ISO.
Just curious, where can you take a point and shoot and not take a DSLR and get better results? Unless you want to be less conspicuous I guess. Don't get me wrong, I sometimes forgo a camera rather than haul a DSLR or an SLR into an intimate gathering. Just wondering what your thought process is as I have never considered using point and shoot for myself. I have used my wifes Olympus and it is fun but the results are not enlargeable. Of course, it is rather old. Again, just curious.
Why I'd rather have a P&S is for when I'm on the road and don't want to carry my $2000 Fuji S5 and my $7000 worth of glass around with me. For example, if I wanted to go to an amusement park I wouldn't want to take my DSLR or if I was going down to the City (San Francisco) and would rather just have a P&S with me then a DSLR.
It just boils down to convience and not having to worry about a more expensive camera.
~Crawn
I like this camera - I might pick one up if I can sell my Sony 3.2MP CyberShot (even for like $50). Granted, it's $400, it has a hot shoe, good manual control, and a SLR-like grip.
Then again, my Sony is fine for times when I don't need my SLR, and I don't mind throwing it in a bag since its metal body can take an insane beating.
Then again, my Sony is fine for times when I don't need my SLR, and I don't mind throwing it in a bag since its metal body can take an insane beating.
I think the Canon G9 is going to be hard to beat. Since you're on the Nikon side, it'll probably take a bit of time getting used to the Canon, but I think you'll find it worth your time. I don't think I could get by with shooting jpeg, even if it was just a point a shoot.
Here's a excerpt from the Canon G9 Review's Conclusion at dpreview.com, which I think sums up the issues very well:
"It's the biggest irony of the compact digital camera market: since the cameras all use very similar sensors (often the exact same sensor) and many even share the same lens assembly, the price difference between the entry-level models and range-toppers such as the G9 simply isn't reflected in a commensurate difference in output quality. And it doesn't matter how much you are prepared to spend; you can't buy your way out of the 'compact camera problem' - a small, noisy sensor is a small noisy sensor no matter what kind of tank you build around it or how many 'professional' features you build into the body.
...
In the final analysis the G9 has more to recommend it than most enthusiast compacts we test, and at ISO 80 the quality is simply superb. It's a pleasure to use, is built like a tank and offers an SLR-like feature set in a compact format.
...
It's not a camera for everyone; you need to know what you're doing to coaxe the very best out of it, and it doesn't operate that effectively as a 'point and shoot' model (especially in low light), but in the right hands it's a real step up from the mass of indistinguishable compacts on the market, and the more you use it, the more you'll grow to appreciate it. And so, like the G7, the G9 only just scrapes into our highest rating bracket."
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/page20.asp
"It's the biggest irony of the compact digital camera market: since the cameras all use very similar sensors (often the exact same sensor) and many even share the same lens assembly, the price difference between the entry-level models and range-toppers such as the G9 simply isn't reflected in a commensurate difference in output quality. And it doesn't matter how much you are prepared to spend; you can't buy your way out of the 'compact camera problem' - a small, noisy sensor is a small noisy sensor no matter what kind of tank you build around it or how many 'professional' features you build into the body.
...
In the final analysis the G9 has more to recommend it than most enthusiast compacts we test, and at ISO 80 the quality is simply superb. It's a pleasure to use, is built like a tank and offers an SLR-like feature set in a compact format.
...
It's not a camera for everyone; you need to know what you're doing to coaxe the very best out of it, and it doesn't operate that effectively as a 'point and shoot' model (especially in low light), but in the right hands it's a real step up from the mass of indistinguishable compacts on the market, and the more you use it, the more you'll grow to appreciate it. And so, like the G7, the G9 only just scrapes into our highest rating bracket."
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/page20.asp
I hear what you're saying, and I've always been a minimalist in my gear. (Why I used the tiny OM-4 in my old film days). I constantly am buying smaller gear bags to try to minimize my "look" when I'm shooting with my Canon DSLR's.
But you have to admit that the quote above is a bit of a "straw man" argument. You won't find a cheap P&S to replace the $9000 gear you mentioned above. You'll find a cheap $400 P&S camera to provide you with mediocre images. Not that carrying a P&S is bad, but you will be having an entirely different photographic experience.
If losing or breaking expensive gear is the main concern, there is the second solution. Use an old DSLR body and a cheap lens on it - even a three generation old Canon 10D (as an example) with any lens over $100 will give better images than the P&S.
Edit - forgot to say that I have the F30, as well as several older Canon P&S's. Reality is that the image quality is always the weak link compared to my L-series glass...
dang it... I wish that Contax was still in business...
Canon G9 looks to be awesome with Panasonic to be good
My favorite point and shoots are the Sony DSC-V3 and the F828 which is awesome with the Zeiss lenses.
Canon G9 looks to be awesome with Panasonic to be good
My favorite point and shoots are the Sony DSC-V3 and the F828 which is awesome with the Zeiss lenses.
Great points you raised in response to my question as to why you would want a point and shoot. Speaking only for myself, as a working photographer I never want to leave a photo to chance. The minimum camera I take on vacations and recreational activities is a D70s. It is light and unobtrusive. Takes excellent photos and looks like every other camera in any crowd. Doing so allows me to take a choice of lenses. As a pro you understand that zooms are not quite the same quality as primes. I generally take a 50mm, a 105 and a medium zoom. Weight is about 5 pounds. I use a Tamrac backpack and blend right in, other than my gray hair that is.
However, a good Leica, as others have mentioned, is a choice I had not considered. Maybe I will think about that and send the bill to the suggesters?
Hmmmmm.
However, a good Leica, as others have mentioned, is a choice I had not considered. Maybe I will think about that and send the bill to the suggesters?
Hmmmmm.
We shoot Nikon dSLRs, but have experience with over 7 Canon P&S cameras. We really like the results from them. Don't expect D3 performance... just enjoy them as non-disposable fun shoot cameras that you pull out quickly at events you otherwise wouldn't bring your dSLR to.
I have a D70s also that I used to carry around but my problem was taking my expensive glass in somewhere where it could get damaged, i.e. amusement park with water rides or water parks, etc. I know some would say take the case but I'd rather not carry a bookbag carrying case around with me for 8 hours.
I agree that the Leica doesn't hold a candle to a dSLR but why do I need to take a dSLR when all I want is a snapshot? If I wanted a great photo of San Francisco or the Golden Gate that I would sell to a client or hang on the wall then I would at least take my Fuji S5 with lenses to get the shot, or if I REALLY wanted the shot, my Sinar 4x5 with Leaf Valeo digital back.
The whole reason I started this thread was because I needed a suggestion for a great P&S camera that I could take around with me and not worry about dropping (as much as the dSLR gear or 4x5) and was small and light weight so it's easy to have around.
As for that, even though it isn't a dSLR, I highly recommended the Leica, or the Panasonic sister to it, because it does give a lot of extra control that I wanted from a dSLR in a small camera like the P&S Leica.
~Crawn