The future of photography...

[skaeight]

Ironically the soccer didn't take (he's only 4), so that problem kind of went away.

One thing I didn't mention is I don't have an unlimited budget. That Zeiss 24-70 lens would be exactly what I would need to replace the kit lens I got rid of, but I don't have $1000 to spend on the lens (I'm sure it's fanatic though).

The same would apply to the RX1 (which I probably actually would be really happy with) and obviously the Leica Q.

The RX100 III / IV.... oK. I haven't tried the three, but I tried the original and very recently tried the Canon G7X, which uses the same sensor as the three, so I think that's out. I was just not impressed whatsoever. I wasn't impressed for the $650 cost of the G7X, I'm almost positive I won't be at $800 for the RX100 III - and from what I saw in the reviews their performance is very similar, it's just that G7X had a longer lens and the RX100 III had a viewfinder.

I just took a quick peak at the RX100 IV reviews on Amazon and they are very positive - it has a stacked sensor like the iPhone does (ironic, huh?). But the darn thing is $950. The question is, does it solve the problems the G7X had and is it $300 better? Does anyone have one of these yet? The thing on these is that I'm coming from APS-C sensors with fast prime lenses (which makes my overall satisfaction with the iPhone as a camera even more insane - what is apple doing with their cameras? it has to be some kind of witchcraft), I'm sure they're great for someone that's upgrading, but so far I've had a tough time finding value with these 1" sensor cameras.

Ideally something like an RX100 would solve my problem. I would like to carry one piece of gear that is good enough that I can't upgrade (that's a feature for me at this point because as I mentioned I inevitably end up with a bag of gear and an infinite number of problems that can only be solved with more lenses (maybe I should have tried more cowbell)). The problem is I just haven't found anything that is worth my money in this department yet when compared to the iPhone. Why am I going to carry this? is something I'm asking with all of these cameras.

The other camera that caught my eye and honestly still could be an option down the road but I need to sell my existing gear and save some money (as I would with the RX100 IV) is the FujiFilm X100T. It's beyond simple and still has an APS-C sensor so I know performance is going to be great. Another huge benefit is that from what I've heard the jpgs are basically good to go - no post processing required which is something I view as a positive at this point. I lose zoom (so if my son takes up soccer or football as everyone but us says, I'm in trouble), but my iPhone doesn't Zoom either, nor would the RX1 if I'd find a bundle of money in the street today.

So I guess bottom line is, there isn't a perfect solution, which I guess for now anyways means I'm kind of punting (that's something from american football for anyone not from here - I don't like sports btw) and going with my iPhone. Sleeping on this did help. I kind of see the X100T (or it's successor) as the goal down the road, but I don't have the money now and and will just have to save up. Again though even this is flawed, but from that I can tell it probably is worth the money and may be the best option to meet my wants/needs that exists. (Anyone have one of these that would care to comment?)

Any other thoughts? (Sorry last nights post was so long and whiney - tiredness and frustration got the best of me).

 

[skaeight]

I've been reading some reviews of the X100T today and several of them could have been written by me. I think this is the ticket:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RQBDSG33I8FJK/ref=cm_cr_pr_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B00NF6ZGY6

"I have bought multiple cameras in the last few years. These are all the cameras that I have tested: Canon 5D Mark II, Canon 7D, Canon 40D, Canon 30D, Canon Digital rebelXT, Canon rebel T3i, Canon PowerShot G10, Canon power shot S90, Canon PowerShot SD790IS, Canon PowerShot SD1200IS, Cool pix S3100, Cyber-shot, DMCLX2, DMC-LX3, Sony DSC-F828, Sony DSC-P10, Sony DSC-RX 100M3, Sony DSC-T200, Sony DSC-TX7, Olympus E-M5, Olympus E-PL1, Fuji X100, Sony A7, Sony alpha 6000, Nikon D35, Nikon D700, Nikon Df, Pentax W 60. My latest SLR camera was the Canon 5D Mark III. It does take great lowlight pictures and is excellent for indoor hockey photos, but it is a heavy camera. I have owned great cameras but you don't get the joy of taking pictures like you do with the Fujifilm X100T. I have gotten to the point where I didn't want to lug around a camera because I always had my iPhone with me. This camera wants and has compelled me to take it everywhere. I haven't done this since the days before phone cameras were decent. I now am going places to take pictures. I went back to JPEG's with the chrome setting. I am doing almost no post processing. This camera is spot on with white balance and focus especially with the new viewfinder. I am now enjoying using manual focus and M mode. The app is fantastic. One of my favorite features of the camera is to put the shutter speed in B mode and the aperture in auto mode which gives you an ISO 200 with a 30 second timer. The Wi-Fi is a great feature and I send all my pictures to my iPhone and then print some of them to the Fuji Instax printer which people cannot get over. The on camera flash is fantastic for fill. For the first time ever I am able to use fill flash outside with a very high shutter speed using the neutral density filter in sunlight."
​

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56214545

"I just jumped ship from a Nikon D7000 with two bags full of lenses to the X100T. I've shot Nikon for many years, going back to my original Nikkormat FTN in the mid 70s. But as the cameras became more and more complicated, and the lenses became heavier and bulkier, I found that I was only taking my camera out once in a blue moon, and shooting every day with my iPhone.

I still have my D7000, and I'm sure I'll continue to shoot with it (once in a blue moon), but instead of the iPhone, I can now carry a super small bag with the X100T around with me every day and have access to exceptional image quality whenever I need it, not just when I plan it. So my advice to you is that the X100T isn't a replacement for a full DSLR and a bag of lenses, it's an alternative to it.

The Classic Chrome film simulation is INCREDIBLE... I am amazed at the color rendition on this little camera. If you are able to expose properly, there is no reason to shoot RAW at all."​

I could go on, there's a lot like this. It's good to hear others seem to be having experiences that appear like they will resolve some of the issues I have with cameras I've tried up to this point. I really want an all-in-one with good, optics, a great sensor, and great in camera processing. From all appearances this seems to do it. The only limitations are cost and lack of zoom. I think I can live with both, it will just take a few months to liquidate my gear and save up the remaining money.

 

[fathergll]

Ideally something like an RX100 would solve my problem. I would like to carry one piece of gear that is good enough that I can't upgrade (that's a feature for me at this point because as I mentioned I inevitably end up with a bag of gear and an infinite number of problems that can only be solved with more lenses (maybe I should have tried more cowbell)). The problem is I just haven't found anything that is worth my money in this department yet when compared to the iPhone. Why am I going to carry this? is something I'm asking with all of these cameras.

Personally I would not carry anything that has a lower IQ than something in the Fuji x100 series or maybe the Sony RX100 IV, because my iPhone 6 is a good fixed 29mm camera and phenomenal in terms of form factor(built into my phone obviously).

I have both a RX1 and X100T. RX1 no question is something I carry with a purpose. The IQ is amazing. Part of it is a mental thing knowing that the little compact you have is going to deliver quality that exceeds majority of guys walking around with a big DSLR. Basically you know you are not sacrificing anything in terms of IQ outside of a medium format body yet it's a compact. X100T on the other hand feels like something you can shoot with all day. Outside of IQ its a better camera. I tend to treat my RX1 like im shooting film on it. Just that it's a very expensive piece of electronics(though i bought it used at a very good deal) and I want to keep it as long as I can. X100T I feel like I would take it on vacation and shoot with it all day.

If you are comfortable with a fixed lens 35mm system and you want to buy now while under budget I would go for a used x100s or x100(assuming the files coming from these cameras is what you are looking for). You may want to also to consider saving money up for a used RX1 which is expensive but attainable(market for them is very good now with the Leica Q out but will be even better once the RX2 drops). Obviously the RX100 IV is another good choice though the output may not be something that will satisfy for years to come.

 

[Mavimao]

Going through the comments here, it's interesting to see people's opinions on where photography is going. The more interesting ones comes from those that seem to think that a tiny camera will be able to beat a larger camera to which I have to say: not really. It's all a matter of physics and science that you can't exactly beat with software. But in the end, it doesn't matter if it's good enough.

Let's talk about lenses alone: lenses are really complicated beasts that have to take in light, and make sure all the different wavelengths get through the other side at exactly the same place (or otherwise you have CA) without distortion or vignetting, while trying to keep the image as sharp as possible, as fast as possible, and as economical as possible. There are a ton of trade-offs lens makers have to make when creating lenses. As much as I'd love to dream, it is impossible to have an ultra sharp, distortion-free, pancake 10-200mm zoom lens with a 1.4 aperture that costs $150.

It is also impossible to imagine that the 1/3" sensor and the 5mm fixed focal length lens that is currently in the iPhone can take the same quality photos as a camera with a 36x24mm sensor and a decent zoom lens no matter what processing power you throw at it. Just for starters, a wide focal length like the one in cell phones are horrible for portraits. They distort objects that are up-close (a subtle fish-eye effect which explains why people are always shocked to see that my baby is not as chubby as they thought based solely on cell phone pictures I've sent). They're horrible at capturing action that is far away (the shorter the focal length, the more distance is exaggerated, so your kid kicking that goal that you can see clearly with your eyes looks like a small dot in your photos). Plus, everything is in focus and bokeh is impossible without getting within inches of your subject.

Now, in the grand scheme of things, does this matter? No. Fifteen years ago, most people were satisfied with disposable cameras. Now THOSE things were crap! 30mm f/16 single element plastic lens with 400 or 800 iso film and a 1/125 shutter speed. Everything had to be shot outside or with a harsh flash indoors. No low light, no aperture or shutter control, distorted corners and softness galore. You also had to be at least 3 feet away from the lens to be in focus. People didn't care because they didn't want to fuss with all the confusing aspects of photography. They just wanted a cheap point and shoot camera. It's the same thing with cell phone cameras except today they are light years better than what people had before.

I love my cell phone camera, but if I recently bought an a6000, it was because, while it was great to take snapshots with an iPhone, I wanted the quality of a bigger sensor and a larger, faster, longer lens. Technology will advance, no doubt, and camera phones as well as DSLRs/Mirrorless cameras will improve, but you can't fight physics and you also can't fight the common crowd who is satisfied with good enough.

 

[JDDavis]

Old thread revival!

It's not a dedicated still camera. Primarily meant for video but it does take 12mp stills and has some cool features. It's an interesting mashup up of a camera, gimbal, and smart phone. Plus, in an emergency you might be able to use it for self defense.

The DJI Osmo

http://www.dji.com/product/osmo

 

[initialsBB]

I think a few of the comments in this thread underestimate the power of software and mobile processors to overcome the shortcomings of smaller form factor sensors.
The recent announcement of the L16 camera concept shows how far reaching the disruption can go.
http://www.light.co/
Of course we'll have to see what comes of it when the product actually ships, but the proof of concept stills stands.
This is where I don't see the major camera manufacturers competing, they're way behind the curve.

On another note, I read a few comments here and elsewhere dismissing iPad photography. I wouldn't be comfortable taking pictures that way, and at first found it even shocking, but I must admit that framing on a 10" screen is actually pretty neat and even reminiscent of view cameras !