This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Pre digital, I always used to have a compact for climbing and an SLR for when weight wasnt an issue, but since going digital three years ago I've made do with just a compact, the weatherproof Sony DSC TX10, which I am very happy with for picture quality. However, with some adventurous trips in the planning for the coming year, I'm thinking of investing in a DSLR. My photography is very much about being in the right place at the right time and pointing and shooting in automatic mode with no more than extremely minor tweeking on the computer afterwards, so I would be gettting a very basic DSLR for, I hope, better picture quality and performance in low light.
Is a DSLR what I want or are there better alternatives? If so, what should I go for and what lens or lenses?
Post edited at 20:26
In reply to Robert Durran:
From your needs list, you should get a large sensor compact/bridge camera. A Sony rx100 would do nicely, although you could go a lot cheaper if you're on a budget.
From your needs list, you should get a large sensor compact/bridge camera. A Sony rx100 would do nicely, although you could go a lot cheaper if you're on a budget.
In reply to Robert Durran:
I agree about bridge cameras. Bigger lens than a compact so better results. Not as heavy a DSLR and it can take videos.
I agree about bridge cameras. Bigger lens than a compact so better results. Not as heavy a DSLR and it can take videos.
In reply to Robert Durran:
I've had a DSLR about 5 or 6 years and used it much like your suggesting here. It takes great pics, but it's a bit of a lump to lug around and I know I'm not using half it's capabilities, but then I'm often holding the ropes in my other hand so snapping in auto is as good as its going to get. I sometimes decided not to take it and take my compact instead just for weight reasons, and then was a bit annoyed with the pics I took on my mid-range compact; including on Stetind this summer. So after that trip and with one of those landmark birthday coming up I decided to buy a high quality compact - plenty of UKCer helped me consider the different options and eventually I bought a Canon s110. I'm really happy with it, it's taking great pics but isn't much bigger than my old Panasonic compact and WAY smaller and easier to carry than my Nikon DX40 slr.
They aren't climbing photos but if you have a look on my blog at the last post http://lightfromthenorth.blogspot.fi/2013/12/an-early-winter-bikepack.html you'll see lots of pics taken quickly with that camera. I like the strong blue skies (doable with the SLR but not the old compact) and the light in the photo of the low sun at the abandoned petrol station.
Some more pics here http://www.flickr.com/photos/toby-northern_light/sets/72157635683148704/ I can't see myself taking the DSLR up a hill again now.
I've had a DSLR about 5 or 6 years and used it much like your suggesting here. It takes great pics, but it's a bit of a lump to lug around and I know I'm not using half it's capabilities, but then I'm often holding the ropes in my other hand so snapping in auto is as good as its going to get. I sometimes decided not to take it and take my compact instead just for weight reasons, and then was a bit annoyed with the pics I took on my mid-range compact; including on Stetind this summer. So after that trip and with one of those landmark birthday coming up I decided to buy a high quality compact - plenty of UKCer helped me consider the different options and eventually I bought a Canon s110. I'm really happy with it, it's taking great pics but isn't much bigger than my old Panasonic compact and WAY smaller and easier to carry than my Nikon DX40 slr.
They aren't climbing photos but if you have a look on my blog at the last post http://lightfromthenorth.blogspot.fi/2013/12/an-early-winter-bikepack.html you'll see lots of pics taken quickly with that camera. I like the strong blue skies (doable with the SLR but not the old compact) and the light in the photo of the low sun at the abandoned petrol station.
Some more pics here http://www.flickr.com/photos/toby-northern_light/sets/72157635683148704/ I can't see myself taking the DSLR up a hill again now.
Post edited at 21:45
In reply to Robert Durran:
I'm interested and intrigued by this scale of tweaking of yours....
Does it go something like:
'Tweak' - defined as 'to make a fine adjustment'
'Minor Tweak' - to make a very small fine adjustment (hardly noticeable in the world of fine adjustment)
'Extremely Minor Tweak' (EMT) - to make an imperceptibly small fine adjustment: so small you can't see the difference
I wouldn't bother booting up your PC for an EMT.
Why do you want another camera if you are already very happy with the picture quality on the Sony DSC TX10. Very happy seems pretty high on the Happy Scale of Image Quality to me (maybe I'm hard to please) - do you want to be Extremely Very Happy? Unfortunately, to get to Extremely Very Happy with image quality from a DSLR (i.e. full potential), you'd have to go beyond EMTs
... anyway back to your question. What's your budget for the new camera.
> shooting in automatic mode with no more than extremely minor tweaking on the computer afterwards
I'm interested and intrigued by this scale of tweaking of yours....
Does it go something like:
'Tweak' - defined as 'to make a fine adjustment'
'Minor Tweak' - to make a very small fine adjustment (hardly noticeable in the world of fine adjustment)
'Extremely Minor Tweak' (EMT) - to make an imperceptibly small fine adjustment: so small you can't see the difference
I wouldn't bother booting up your PC for an EMT.
Why do you want another camera if you are already very happy with the picture quality on the Sony DSC TX10. Very happy seems pretty high on the Happy Scale of Image Quality to me (maybe I'm hard to please) - do you want to be Extremely Very Happy? Unfortunately, to get to Extremely Very Happy with image quality from a DSLR (i.e. full potential), you'd have to go beyond EMTs
... anyway back to your question. What's your budget for the new camera.
In reply to ChrisJD:
> I wouldn't bother booting up your PC for an EMT.
The EMT that I do involves using the facility which came with my computer using litle sliders labelled "brightness", "contrast" and "colour" to try to make the photos look as near as possible like the reality
I also, I admit scandalously, crop my photos.
> Why do you want another camera if you are already very happy with the picture quality on the Sony DSC TX10. Very happy seems pretty high on the Happy Scale of Image Quality to me.
I am very happy, given the compromise in quality I know I am making by having the size and shock and weather proofing advantages of the DSC TX10. I am, for instance very happy with the qulaity of this: http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=215097
> Do you want to be Extremely Very Happy?
Thats the idea.
> Unfortunately, to get to Extremely Very Happy with image quality from a DSLR (i.e. full potential), you'd have to go beyond EMTs.
I've no interest in the full potential. I just want the advantages of a better quality lens with a bigger aperture and a a bigger sennsor.
> ... anyway back to your question. What's your budget for the new camera.
I've looked up the Sony RX100 recommended above (sounds good) and at £399 new it would be at the upper end of my budget. Is there any advantage in, say, the most basic Canon DSLR given my lack of desire to go beyond EMT.
> I'm interested and intrigued by this scale of tweaking of yours....
> I wouldn't bother booting up your PC for an EMT.
The EMT that I do involves using the facility which came with my computer using litle sliders labelled "brightness", "contrast" and "colour" to try to make the photos look as near as possible like the reality
I also, I admit scandalously, crop my photos.
> Why do you want another camera if you are already very happy with the picture quality on the Sony DSC TX10. Very happy seems pretty high on the Happy Scale of Image Quality to me.
I am very happy, given the compromise in quality I know I am making by having the size and shock and weather proofing advantages of the DSC TX10. I am, for instance very happy with the qulaity of this: http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=215097
> Do you want to be Extremely Very Happy?
Thats the idea.
> Unfortunately, to get to Extremely Very Happy with image quality from a DSLR (i.e. full potential), you'd have to go beyond EMTs.
I've no interest in the full potential. I just want the advantages of a better quality lens with a bigger aperture and a a bigger sennsor.
> ... anyway back to your question. What's your budget for the new camera.
I've looked up the Sony RX100 recommended above (sounds good) and at £399 new it would be at the upper end of my budget. Is there any advantage in, say, the most basic Canon DSLR given my lack of desire to go beyond EMT.
Post edited at 22:17
In reply to Dan Arkle:
I'll second that recommendation, as a longtime user of a dSLR.
Before we got the RX100, it was a tough call anyway whether to take the SLR, as we were already lugging one kid on my back, plus a four year old who needed occasional help (and more than occasional cajoling/bribes!). Now we don't even consider it. The compact goes everywhere. We still use the SLR a lot at home, because of the control of depth of field, and we can put a proper flash on it - but it rarely leaves the house.
We picked the RX100 specifically for its sensor size - and we weren't disappointed.
> From your needs list, you should get a large sensor compact/bridge camera. A Sony rx100 would do nicely, although you could go a lot cheaper if you're on a budget.
I'll second that recommendation, as a longtime user of a dSLR.
Before we got the RX100, it was a tough call anyway whether to take the SLR, as we were already lugging one kid on my back, plus a four year old who needed occasional help (and more than occasional cajoling/bribes!). Now we don't even consider it. The compact goes everywhere. We still use the SLR a lot at home, because of the control of depth of field, and we can put a proper flash on it - but it rarely leaves the house.
We picked the RX100 specifically for its sensor size - and we weren't disappointed.
In reply to Nutkey:
I carry an Olympus E-PL3 on most climbs, provided it's not too wet. I have a 75-150mm zoom (150-300mm 35mm equivalent) which I find good for portrait shots.
I carry an Olympus E-PL3 on most climbs, provided it's not too wet. I have a 75-150mm zoom (150-300mm 35mm equivalent) which I find good for portrait shots.
In reply to Robert Durran:
That's Tweaking (or Minor Tweaking), not EMTing
> I also, I admit scandalously, crop my photos.
Hope you don't crop stuff out that might lead us to think differently about the reality you saw
> I've no interest in the full potential.
So that's not Extremely Very Happy, that's making do with second best.
> I've looked up the Sony RX100 recommended above (sounds good) and at £399 new it would be at the upper end of my budget.
I've owned a few Sonys (from a compact like your Sony, through mid range compact (HX9) and an NEX), but never got on with their jpgs - far too over processed out the camera for my taste. Not used an RX100.
> Is there any advantage in, say, the most basic Canon DSLR given my lack of desire to go beyond EMT.
You will notice an improvement I'm sure - but you may have to change the in-camera default jpg processing engine settings to stop further tweaking on PC
However, having owned a Fuji XE1, a X-M1 (£429 with cashback) should be on your list. Fuji X jpgs are very very good straight out camera.
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-fuji-x-m1-digital-camera-with-16-50mm-le...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-m1/12
> The EMT that I do involves using the facility which came with my computer using litle sliders labelled "brightness", "contrast" and "colour" to try to make the photos look as near as possible like the reality
That's Tweaking (or Minor Tweaking), not EMTing
> I also, I admit scandalously, crop my photos.
Hope you don't crop stuff out that might lead us to think differently about the reality you saw
> I've no interest in the full potential.
So that's not Extremely Very Happy, that's making do with second best.
> I've looked up the Sony RX100 recommended above (sounds good) and at £399 new it would be at the upper end of my budget.
I've owned a few Sonys (from a compact like your Sony, through mid range compact (HX9) and an NEX), but never got on with their jpgs - far too over processed out the camera for my taste. Not used an RX100.
> Is there any advantage in, say, the most basic Canon DSLR given my lack of desire to go beyond EMT.
You will notice an improvement I'm sure - but you may have to change the in-camera default jpg processing engine settings to stop further tweaking on PC
However, having owned a Fuji XE1, a X-M1 (£429 with cashback) should be on your list. Fuji X jpgs are very very good straight out camera.
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-fuji-x-m1-digital-camera-with-16-50mm-le...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-m1/12
Post edited at 23:30
In reply to Robert Durran:
I recently bought a used compact with full manual control. (No RAW capability, but I was happy with that compromise). This was bought with weight & space saving properties in mind. The couple of times I've taken it instead of the DSLR I've been reasonably happy with it, but definitely noticed its limitations compared to the latter. Having said that, I'd not be going out in very wet or cold conditions, so my requirements are a bit different to yours.
I'm not quite sure what you actually saw compared to the sample photo you are very happy with, but I'm pretty sure my compact could generate such an image. For the record, I got a Nikon P310 and have found it excels in really low light thanks to the very fast lens, possibly more so than my DSLR. I'd say the images form the compact are slightly sharper than from the big one, but not so much as to be of concern, at least to me. I like the ability the compact gives me to travel light if required, and that's really where it comes into its own. For anything else however, I'll be sticking with my DSLR.
I recently bought a used compact with full manual control. (No RAW capability, but I was happy with that compromise). This was bought with weight & space saving properties in mind. The couple of times I've taken it instead of the DSLR I've been reasonably happy with it, but definitely noticed its limitations compared to the latter. Having said that, I'd not be going out in very wet or cold conditions, so my requirements are a bit different to yours.
I'm not quite sure what you actually saw compared to the sample photo you are very happy with, but I'm pretty sure my compact could generate such an image. For the record, I got a Nikon P310 and have found it excels in really low light thanks to the very fast lens, possibly more so than my DSLR. I'd say the images form the compact are slightly sharper than from the big one, but not so much as to be of concern, at least to me. I like the ability the compact gives me to travel light if required, and that's really where it comes into its own. For anything else however, I'll be sticking with my DSLR.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Do you have any lenses left from the film era? If so it might be worth picking up a used DSLR body that fits the lenses and try if you like it. I personally really like having a DSLR but it is more faff without a question and it is harder to pull out/put away when it is raining, hence me buying the latest body that is water resistant.
Do you have any lenses left from the film era? If so it might be worth picking up a used DSLR body that fits the lenses and try if you like it. I personally really like having a DSLR but it is more faff without a question and it is harder to pull out/put away when it is raining, hence me buying the latest body that is water resistant.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Here's another possibility for you to check out.
I went through a similar search process three months ago and ended up buying a Fuji X20, at roughly the same price as the Sony RX100 which I also looked at. Factors influencing my decision included: (1) the X20 has an unusually good optical viewfinder, which I much prefer to a screen in bright light; (2) I have big and fairly stiff fingers, and found the Sony a touch too small and fiddly to handle; (3) the Fuji X series cameras have a strong reputation for low light performance and for excellent auto jpg quality; and (4) its styling and construction remind me of my old baby Rollei film camera. Factors 1/2/4 may not apply to you but it sounds like 3 does, and so far I'm very pleased with the jpgs from the X20 in auto, intelligent auto, or scene selection mode. The low-light no-flash performance is amazing compared to my old Nikon DSLR or to a cheap compact.
Rob F
Here's another possibility for you to check out.
I went through a similar search process three months ago and ended up buying a Fuji X20, at roughly the same price as the Sony RX100 which I also looked at. Factors influencing my decision included: (1) the X20 has an unusually good optical viewfinder, which I much prefer to a screen in bright light; (2) I have big and fairly stiff fingers, and found the Sony a touch too small and fiddly to handle; (3) the Fuji X series cameras have a strong reputation for low light performance and for excellent auto jpg quality; and (4) its styling and construction remind me of my old baby Rollei film camera. Factors 1/2/4 may not apply to you but it sounds like 3 does, and so far I'm very pleased with the jpgs from the X20 in auto, intelligent auto, or scene selection mode. The low-light no-flash performance is amazing compared to my old Nikon DSLR or to a cheap compact.
Rob F
In reply to Robert Durran:
I'd suggest a compact, such as those Chris JD has mentioned, but make sure you can use it one-handedly. If it has RAW and full manual options, you'll be well on the road to perdition and more satisfying results to boot.
I have an SLR which I've taken on the hill occasionally but like most other people on here, my compacts have had much more use. Also, I suspect you'd get better value for money from a good compact than from a basic DSLR.
I'd suggest a compact, such as those Chris JD has mentioned, but make sure you can use it one-handedly. If it has RAW and full manual options, you'll be well on the road to perdition and more satisfying results to boot.
I have an SLR which I've taken on the hill occasionally but like most other people on here, my compacts have had much more use. Also, I suspect you'd get better value for money from a good compact than from a basic DSLR.
In reply to rif:
I looked at an X20 but decided against it because of the twist on/off switch which I thought would be tricky one-handed. Lovely camera - esp viewfinder.
I looked at an X20 but decided against it because of the twist on/off switch which I thought would be tricky one-handed. Lovely camera - esp viewfinder.
In reply to Robert Durran:
The Sony rx 100 is superb. Currently there is a 'like new' one for sale on amazon for £305 [not mine btw!] and a new one for £367. The Fuji X20 is also a lovely camera. The low light abilities of both are amazing. These cameras have bigger sensors than most compacts and the IQ is excellent - a major improvement on your TX10, particularly if you want to do a bit of cropping and/or print large. From your post it seems to me that a basic DSLR would not be the way to go. I think you may find it a pain in the arse to lug around, would probably take fewer shots and all for no great improvement in IQ over the aforementioned cameras.
The Sony rx 100 is superb. Currently there is a 'like new' one for sale on amazon for £305 [not mine btw!] and a new one for £367. The Fuji X20 is also a lovely camera. The low light abilities of both are amazing. These cameras have bigger sensors than most compacts and the IQ is excellent - a major improvement on your TX10, particularly if you want to do a bit of cropping and/or print large. From your post it seems to me that a basic DSLR would not be the way to go. I think you may find it a pain in the arse to lug around, would probably take fewer shots and all for no great improvement in IQ over the aforementioned cameras.
In reply to Solaris:
Weight, bulk and certainly the ability to use the camera one-handed are not major issues because I see myself continuing to use my shock/weatherproof sony Compact when actually climbing (not having to worry about getting it wet or banging it on the rock is great!)
These large sensor compacts sound like a good option and I suppose would be light enough to use when climbing if my current Sony compact broke or got lost on a trip.
I wonder how big the advantage of interchangeable lenses is on a DSLR. Pre digital I always used to carry two zoom lenses with one going up to 300mm. The Sony RX100 only goes up to 100mm - but with the picture quality and the use of cropping, would that be an issue?
Weight, bulk and certainly the ability to use the camera one-handed are not major issues because I see myself continuing to use my shock/weatherproof sony Compact when actually climbing (not having to worry about getting it wet or banging it on the rock is great!)
These large sensor compacts sound like a good option and I suppose would be light enough to use when climbing if my current Sony compact broke or got lost on a trip.
I wonder how big the advantage of interchangeable lenses is on a DSLR. Pre digital I always used to carry two zoom lenses with one going up to 300mm. The Sony RX100 only goes up to 100mm - but with the picture quality and the use of cropping, would that be an issue?
Post edited at 10:57
In reply to Robert Durran:
This should help with sensor size comparisons:
http://cameraimagesensor.com/size/#14,108,15,163,110,232,b
The Fuji X-M1 has the same sensor size as the Fuji X-Pro
This should help with sensor size comparisons:
http://cameraimagesensor.com/size/#14,108,15,163,110,232,b
The Fuji X-M1 has the same sensor size as the Fuji X-Pro
Post edited at 11:34
In reply to Robert Durran:
This site is really useful as well:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#332,466
This site is really useful as well:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#332,466
In reply to Robert Durran:
Bit out of your budget, but the new micro four thirds GM-1 is tiny and has a much bigger sensor than RX100:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#491,332
Bit out of your budget, but the new micro four thirds GM-1 is tiny and has a much bigger sensor than RX100:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#491,332
In reply to rif:
I also went through a similar process in April this year. For largely similar reasons to yours, I settled on the X-20 and have not been disappointed. It's a great wee camera and I'm looking forward to learning how to use it better.
Any new camera I buy must have a viewfinder - I tried going without, but on bright days afloat or on snow, the results were invariably poor.
responding to Solaris - I've not (yet!) found the twist-lens on/off thing to be a problem. I admit, however, that I've not been climbing with this camera, only using it in situations where both hands can be free.
I also went through a similar process in April this year. For largely similar reasons to yours, I settled on the X-20 and have not been disappointed. It's a great wee camera and I'm looking forward to learning how to use it better.
Any new camera I buy must have a viewfinder - I tried going without, but on bright days afloat or on snow, the results were invariably poor.
responding to Solaris - I've not (yet!) found the twist-lens on/off thing to be a problem. I admit, however, that I've not been climbing with this camera, only using it in situations where both hands can be free.
In reply to ChrisJD:
This sounds very tempting. Presumably the much bigger sensor should give better picture quality than the Sony RX100 (?). I do like the idea of interchangeable lenses for flexibility in the future (though not the cost of getting a 50-200mm one as well as the shorter one which comes with the camera!). I wonder whether cropping a picture taken at 50mm on the XM1's big sensor would give a comparable result to one taken at 100mm on the RX100.
I'll seriously consider the RX100 (there doesn't seem to be a bad word said about it) though the viewfinder on the Fuji X20 would be a plus.
> However, having owned a Fuji XE1, a X-M1 (£429 with cashback) should be on your list. Fuji X jpgs are very very good straight out camera.
This sounds very tempting. Presumably the much bigger sensor should give better picture quality than the Sony RX100 (?). I do like the idea of interchangeable lenses for flexibility in the future (though not the cost of getting a 50-200mm one as well as the shorter one which comes with the camera!). I wonder whether cropping a picture taken at 50mm on the XM1's big sensor would give a comparable result to one taken at 100mm on the RX100.
I'll seriously consider the RX100 (there doesn't seem to be a bad word said about it) though the viewfinder on the Fuji X20 would be a plus.
In reply to Robert Durran:
My fuji X-E1 has completely changed when I use my DSLR. I'll only carry it now when making special trips into the hills for photography or for jobs. Everything else gets the X-E1 and it's a cracking bit of kit.
My fuji X-E1 has completely changed when I use my DSLR. I'll only carry it now when making special trips into the hills for photography or for jobs. Everything else gets the X-E1 and it's a cracking bit of kit.
In reply to london_huddy:
i know what you mean. the X-E1 is fab. i am not sure when i will use my SLR again, it hardly seems worth the bother... particulary so since i have gone and got the XE-2....
i know what you mean. the X-E1 is fab. i am not sure when i will use my SLR again, it hardly seems worth the bother... particulary so since i have gone and got the XE-2....
In reply to mac fae stirling:
Am I right in thinking that the XM1 only differs from the XE1 in that it has fewer bells and whistles - using them in automatic mode (as I will almost entirely be doing) will give identical results (same lens and sensor)?
> i know what you mean. the X-E1 is fab. i am not sure when i will use my SLR again, it hardly seems worth the bother...
Am I right in thinking that the XM1 only differs from the XE1 in that it has fewer bells and whistles - using them in automatic mode (as I will almost entirely be doing) will give identical results (same lens and sensor)?
In reply to Robert Durran:
http://www.wexphotographic.com/blog/fuji-x-m1-vs-x-e1-key-differences
> Am I right in thinking that the XM1 only differs from the XE1
http://www.wexphotographic.com/blog/fuji-x-m1-vs-x-e1-key-differences
In reply to ChrisJD:
Thanks!
So it seems the extra cost of the XE1 is mostly for the viewfinder (it would be nice to have but is really beyond my budget.....)
Thanks!
So it seems the extra cost of the XE1 is mostly for the viewfinder (it would be nice to have but is really beyond my budget.....)
In reply to Robert Durran:
Yep, that's about it.
Plus, Fuji really are excellent at updating firmware across their X-range to give the latest features - which really helps to future proof your investment in the body & system.
Yep, that's about it.
Plus, Fuji really are excellent at updating firmware across their X-range to give the latest features - which really helps to future proof your investment in the body & system.
In reply to Robert Durran:
yes same sensor. the kit lens for the xm1 is the 16-50 which i know nothing about - knowing fuji i am betting it is excellent. the kit lens for the xe1/2 is the 18-55 and it is a cracking lens.
yes same sensor. the kit lens for the xm1 is the 16-50 which i know nothing about - knowing fuji i am betting it is excellent. the kit lens for the xe1/2 is the 18-55 and it is a cracking lens.
In reply to Robert Durran:
I got a DSLR for my birthday a couple of years ago and love it. That said bridge camera systems have come on along a lot recently.
I went on a 1 day course when I got my DSLR which covered the basics (e.g. got you using Tv and Av settings, ISO, white balance etc and away from auto).
One of the best £70 ever spent as its made a big difference to (a) pictures I take (b) enjoyment of photography...would recommend it if you get one.
I got a DSLR for my birthday a couple of years ago and love it. That said bridge camera systems have come on along a lot recently.
I went on a 1 day course when I got my DSLR which covered the basics (e.g. got you using Tv and Av settings, ISO, white balance etc and away from auto).
One of the best £70 ever spent as its made a big difference to (a) pictures I take (b) enjoyment of photography...would recommend it if you get one.
In reply to ChrisJD:
So it looks like a tough choice between the RX100 and the XM1. The XM1 can be bought for £399 (not much more than the RX100) and sounds fantastic and more versatile, but three times the weight so there will be more times I won't want to carry it. In an ideal world I would own both! Tricky one....
So it looks like a tough choice between the RX100 and the XM1. The XM1 can be bought for £399 (not much more than the RX100) and sounds fantastic and more versatile, but three times the weight so there will be more times I won't want to carry it. In an ideal world I would own both! Tricky one....
In reply to Robert Durran:
As others have said, I'd suggest looking at Compact System Cameras such as the Fujifuilm X series and the Olympus PEN series. The latter even does a 'light' version which should be good for climbing, although it has fewer buttons and more touchscreen controls than the Fujifilms.
As others have said, I'd suggest looking at Compact System Cameras such as the Fujifuilm X series and the Olympus PEN series. The latter even does a 'light' version which should be good for climbing, although it has fewer buttons and more touchscreen controls than the Fujifilms.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Thanks to all for the really useful advice!
I've just splashed out and ordered an XE1 with 18-55 lens. It does, by all accounts, sound superb and I decided I didn't want to spend the rest of my life with an XM1 wishing I had a viewfinder. I'm now really looking forwards to having a "proper" camera again (and even learning how to use it properly!). I suspect that, at a future date, when my bank balance has recovered, I might need to plug the gap between it and my little compact with something like the RX100 (or the X20 if I get too used to having a viewfinder......)
Thanks to all for the really useful advice!
I've just splashed out and ordered an XE1 with 18-55 lens. It does, by all accounts, sound superb and I decided I didn't want to spend the rest of my life with an XM1 wishing I had a viewfinder. I'm now really looking forwards to having a "proper" camera again (and even learning how to use it properly!). I suspect that, at a future date, when my bank balance has recovered, I might need to plug the gap between it and my little compact with something like the RX100 (or the X20 if I get too used to having a viewfinder......)
In reply to Robert Durran:
I think the two of you will be very happy together, congratulations!
One big surprise for me was just how good the jpgs are straight out of the camera - it takes some work in postprocessing to learn to match and then exceed the in camera engine!
I think the two of you will be very happy together, congratulations!
One big surprise for me was just how good the jpgs are straight out of the camera - it takes some work in postprocessing to learn to match and then exceed the in camera engine!
In reply to london_huddy:
Yes, that was certainly part of the appeal!
> One big surprise for me was just how good the jpgs are straight out of the camera - it takes some work in postprocessing to learn to match and then exceed the in camera engine!
Yes, that was certainly part of the appeal!
In reply to Robert Durran:
nice one, i hope you are both very happy together! i love my xe1 and the 18-55 lens is great. btw, the 35mm lens is superb..... just saying....
nice one, i hope you are both very happy together! i love my xe1 and the 18-55 lens is great. btw, the 35mm lens is superb..... just saying....
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...