UKC

Question has probably been asked before, but I'll ask again anyway....!

So finally decided the old camera is past its use by date - it's a Panasonic Lumix from about 3 yrs ago. There's dust inside the lens, a couple of bashes, and it's anti-shake seems to have packed in, not to mention it isn't overly clever at focusing sometimes. Given the cost of refurbishing, would rather look at a new one.

So, the question - Bridge or another Compact? Most of my photography is mountain biking related during the summer, and mountaineering related in the winter. Bulk is a concern for the biking, but super-zoom and more features are a major plus for the mountains. Looking to spend about £200 - £300, so things like the FUJI FinePix S1 are achievable in the Bridge department, but even £200 gets you a pretty decent compact these days...

What's peoples experiences with using big cameras in the hills? Worth the extra weight/bulk, or does it just get in the way? How good are modern compacts? Other than super zoom, am I really missing much with a good quality compact?

Any personal experiences or recommendations appreciated - most online reviews are more concerned with folks who take pictures of insects, babies and flowers as opposed to people who use them up mountains or in harsher environments...!

Cheers,
Gordon

In reply to peebles boy:

Ive got both. Compact (Canon SX240hs with 20x zoom) is my go-to clipped-to-my-rucksack camera. Either the bridge camera (fuji hs30) is either tucked away in the rucksack or left in the car/house.

Personally, I think that unless photography is the main focus of your days in the hills then modern compacts are more than enough. You say your current one is an older panasonic lumix. One of the TZ series? I've seen some great pics taken with them and would have bought one last year when I got my canon, but the canon was too much of a bargain.

In reply to peebles boy:

If I were going to own one camera, it would be a compact, not a larger camera.

For climbing in particular, a large camera can be a pain to carry where it is easily accessible.

I have a lot of cameras. The ones that get used the most are my compacts.

Given your budget, this is the camera I would buy: Sony RX100 ii You can pick them up on ebay for a little over 300

In reply to peebles boy:
Have a look at the Sony Rx100

Although still a compact you have a lot of manual settings and this camera has made me learn a lot about photography that I didn't need to to get the best out of my previous compact camera.

Once you get the settings right the quality is superb and a step up from anything my previous compact could achieve.

You can get the mark 1 within your price bracket.

cheers

Gaz

Edit Lol Kai beat me to it

In reply to Gazlynn:


I'll second that!

In reply to Robert Durran:

Good to see recommendations for the Sony RX100. I'm pleased with mine too. I don't think you'll get as good quality with a Bridge camera, and you'll be carrying a lot of extra bulk.

Martin

In reply to peebles boy:

A bridge camera may have a larger sensor and better lens but you are probably not going to miss either if you're shooting in good light, ie outside in daylight. The ease of whipping out a compact will probably far outweigh a slightly lower image quality, especially with the very respectable quality available from modern compacts.

Another happy RX100 (first version) user. We still have and use a decent SLR. Before the RX100, we used to debate lugging the SLR up the hil vs what was then a fairly decent compact. Now we don't even consider it.

In reply to Jimbo C:


The sensor in the RX100 is far bigger (about 4 times the area) than the one in the Fuji S1.

In reply to Gazlynn:

Gaz/Kai/almost everyone else...!

Had a look at the RX100. I'll be honest, just looking at that flash unit makes me think I'll break it the first time I used it. Is it as flimsy as it looks?

Cheers,
Gordon

In reply to peebles boy:

I was worried about that too. It is a lot sturdier than I was expecting but I'll be honest I don't use the flash very often.

Another tip that Robert Durran kindly gave me is if you decide to get this camera buy the Alexander S White's book "Photographers guide to the Sony rx100". It helped me heaps.

Good luck with your choice

Cheers

Gaz

In reply to peebles boy:

You will not use a flash for most outdoor stuff anyway. I actually can't find any situation where you would need a flash while hiking/climbing. It might help if the sun is harsh and there are lots of shadows, but it's usually solvable by getting in a right position. Selfies at night might be another answer why you need a flash, but they will look rubbish. I've got Olympus E-PL5 which has no built-in flash (there's a wee one provided anyway) and I don't even carry it while being outdoors. Most likely, you will need to use it indoors, but you will definitely be more gentle with the camera given you won't wear gloves and you will be standing on a firm surface .

My suggestion was Fujifilm X20 or X30, but it might confuse you even more...

In reply to peebles boy:

The flash is designed so you can use it to bounce light, I have had my RX100 a couple of years and had no issues,


Chris

In reply to Gazlynn & other rx100 users:

How do you manage without a viewfinder in bright snow?

I'd love to use a compact instaed of a bridge but I just can't manage without a viewfinder in bright conditions... Is there a trick to it?

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

The latest Rx100 has a viewfinder I believe but it's way out of my price bracket.

I suppose it's what you're used to. I've never owned a camera with a viewfinder so don't really miss it.

On the few times glare has been an issue I take photos one handed with the other hand as a shade over the camera and squint my eyes.

cheers

Gaz

In reply to PPP:


The flash will rarely be needed indoors unless it is dimly lit. Probably only likely use is photos of people or things at night. I've yet to use mine.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


The lack of a viewfinder (when you are used to one) is the only drawback I can find with the original RX100, but it is a trade off with price and weight (will be the same with almost all compacts). When very bright, I tend to play on the safe side with the zoom and then crop and straighten afterwards.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Canon G16 is superb compact with a good optical viewfinder, I use it a lot for climbing and skiing. The dioptre adjustment on the viewfinder is particularly useful for those who may need reading glasses to view the screen

In reply to kevin stephens:


But bulkier, 50% heavier and a sensor about a third the area of the RX100. It's all trade offs........ If money were no object the RX100 Mark 3 would probably be a no brainer.

In reply to Robert Durran:

The flash is definitely needed somewhere in the pub. I have been working in parties and pubs as a photographer and it's usually dark in there, as well as lots of movement and lots of colourful lights which you might prefer to override with a flash.

In reply to PPP:

A flash is very useful on a sunny day for a bit of fill in on portraits when the subjct is back lit. I use it it a lot on the hills.

In reply to peebles boy:

For no reason other than personal preference I would go for a good quality compact in the hills, Ifind 28mm to c 120mm plenty for the shots I wil be taking. I user a Fuji X10 in the hills would wuite happily go for the X30 if I lost it, for the size of most bridges you'd be as well getting as small dSLR or mirrorless system, though that would up your costs.

In reply to peebles boy:

The main advantage of a bridge is zoom range, if you don't need the range then a 'proper' compact like the RX100 will give better image quality and more artistic options.