UKC

Hi all,

After a bit of advice really. Looking at investing in a new camera for use in the mountains - the usual mix of ski-mountaineering, rock, ice, summer alpinism etc. After a camera that will allow easy manipulation of manual functions, will take quality shots and isn't too cumbersome. I'm happy with going to the larger end of the compact range, but I should stress the 'easy manipulation...' - not so much after a simple point-and-shoot. Rather, I'd like something that will allow my photography to develop: I don't want to have to fiddle with small four-way control pads to go into a menu for focus, out and in for aperture, another one for X, and then Y, only to find the focus wasn't quite right etc.

Two requests really:
(1) what features of a camera make it appropriate for the above? What's relevant/what doesn't matter so much for the intended usage? For example: should I worry about having a super zoom, or do my priorities not match that? What about apertures, sensor sizes...
(2) what cameras out there at the moment fit the bill? If possible offer alternatives at different price points.

Thanks,
Tom

In reply to tjhare1:

I have been using a Panasonic Lumix lx-7 recently. It has a decent zoom range, fast and sharp lens and manual controls. A bit bulkier than some compacts, but still usable for climbing.

In reply to tjhare1:

I have a Panasonic LX100, haven't used it much yet as I haven't been out in the mountains since I bought it.

From my limited use on a few trips and at a wedding I am very happy with it, the ability to change every setting (shutter speed, appature, exposure compensation) with dials was a big selling point for me as it should mean that it is easy to use in gloves.

At a wedding I went to recently I was pretty amazed with the results with the lens wide open at ISO 3200. It doesn't have a very big zoom, but I hardly zoom anyway so that didnt worry me. I also like the fact that I can put a filter on the front of the lens and not worry about a lens cap, as I dont really care about scratching a cheap filter, but would be a bit more worried about the main lens element.

In reply to tjhare1:

Lots of great cameras out there. Compact-wise, I lke the Canon G1X for the hills - there is a new version but the image quality/sensor is the same. It has a big sensor for a compact, it is chunky and built like a brick, has full manual controls if you want, a EV dial on the top of the camera, it has a decent zoom, a flip screen, the IQ is excellent and you can go up to at least 1600 ISO no problem. It is useless for macro shots. You can get a fairly cheap third party automatic lens cover so you can use it with one hand (it comes with a lens cap, which is a pain). You can easly get one second hand on Amazon for a good price. I treat it quite roughly in winter and it seems to cope no problem.

In reply to tjhare1:

The Sony RX100 seems to be the defacto answer for a high end compact.

I have just gone M4/3 with the Olympus OMD E-M10, couldn't be happier.

In reply to Dark-Cloud:


It has been for a while as there was nothing that competed due to it having a 1" sensor in such a small body, however with the LX100 if you are willing to trade for a bit of a larger camera (so easier to use in gloves) you get a much larger sensor again (full micro 4/3s)

In reply to tjhare1:

I would consider looking at the Panasonic GX1 or other equivalent micro 4/3s. I have found it to be great for allowing plenty of scope for progression in my photography with lots of easy to use manual controls (via back buttons or touch screen), preset "modes" and the option to turn it to full auto for situations when point and shoot is preferable.

Not a compact but when paired with a power zoom lens and something like a Lowepro Dashpoint 20 case it sits nicely on the back of a harness. I have carried mine on plenty of multipitch rock and winter routes without issue.

The only drawback is that it is too big to leave hanging round your neck tucked into your jacket for quick/easy access which you could do with a compact, albeit, you might not want to with an expensive one.

For me the photo quality speaks for itself and it has been the catalyst for me taking a proper interest in photography as opposed to simply taking the odd bum shot.

In reply to alastairbegley:

Not sure the LX100 is really a compact though in traditional terms, might as well just go CSCand have a bit more flexibility, the OMD with the pancake kit zoom or the GX7 with the 20mm prime are just as small.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#569,472.30,521.409,ha,t

In reply to Dark-Cloud:

why not one of the APS-C compacts with interchangable lenses?

In reply to malk:

Such as ?

In reply to malk:


Much bulkier and heavier than an RX100. For that reason I have one of each for different situations.

In reply to Dark-Cloud:

I looked at this before buying the camera, the GX7 is actually a lot bigger in reality when compared to the LX100 and I didn't really want to just be restricted to a 20mm (ie.40mm) prime.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Panasonic GM1 or GM5 and either the 15mm or 20mm pancake is not all that much bigger than RX100 / LX100.

In reply to tjhare1:

For compacts the Canon G16 would be your best choice, slightly chunky for a compact but fine for rock climbing and skiing with neck strap down front of my jumper, wide range of controls that can be used with gloves on, good optical viewfinder, very useful exposure compensation knob for snowy scenes, build in auto lens cap

Big compact Canon G7 X, as above but with much larger sensor for image quality

DSLR Pentax K-S2 with prime 15mm lens. This is the closest in image quality to me broken Ricoh GR1 35mm film camera.; a lot bulkier but still very compact compared to most DSLRs, especially with zoom lenses

In reply to HeMa:

true, but also really fiddly to use!

In reply to HeMa:

Maybe, but they are micro 4/3, not APS-C.

In reply to tjhare1:

Might be worth researching the Ricoh GR Digital series. Very easy to change the exposure compensation one handed with gloves on, or indeed the f stop, aperture and ISO all one handed if you wanted. It's way way lighter and smaller than the Cannon G series. I got a GRD III cheap recently, but the newer ones are cripplingly expensive.

+1 for the Sony RX100.

I got one after recommendations on this site and it is excellent, although having said that I haven't got that much photography experience. I mainly use if for climbing, travel and take it to weddings. It has plenty of manual control over the functions, and I've found I've been using them an increasing amount. The automatic settings also work well if you want to take a snap mid route. It's bigger than some compacts, but it still fits in a pocket without a case on, or clips onto a harness in a case without taking up to much space.

I'd certainly recommend looking into it.

Edit - If you get one and use it in a desert, they don't like sand!

In reply to tjhare1:
Just to go against popular opinion I had an RX100M3 for a bit and I didn't think much to the photo quality (a friend uses his A7 for video but will always go back to a 5D for photos). The video was amazing but if I were buying a new high-end compact for photos specifically, i'd be going Canon (or Nikon, I wouldn't know about that dark art though)

In reply to tjhare1:



I've just got a X100T - loving it. The dual viewfinder, aperture ring and dials are a real pleasure to use.

Fits your 'list of wants' very well.

I've tried lots of compacts/CSC and the X100T seems to be 'the one'.

Excluding DSLR, my small camera bibliography includes (from LR Metadata):

Canon G7, G11, A810, A1300, S40, S60, S70, S90, S100.
Panasonic: GF-1+20mm, GH-2
Sony: T1, T9, W300, HX9V, NEX-5, A6000
Pentax: A10
Fuji: XE-1, X100T

Strange - never owned a Nikon!

In reply to tjhare1:
I use a sony Rx100 and the main plus point is the quality of the images it takes for such a compact camera. It doesn't have the greatest of zooms but can work around that when home.
Photo of a bee in my garden zoomed in using lightroom and not the camera:-

https://www.flickr.com/photos/garethlynn/16868473427/in/album-7215765183746...

I do find that the camera is a bit awkward and fiddly to operate in a mountain enviroment and the on off has a mega delay and virtually impossible to operate with gloves on, although no different to the canon ixus or the other sony compact that I owned although the rx100 does have a facility to save 3 of your favorite settings on the memory recall button which is a step in the right direction.

good luck with whatever you choose.

Gaz

Edit - like my climbing I'm a proper punter when it comes to photography and I'm certainly no photographer just a point and click person

In reply to tjhare1:

Thanks for all the responses everybody - most helpful!

In reply to ChrisJD:





I've had an X100s for about 3 months and it is an absolute joy to use. Image quality is fantastic.

In reply to Glyno:

All great

Some general initial thoughts on Fuji jpg & RAW.

The the noise reduction on the jpg engine is a bit aggressive and does smear a bit of detail, so have turned down to NR to -2.

Having shot around 1300 jpg, now having a go at RAWs in LR6 - Adobe have matched each 'jpg' setting really well via the RAW Profile setting - so you are not fixed at capture stage (you can bracket the effects at jpg capture though).

Side by side of Fuji-jpg versus RAW with LR-Profile shows just how damn good the jpgs are!, Only small IQ gains (100% pixel peeping) with RAW. Changing profile in RAW is a real advantage if you like the different jpg styles (which i do), and highlight/shadow recovery is also a bit better. Worth the extra file size.... not sure yet (no extra real processing faf in LR if using RAW).

In reply to ChrisJD:

Since owning the camera I suspect I haven't actually shot a single jpeg, and that's despite the jpeg quality apparently being amazing!
It's just the habit of severals years of shooting raw, saving raw, and converting as and when required.

In reply to Glyno:
Shot RAW on previous good cameras and DSLRs, but thought I'd give the famous Fuji jpgs a fair go.

And they are very very good. Probably 95% good enough for 95% of general shots.

And the jpegs seem to have a RAW-like response in editing - they hold up really well to even pretty severe editing, so much so you forget they are jpgs.

RAW does give you a small edge though, so I tip my hat to the Fuji jpg engine, respect! (and have now gone back to RAW old habits).


Some LR edited jpg from Lewis/Harris in Outer Hebs (first three sunset shots are on Canon 70D, which never then came out of bag again on the whole trip).

https://www.flickr.com/photos/105343926@N08/sets/72157651805243984
(hopefully this work - link to Public shots only)

In reply to ChrisJD:

Very nice! Some particularly impressive panos

In reply to Glyno:



The jpg sweep pano feature is great fun (some have been done in LR though).

I got some very bad banding on some of the sweep pano shots - have since found out that chances of this can be minimised by 1/200 or less, fixed ISO and manual exposure.

In reply to ChrisJD:




I've never used the sweep pano feature! ...I really ought to get round to reading the manual.
I've been very impressed by LR's photo merging

In reply to tjhare1:

Rumours that Sony RX100 Mark 4 due out this month with 4/3 sensor, would be good if made a bit larger and then it would be easier to use.

In reply to m0unt41n:


Wouldn't that spoil one of the RX100's big selling points - that it's a truly compact camera with a big sensor?

In reply to Robert Durran:

True but I've got big hands and I find the RX100 a bit too small.

In reply to Robert Durran:

The rumours say only a tiny bit bigger:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-rx100m4-with-ft-sensor-has-about-the-sam...

In reply to tjhare1:

Nobody's mentioned the digital version of the Ricoh GR climbers classic camera yet?! I've used the previous small sensor model, but the new version, with the big chip gets rave reviews. Not too small for big hands, and slips into those little breast pockets, common on modern clothing tops, due to its slim profile.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/06/07/the-ricoh-gr-camera-review-the-new...

In reply to tjhare1:

I would be also looking at the Panasonic LX-100

- Just easier to use than the Sony in terms of ergonomics
- Much more compact than a G series with equivalent lens. Hard to beat that f1.7/f2.8

In reply to tjhare1:

Well you did say high-end. https://luminous-landscape.com/leica-q-hands-on-and-video-interview/

In reply to John2:

And there is the 'cheaper' Sony RX-1

In reply to tjhare1:

Nikon A is very small, high quality images and has auto as well as manual features.

It's a fixed lens. Ricoh do something similar.