More about cameras

~ beetleypete

After my recent post about buying a new camera, I was encouraged by a good response from everyone out there. I had some great suggestions from a few readers, including a real top tip from photographer Martin, via Pippa. Cameras are quite a niche topic, so anyone with no interest in them, please stop reading now. It gets more involved…

I have a new shortlist. My previous front-runners have now gone, due to the small sensors found in them. Sensor size is fairly crucial, so a few favourites have had to go, as their sensors do not manage to overcome their good points. That’s a shame, as they are also considerably cheaper. This means that my previously well-researched shortlist of two cameras has now had to be scrapped, and extended to three. All of the three are substantially more expensive, but as this might well be the last serious camera that I ever buy, it might be worth the extra expenditure.

The evenings at chez beetleypete have been consumed with Internet research. I have read reviews, user forums, seller websites, and photo blogs, until I was literally exhausted with camera-speak. I have drawn up physical and mental shortlists, saved pages as bookmarks, visited manufacturer’s websites, and perused the selling pages of every known camera supplier in the UK. Suffice to say, research is now done. My shortlist of three is now complete. Two Fuji products, one Panasonic, all around the same price. They all have good size sensors, with the Panasonic the smallest, at micro four-thirds.
Here we go.

1) First choice. Panasonic DMC LX 100. (Thanks Martin) Leica lens, 24-75mm equivalent, lots of features, does most things I could ever want, but it has a separate flash. Modern style, with a retro feel, not going to fit into a pocket, but a manageable size, much smaller than any SLR.

2) Fuji X100s. Unashamedly retro, fixed 35mm equivalent lens, beautifully made, and built-in flash. No zoom capability, and might be superceded by a new model, but tactile, solid, and very desirable for a photographer to own. Loved by reviewers, perhaps a little overpriced.

3) Fuji XPro-1. This is a solid camera with interchangeable lenses. The best lenses are very expensive, almost as much as the camera body. The current deal is with two cheaper lenses, with 35mm equivalents of 27mm and 40mm. It is incredibly well made, and loved by ‘serious’ photography equipment reviewers. Flash is a cost-option, but it has a full-size APS-C sensor, so the potential is there.

All of these are the best part of £600 to buy, and I might be exchanging my current kit to reduce costs a little. Any ideas? Does anyone have these cameras, or experience of them? Advice appreciated. Pete.

I am including links below, for anyone remotely interested.
http://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-digital-cameras—point-and-shoot/compact-cameras/dmc-lx100.html
http://www.fujifilm.eu/uk/products/digital-cameras/proenthusiast-fixed-lens/model/x100s/
http://www.fujifilm.eu/uk/products/digital-cameras/interchangeable-lens-cameras/model/x-pro1/

19 thoughts on “More about cameras”

  2. Well Pete, save yourself £300 and get this:

    Canon EOS M Compact System Camera – Red (18MP, Includes Speedlite 90EX and EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM) 3.0…
    by Canon
    £299.99new

    You don’t really need anything else. The only thing is there is no viewfinder but the quality is great and it’s small. Try one out.
    Ro

    Like

    Reply

  3. All those look good Pete, I would go with the Lumix myself (4K video too). I think you have to go and feel them in your hands and buy what is most comfortable. I presume they all have a RAW facility which I find imperative. Do you use Photoshop? It’s the only software I use and the creative
    possibilities are amazing.
    Remember also that the brighter the lens the better, i.e. go for F1.4/F2 if you can. I have a brilliant 70mm-200mm zoom which is F2.8 but of course it retails at about £1500.00, however the quality is excellent . . sharp and full of contrast, the attributes of a fast lens.
    Check the ASA rating as well, if it can go to 6400 or above then it means you have little need for flash (however you will have to manage the colour temperature adjustment in low tungsten light). Have a look at the menu and its ease of use.
    What do you plan to take pictures of? If its landscapes you will need a long lens facility, if its generally a bit of everything you need a fast zoom lens and it is worth paying a lot of cash for one, as much as the body in my opinion. As you well know, there are no cheap options . . but be comfortable.
    Let me know what you decide on, cheers, Ro x

    Like

    Reply

    1. Thanks for the advice Ro. It started as an idea to replace my SLR and large flash etc, with something easy to carry, offering an all-in-one solution. I will probably take shots of the local area, Ollie, and places I visit in Norfolk. I thought to get something of a manageable size, which might make me carry it around more. I want something that produces good jpegs, as although I have one version of Photoshop, I really don’t want to get into shooting RAW , and having to spend a lot of time in post-processing.
      It might well come down to price, and available funds mate. I will let you know what happens. x

      Like

      Reply

    1. Believe it or not David, that’s fairly cheap by modern standards. I have friends who have paid more for one lens. When I bought my Canon T90 film camera many years ago, the recommended retail price was £500 body only, almost half a month’s salary back then. Cameras are actually cheaper in most states in the USA, as we have Value Added Tax at 20% to pay here, as well as European distributors marking up higher margins that they can get away with in America.
      And don’t get me started on the price we have to pay for a car!
      Best wishes as always, Pete.

      Like

      Reply

  5. I’m sorry, but I can’t contribute with any help to this matter, Pete. I habe no experience with your three listed favourites, but I’ll eagerly follow the process and learn together with you. 🙂
    Greetings from Cley,
    Dina – and the rest of the gang say hell! too! 🙂

    Like

    Reply

    1. Thanks Dina. Not on a par with your big Nikon of course, but we will see what happens.
      Thanks for the follow by the way. Hope all’s well. Love from Pete and Ollie. X

      Like

      Reply

    1. Lots of people seem to like the Fuji. I currently have (on loan to my stepson) a Fuji S5 Pro SLR, based on a Nikon D200. It is about 7 years old There is a Nikon full-size accessory flash, and a Nikon 28-80 lens. Probably not worth much these days, so if the p/ex offer is too low, I might keep it.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    1. I have had a few smaller compacts with tiny sensors, and been unhappy with the results. I sometimes print at 8 x 10, but have had larger prints made professionally (as gifts) up to poster size. The sensor in my current camera is a DX-CMOS and gives good results. So, I didn’t want to go much smaller than micro four-thirds, if I can help it.
      I was going to pay over £400 for a camera with a 2/3 or 1 1/7 sensor, so thought an extra £160 might be worth it, for the better detail. I could be wrong of course.
      Thanks Sue, comments much appreciated.
      Best wishes, Pete.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Ah, OK… Now I see where you’re coming from, Pete. Tiny compact camera sensors aren’t good news, but you should find MFT fine…I’ve come from an APS-C sensor (Nikon) to MFT (Olympus) and quite happy…. The dynamic range seems to be good enough for my purposes.

        Like

        Reply

All comments welcome

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.