Finding a compact, large sensor travel camera

[raymanh]

I have, just recently, purchased a Ricoh GR. It's a small pocket-able point-and-shoot lookalike with a fixed 28mm lens that gives images literally as good as most DSLRs. What's more, it's button configuration is completely customaziable which makes it much much easier to shoot with once set up. I want to go travelling with this, but at a fixed 28mm I know I am going to miss a lot of action. Here are the options I have in my mind:

Ricoh GXR with A16: 24-85 lens f3.5 (bit slow), same Ricoh customizability. But big lens and zoom only by button.

Fuji X-E1 with 18-55 lens f2.8, nice form, lots of external controls. Don't like the fuji colours. I'm sure this can change when edited later in RAW to produce heavier, more saturated results.

Sony NEX 6 with 16-50/18-200. Menus look horrible, slow.

Any thoughts?

[MysteryLemon]

None of the above are exactly small. None of them are pocketable.

Sony RX-100 is about the best image quality you can currently get from a truly pocketable camera.

Mirrorless cameras are smaller than a DSLR, yes, but they still aren't small. This coming from someone who sold a decent bit of DSLR kit to switch to a smaller, more practical mirrorless system, to find it to be just as impractical as the DSLR, and is now looking to go back to a DSLR system as it's better in just about every way.

[markmullen]

Linhof Kardan.

[PleasantPeasant]

If I was in your position I'd consider returning or selling the Ricoh and get ready to buy the new Sony RX100 MkIII.

Preview videos now on YouTube. They have added a built in EVF and removed the hotshoe. The camera just looks insanely good. Probably around £700 launch.

[DavidY]

Run with existing Ricoh and work around the lens, it will make you work harder and consequently take better photos, I've done too holidays with only a Fuji X100 and not regretted it.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/89667368@N05/sets/72...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/89667368@N05/sets/72...

[budfox]

Second hand D700. It ain't compact but it's bloody brilliant.

[ian in lancs]

budfox said:

Second hand D700. It ain't compact but it's bloody brilliant.

x2

[Simpo Two]

markmullen said:

Linhof Kardan.

Is he still playing for Spurs?

[the-photographer]

Smallest Sony RX100 MKII (warning MKIII model coming soon)

Then consider Panasonic GM1 or the larger Powershot GX1 MKII

[marctwo]

RX-100 II can be had for reasonable money now. I think the Panasonic GM1 with kit lens is a good call and additional lenses if needed. If you need lots of zooooom and want good video maybe a Sony RX-10?

[fido]

the-photographer said:

Smallest Sony RX100 MKII (warning MKIII model coming soon)

Given the emphasis on requiring a large sensor, might be worth waiting for the MK3 as it is expected to have a fast 1.8-2.8 lens. That's a huge improvement on the MK2.

[carreauchompeur]

That RX100 looks great. I think this is what I need for my next travels. Currently have a Lumix FZ45 bridge camera but the lumpy shape just makes it a bit conspicuous all the time, much prefer to pop off subtle people shots and landscapes without drawing attention to myself.

[GetCarter]

Gotta be the RX100. Nothing comes close image wise, for the size.

[Elderly]

fido said:

........ might be worth waiting for the MK3 as it is expected to have a fast 1.8-2.8 lens. That's a huge improvement on the MK2.

The MK3 has a 24-70 mm lens, the MK2 a 28-100 mm.

[anonymous-user]

GetCarter said:

Gotta be the RX100. Nothing comes close image wise, for the size.

Mr Carter, along with a number of others in this thread are quite correct in recommending the RX100.

It simply smashes it right out of the ballpark with every photo, and has been the reason my Nikon DSLR and selection of good quality lenses have been getting left at home.

The detail and clarity in every photo you take with it is just unreal given the size.

I now take the RX100 on holiday with me instead of my DSLR, and the whole "best camera is the one you have with you" really comes into play as I almost always have the RX100 in a pocket whereas I would have to think twice about walking about with a DSLR hanging round my neck.

I'm simply an amateur who enjoys taking photos, and I will wheel out the below pic again for viewing as it's a great example of simply having the RX100 in my pocket when I went somewhere and couldn't take a DSLR.

Photo was taken handheld, through glass, and simply set to black and white in Lightroom. I have it printed up huge on my living room wall and people stare at it as the detail goes on forever. They then naturally ask what camera it was, and get a bit of a shock when I show them the Sony!




Click here to see the rather huge original photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/aircooledsix/1187786...

As others have mentioned, the Mk3 is out in a few weeks, which is stuffed with an almost unbelievable set of specs and improvements. Lots of details here: http://www.trustedreviews.com/sony-rx100-iii_Digit...

Edited by NinjaPower on Tuesday 20th May 11:47

[raymanh]

The RX100 does look great and from the videos I've seen of it, very customizable. I'm just a bit reserved about its low light performance with its small 1 inch sensor, which is a big requirement for me. I'm aiming to get some beautiful clean images to print out, hence good high ISO. Part of me is now thinking I should just take the bulk and get a proper DSLR, like a D7000, which isn't any more expensive than a new RX100III.

[marctwo]

Panasonic GM1 is a good option. Bigger sensor and still very compact.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dm...

[the-photographer]

NinjaPower said:

Photo was taken handheld, through glass, and simply set to black and white in Lightroom. I have it printed up huge on my living room wall and people stare at it as the detail goes on forever. They then naturally ask what camera it was, and get a bit of a shock when I show them the Sony!

I'm not turning this into a direct comparison, but as discussed many times before, if you don't print big, only publish to friends and family, only have a 1080P TV, then small sensors can be adequate;



Yes, this loses detail 4000 x 2232 versus 5472 x 3648 but for a small compact camera (LX7) its OK for A3 and smaller prints.

Originals on http://lx3.smugmug.com/Architecture/The-Shard-Lond...

[GetCarter]

the-photographer said:

I'm not turning this into a direct comparison, but as discussed many times before, if you don't print big, only publish to friends and family, only have a 1080P TV, then small sensors can be adequate;

Except of course, I often crop, so the bigger the image the more chance I have to crop.

[the-photographer]

Yes, agreed. I should have added that to my list of things.