Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Itch for new compact
#1
I've been feeling an itch to get a new compact... this would be a carry-everywhere pocket camera, so bridge cameras are out.

Rough requirements in order of preference, highest priority first:
1 must be coat pocketable
2 Long zoom target 400mm+ equivalent full frame at some usable quality, 300mm minimum.
3 Quick and accurate single shot AF
4 Quick startup time, say, less than 2 seconds.
5 Reasonable macro (say equiv. to 0.5x on APS-C).
5 Wide angle 24mm equivalent full frame
6 Serious photographer friendly features would be nice
7 RAW would be a nice extra but not essential if the jpeg is decent quality

If it helps, what I'm using now is the Sony HX9V. It's ok but I really fancy something more. Of the above requirements it fits in my pocket fine, 24-384mm equiv. and usable macro. It's major weaknesses include: very slow startup, and the noise reduction is very strong and you can't usefully turn it down to try and regain some detail from being smeared out. I'm not convinced newer newer models in the HX series really improve that much.

Have to say the Canon SX50 strongly tempted me, but it is big enough it wouldn't be carry everywhere.

The Canon SX260/280 sounds like possible candidates, as are the Panasonic TZ30/40 models. Both offer generous zoom, although neither does RAW. I haven't looked at their respective startup times and AF capability yet, but I'm guessing at least the AF of either is adequate.

Thinking back to my E-P1 days with Pana pancake 20mm, I wouldn't rule out mirrorless system. In this case I think we would now be looking at a pancake standard zoom. Add a 2nd lens to get the extra reach, if that 2nd lens isn't too big. A 2nd lens could be accecptable since it could go into another pocket and isn't fixed. So perhaps an Oly body, X pancake and a 200mm zoom could do the trick (macro aside). I notice NEX has a 210mm zoom, and the Nikon 1 with 110mm zoom both would just about scrape the 300mm equiv. requirement, although I'm not sure about their size.

If I sound confused, I am. I would welcome any suggestions if there is anything else I may have overlooked.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#2
Not sure about the SX280 (new generation), but the old SX230 (240) and SX260 are apparently nicer than their Panasonic/sony counterparts in IQ, and they have one big advantage: CHDK firmware. 

 

Just put it on the SD card, and you will have:

RAW files, bracketing, full manual control over exposure, zebra mode, live histogram, grids, 

 
  • <b>Motion detection</b> - Trigger exposure in response to motion, fast enough to catch lightning.
  • <b><a class="" href="http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/USB_Remote_Cable" title="USB Remote Cable">USB remote</a></b> - Simple DIY remote allows you to control your camera remotely.
  • <b>Scripting</b> - Control CHDK and camera features using ubasic and Lua scripts. Enables time lapse, motion detection, advanced bracketing, and much more.
<p style="font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;margin-left:0px;">I think that CHDK firmware makes these cameras more attractive than any other small differences, and it makes the Sx230/240 worthwhile.

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/SX230

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/SX240

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/SX260

#3
VERY good point there! I had forgotten about existence of CHDK, and on a similar note I never got round to trying Magic Lantern either... the SX240 is very affordable, well within the realms of get it and try it territory. Just need to look up what the difference is between it and the SX260 which is only a little more.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#4
Have ordered the SX240 now which is due to arrive tomorrow. Appears the only difference between the 240 and 260 is GPS, which I don't really care for or need. I hope to give it the standard duck test then.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#5
I have one of the sx cameras (I think 230); chose it over the sony when i was picking one (it was a toss up with different advantages between them). I don't remember it having 24mm - thought it was 28mm; I guess the new one is 25mm. Anyways the only real complaint with the sx230 was CA; otherwise I liked it quite a bit - took it up to N. Falls couple of summer ago. Oh yea and the battery is a little small; for me fine for a day or so but have to remember to recharge.

-

Weird dpreview seems to suggest the 230 is slight better than the 260; though 260 has longer reach.

#6
Quote:I've been feeling an itch to get a new compact... this would be a carry-everywhere pocket camera, so bridge cameras are out.


Rough requirements in order of preference, highest priority first:

1 must be coat pocketable

2 Long zoom target 400mm+ equivalent full frame at some usable quality, 300mm minimum.

3 Quick and accurate single shot AF

4 Quick startup time, say, less than 2 seconds.

5 Reasonable macro (say equiv. to 0.5x on APS-C).

5 Wide angle 24mm equivalent full frame

6 Serious photographer friendly features would be nice

7 RAW would be a nice extra but not essential if the jpeg is decent quality


If it helps, what I'm using now is the Sony HX9V. It's ok but I really fancy something more. Of the above requirements it fits in my pocket fine, 24-384mm equiv. and usable macro. It's major weaknesses include: very slow startup, and the noise reduction is very strong and you can't usefully turn it down to try and regain some detail from being smeared out. I'm not convinced newer newer models in the HX series really improve that much.


Have to say the Canon SX50 strongly tempted me, but it is big enough it wouldn't be carry everywhere.


The Canon SX260/280 sounds like possible candidates, as are the Panasonic TZ30/40 models. Both offer generous zoom, although neither does RAW. I haven't looked at their respective startup times and AF capability yet, but I'm guessing at least the AF of either is adequate.


Thinking back to my E-P1 days with Pana pancake 20mm, I wouldn't rule out mirrorless system. In this case I think we would now be looking at a pancake standard zoom. Add a 2nd lens to get the extra reach, if that 2nd lens isn't too big. A 2nd lens could be accecptable since it could go into another pocket and isn't fixed. So perhaps an Oly body, X pancake and a 200mm zoom could do the trick (macro aside). I notice NEX has a 210mm zoom, and the Nikon 1 with 110mm zoom both would just about scrape the 300mm equiv. requirement, although I'm not sure about their size.


If I sound confused, I am. I would welcome any suggestions if there is anything else I may have overlooked.
 

If you could relax your lens requirements to a 28-200 equivalent, you might want to look into a Nikon P7700.  This features a larger sensor than the typical compact and the lens is actually quite bright (2.0 - 4.0).  I would not consider a 1/2.3" camera.  For a compact it is a bit on the large side, but will fit a large coat pocket.  If you want something smaller I would compromise at the tele end and look into a Nikon P330, Fuji XF1 or Canon S110.

 

The P7700 offers RAW and the P, A, S and M settings you are used to from a serious camera.  It has a tilt/swivel screen to help with your macro.  RAW files are seriously large (24MB) which slows matters down when shooting RAW (it takes time to crank that amount of data to card).  I still try to understand whether or not this is a 14-bit or just an inefficient 12-bit.
enjoy
#7
Quote:I have one of the sx cameras (I think 230)
The only ones currently widely available new are the 240 and 260, hence I went for those.
 
Quote:If you could relax your lens requirements to a 28-200 equivalent
That is not an option. Note how I put the tele reach 2nd on my list of requirements, only after size. Speed is not really important to me. Of course I'd take it if it was there as well as the reach, but I wouldn't take it instead of the reach.

Perhaps I should have added, I intend to use this as my sole camera when on work travel, and regardless of where I go, wildlife is a main interest. Any number of cameras can do the wide angle side, but I do need the long end too. Getting closer is not an option for any foot zoom fans. 300mm full frame equivalent is only barely adequate actually, and 300mm on APS-C is my preferred range = 480mm equiv. 200mm really isn't worth any consideration.

The SX50, if it weren't for its size, seems to offer very good quality too, as well as an almost silly 1200mm equivalent that actually looks pretty good. Actually I may still get one later on if I see it at a good price. It's just not quite pocketable though, not without a questionable bulge anyway.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#8
Quote:The only ones currently widely available new are the 240 and 260, hence I went for those.

 That is not an option. Note how I put the tele reach 2nd on my list of requirements, only after size. Speed is not really important to me. Of course I'd take it if it was there as well as the reach, but I wouldn't take it instead of the reach.


Perhaps I should have added, I intend to use this as my sole camera when on work travel, and regardless of where I go, wildlife is a main interest. Any number of cameras can do the wide angle side, but I do need the long end too. Getting closer is not an option for any foot zoom fans. 300mm full frame equivalent is only barely adequate actually, and 300mm on APS-C is my preferred range = 480mm equiv. 200mm really isn't worth any consideration.


The SX50, if it weren't for its size, seems to offer very good quality too, as well as an almost silly 1200mm equivalent that actually looks pretty good. Actually I may still get one later on if I see it at a good price. It's just not quite pocketable though, not without a questionable bulge anyway.
 

The compact big zoom factor cameras are nice. In my wife's case, we went with a Sony HX20V, because exactly for traveling, the GPS is nice to have to locate an "off the normal spot" place. The GPS does seem to work reasonable well. The other reason was the in-camera panoramas to get a quick overview shoot. I don't know why Canon can't do it, so far all I have seen is you have to assemble it later on the computer.

As to the "smeary" look, indeed, when pixel peeping with the HX20, there is substantial processing applied. Of all the cameras compared at dpreview, still the HX20 seemed to have one of the best pictures.   Very few of these cameras provide RAW support (I didn't know one could do RAW with the CHDK on the canon P&S), and the one I saw (I think Fuji??) didn't have GPS. Seems though it should be feasible to get all in one package, nobody offers it.

 

There could also be issues with sensor (or near sensor) dust in the HX20 and related camera. We had a big piece of lint in the image that they cleaned under warranty. That's clearly a disappointment for a P&S where the sensor does not get exposed unlike a dSLR. However, I am wondering if large-range zooms in P&S act like dust pumps in general (like the Canon 100-400 is supposed to be a dust pump), so they may be more prone to dust, since they are hardly seriously sealed?

 

As to the Canon SX50, not long ago I posted (here?) about estimates of the limits of resolution due to diffraction. These 1000-1200mm lenses have small sensors and small apertures (5.6 or smaller). Taking this into account, achievable resolution seemed only around 2 Megapixels, which is still fine for Movies, but for stills you might get the same effect with a shorter lens on a bigger sensors, or a shorter faster lens.
#9
I'm curious about your comments about the HX20V as it doesn't compare closely with the HX9V I have. I understand the HX20V has a bit more zoom and even more MP, but wasn't aware if they changed much else. The GPS in the HX9V is very slow at locking even with clear skies. I'm sure the hardware is capable of much more potential, but it is crippled by the interface.

The diffraction limiting effects are harder to quantify. Putting aside the theory, raw samples I've seen from the SX50 taken at maximum zoom look good to me. Check out the RAW samples posted by AlanF in this thread. I did think though, the 1200mm equiv. is a bit less if you consider the higher MP count within the field of view of a DSLR assuming you crop to an equal 12MP. Regardless, to me photography hardware is not always about "the best of the best" but about "good enough for the job". I think the SX50 is capable of providing that in my case.

And finally, not the 100-400L dust pump myth again... it is no worse than any other extending zoom. I use the lens a lot and rarely clean the sensor, perhaps 2 or 3 times a year if that. The biggest risk of dust entry is when you take the lens off. It doesn't matter how much sealing the lens has in that case.

(edited to correct link)
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#10
Looks like a nice camera and you get them at a good price in France at the moment; 150€, payable in 3 payments, no interest is the best I found.

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)