After a smallish camera to take lots of photographs of the children

Messages
388
Name
Nads
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,
Please could you recommend a light weight camera that I can carry in my changing bag so that I can take lots of photographs of my 4 year old and 2 year old. I have a canon 5D Mark II but its just getting too bulky to carry around with us. I would like something with functionality and able to go to apertures of 1.8/2.8 and photograph in low light
I love street photography and love photographing my children although struggle to get sharp shots
Any recommendations please
Thanks
NB
 
Messages
936
Name
Alistair
Edit My Images
No
I've just bought a Canon EOS M10. The kit lens is fine for general use and really small. Add the 22mm f2 lens or add the EF adaptor (£24 for the Meike version) and pop a 50mm on there.
The M10 with 15-45mm kit lens weighs about 450g, vs about 1500g for my 6D and 24-105L.

The Sony RX100, even the old ones are meant to be great and very pocketable.
 
OP
norahbattie
Messages
388
Name
Nads
Edit My Images
Yes
No real budget, I just want something that will take the same quality photos as my canon 5D Mark II. I was even looking at the leica!!

Can you add your canon lenses to the m10?
 
Last edited:
Messages
936
Name
Alistair
Edit My Images
No
The 5D2 is getting on a bit, but the image quality is still good. There are plenty of small cameras that will match it, but it really does depend on whether you want to invest in a system (ie body and lenses) or just a good fixed lens compact.
My thoughts would be:
Fuji X100T or F would be great, but you're stuck with a 35mm equivalent lens. - £600+
Sony RX100 Mk4 or 5 is great, but a much smaller sensor. £600+
Sony A6000 (or 6300/6500) are great, APS-C sensor, fast AF, fast continuous shooting and still small. - £400 + for the older A6000
Canon EOS M10, APS-C sensor, decent AF, no viewfinder - £280

I've used an original X100, but wasn't convinced that I could live with the fixed lens and couldn't afford the newer version for the better AF.
The EOS M10 is small and easy to use, especially if you're already familiar with Canon's menus, the touch screen is nice too. The price is decent too. If you have a little more cash, the M3 is possibly worth it for the chunkier grip, extra thumb dial and better AF.
 
Messages
936
Name
Alistair
Edit My Images
No
Can you add your canon lenses to the m10?
Yes, you either buy the Canon EF-EFM adaptor (about £90) or buy a 3rd party adaptor (I bought a Meike adaptor from Amazon for £24). Both these adaptors have electronic contacts to allow the camera to control AF, aperture and image stabilisation. They also have tripod mounts so you can balance the camera/lens combo better.
You can mount bigger lenses, but then it kinda defeats the point of the smaller camera if you put a great big L lens on a tiny body.
Also worth noting that in continuous focus mode the EOS M will be moving the focus motor all the time, so with some older lenses the constant noise can be annoying. If I put the Canon 50mm f1.4 USM onto my EOS M10 it starts hunting for something to focus on, which is slightly annoying. But it does work. I would probably work even better with the 50mm f1.8 STM, which has the newer, faster, quieter motor. The kit lens is an STM and is practically silent when following focus.
The AF has face tracking and you can just user your finger on the touchscreen to pick where you want to focus.
 

GTG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,795
Edit My Images
Yes
The 5D2 is getting on a bit, but the image quality is still good. There are plenty of small cameras that will match it
These modern very small cameras are still generally miles behind in ISO performance though.

For example in a DXO test a Sony RX100 MK 5 scores 586. The 5D MK 2 score 1815.

The Sony gets out scored by a 2007 APS-C 9 years older than it in fact.
 
OP
norahbattie
Messages
388
Name
Nads
Edit My Images
Yes
Did like the fuji x100F but don't think I would cope with a fixed lens, my children run away too much and the camera will be used predominantly to photograph them
 
Messages
750
Edit My Images
No
I am a long term Canon user (currently 80d with 17-55 and 24 STM) but can vouch for the Sony RX 100 mk 3. I have used it quite extensively to take photos of my grandchildren and have recently passed it on to my daughter so she can continue the good work! Pocketable, but the trade off is the 1" sensor.
I have now purchased a Panasonic G80 with 25mm prime lens which is also performing superbly in capturing shots of fast moving chlldren. Obviously not as pocketable or light but still much smaller than my 80D. Whether this would fit in your changing bag - I'm not sure.
 
Messages
14,836
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Fuji XT20 with the 23 F2 and/or maybe the 50 F2. You don't give a budget.
 
OP
norahbattie
Messages
388
Name
Nads
Edit My Images
Yes
Daft question but with a fixed focal length, how do you zoom apart from using your feet? I don't really have a budget Cagey75 but don't want to spend thousands and thousands but seriously looking at the fuji range
 
Messages
936
Name
Alistair
Edit My Images
No
One advantage of "Zooming with your feet" is that it forces you to move into a better position, meaning you are less likely to get lazy with composition.
I'm happy following my kids with just a 50mm. But then my kids are relatively calm compared to some.
 
Messages
23,801
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
Daft question but with a fixed focal length, how do you zoom apart from using your feet? I don't really have a budget Cagey75 but don't want to spend thousands and thousands but seriously looking at the fuji range
One advantage of "Zooming with your feet" is that it forces you to move into a better position, meaning you are less likely to get lazy with composition.
I'm happy following my kids with just a 50mm. But then my kids are relatively calm compared to some.
Just for clarity, there's no such thing as 'zooming with your feet'.

I'm not going to bore with the details, but if you change the focal length and subject distance, you get a different picture, that's just how it works.

Back to the OP, this question is made for the answer, 'grab a Fuji' the x series and a trio of prime lenses would be my go to kit if my needs were this simple.
 
Messages
936
Name
Alistair
Edit My Images
No
Just for clarity, there's no such thing as 'zooming with your feet'.

I'm not going to bore with the details, but if you change the focal length and subject distance, you get a different picture, that's just how it works.

Back to the OP, this question is made for the answer, 'grab a Fuji' the x series and a trio of prime lenses would be my go to kit if my needs were this simple.
I know that. It's just the term that has been commonly used.
My point being that just sitting in one place and following the child with a zoom doesn't always give you the best shot.

Yes a Fuji is a good answer.
The XT2 is meant to be great for fast AF, add the 23mm, the 35mm f2 (the older f1.4 is known to be slower) and the 56mm.
But that is quite a pricey kit.
 
Messages
14,836
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Daft question but with a fixed focal length, how do you zoom apart from using your feet? I don't really have a budget Cagey75 but don't want to spend thousands and thousands but seriously looking at the fuji range
You don't, as mentioned, but you get more exercise :cool:

I personally prefer primes, I have 4 atm, no zooms. But, if you prefer a neat zoom, the Fuji 18-55 2.8 - 4 is a great little lens. Pair that with an XT20 and you're good to go for shooting the kids running about, without much hassle. The XT20 is pretty much a mini XT-2, I recommend that one because you specified small. The XT-2 with that same lens would also cost you about £500 more.

You can always add some primes later.
 
Last edited:
Messages
23,801
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
...
The XT2 is meant to be great for fast AF, add the 23mm, the 35mm f2 (the older f1.4 is known to be slower) and the 56mm.
But that is quite a pricey kit.
Cheap compared to a Leica, which was on the OP's shortlist.
 

GTG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,795
Edit My Images
Yes
Christ my 71 year old mother can photograph kids running around with a £80 compact let alone a Leica lol
 
Messages
14,836
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Christ my 71 year old mother can photograph kids running around with a £80 compact let alone a Leica lol
OP also likes street photography, and wants 'sharp' shots :D in low light also
 
Last edited:
Messages
286
Name
Darren
Edit My Images
Yes
I like my Panasonic Lumix Tz-70 as a pocket camera. It's really smart on-board computer wise, the zoom is mahoosive & it's not bad in low light
 
Messages
854
Edit My Images
Yes
I've just moved from a Canon 6D to a Panasonic GX80. So far I'm impressed, very usable ISO 3200, and there are some nice, fast, cheap primes, the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 especially has impressed so far. I can carry the body and 4 lenses in the same bag that used to be full with the 6D with the pancake 40mm attached. If I was buying again I'd maybe go for the GX8 over the GX80 for the better viewfinder but YMMV.
 
Messages
23,801
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
Christ my 71 year old mother can photograph kids running around with a £80 compact let alone a Leica lol
Your 71 year old grandmother either has better skills or lower standards than me and the OP then (both?) ;)

I find the focussing on cheap compacts to be next to useless for moving subjects, and my Facebook feed tells me that most people can't take a reasonably sharp picture, but that's OK cos they don't care when an image of their cherubs is technically crap. :p
 

GTG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,795
Edit My Images
Yes
Your 71 year old grandmother either has better skills or lower standards than me and the OP then (both?) ;)

I find the focussing on cheap compacts to be next to useless for moving subjects, and my Facebook feed tells me that most people can't take a reasonably sharp picture, but that's OK cos they don't care when an image of their cherubs is technically crap. :p
She does alright. She was getting in focus sharp shots in the mid 1980`s with cheap film cameras. She still has them on the wall.
 
Messages
23,801
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
She does alright. She was getting in focus sharp shots in the mid 1980`s with cheap film cameras. She still has them on the wall.
Maybe we have different standards ;)

There's so much wrong with this statement I barely know where to start...

I find it bizarre when 'camera collectors' will pore over DxO charts and then create and be happy with technical abominations. :)

The only example I've seen of your work was both out of focus and underexposed, I'd suggest you and I also have different standards.
 

GTG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,795
Edit My Images
Yes
Maybe we have different standards ;)

There's so much wrong with this statement I barely know where to start...

I find it bizarre when 'camera collectors' will pore over DxO charts and then create and be happy with technical abominations. :)

The only example I've seen of your work was both out of focus and underexposed, I'd suggest you and I also have different standards.
And I think your a overly fussy snob photographer who thinks a lot of himself
 
Messages
23,801
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
And I think your a overly fussy snob photographer who thinks a lot of himself
You're perfectly welcome to that opinion.

I'm here to offer advice, when the OP is considering Leica, and someone suggests their Gran gets perfectly good results with a cheap compact, I feel I ought to point out the disconnect.

One of us was being 'helpful' the other just likes to have something to type :)
 
Messages
702
Edit My Images
Yes
Have a look at the panasonic GX80 and some primes if you want a small package, its my current combo, have a look at my Instagram link for photos.
 

GTG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,795
Edit My Images
Yes
You're perfectly welcome to that opinion.

I'm here to offer advice, when the OP is considering Leica, and someone suggests their Gran gets perfectly good results with a cheap compact, I feel I ought to point out the disconnect.

One of us was being 'helpful' the other just likes to have something to type :)
And a rude generally obnoxious smart ass might I add. Please refrain from quoting me in future thank you.
 
Messages
1,861
Name
Soeren
Edit My Images
Yes
I believe people today are to hung up in technical terms, testcharts, numbers and the highest possible technical quality. Roger Hicks had the term "quality treshold" above which it really doesnt matter you get better sharpness etc.
Remember subject matter trumps all and as AA puts it "There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept"
And. Film cameras and film, even 35mm and some point and shoot cameras are capable of delivering high quality images, in the right hands very high.
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,581
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
If you want the best possible camera that can fit in your pocket, look at the Sony RX100 III or above. :)
 
Messages
5,129
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
And a rude generally obnoxious smart ass might I add. Please refrain from quoting me in future thank you.
You cannot ask not to be quoted. If you don't like being quoted, don't write anything, job done.
 
Messages
1,861
Name
Soeren
Edit My Images
Yes
Just for clarity, there's no such thing as 'zooming with your feet'.

I'm not going to bore with the details, but if you change the focal length and subject distance, you get a different picture, that's just how it works.

Back to the OP, this question is made for the answer, 'grab a Fuji' the x series and a trio of prime lenses would be my go to kit if my needs were this simple.
Actually the word preceeds the lenses. To zoom means something like to move fast.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/zoom
 
Messages
24,938
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,
Please could you recommend a light weight camera that I can carry in my changing bag so that I can take lots of photographs of my 4 year old and 2 year old. I have a canon 5D Mark II but its just getting too bulky to carry around with us. I would like something with functionality and able to go to apertures of 1.8/2.8 and photograph in low light
I love street photography and love photographing my children although struggle to get sharp shots
Any recommendations please
Thanks
NB
I've just moved from a Canon 6D to a Panasonic GX80. So far I'm impressed, very usable ISO 3200, and there are some nice, fast, cheap primes, the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 especially has impressed so far. I can carry the body and 4 lenses in the same bag that used to be full with the 6D with the pancake 40mm attached. If I was buying again I'd maybe go for the GX8 over the GX80 for the better viewfinder but YMMV.
As per SixToes and Willo I'd recommend the Panasonic GX80. I have a one and a nice set of Olympus primes, 17, 25 and 45mm f1.8. These primes are relatively cheap, easy to find on the second hand market and they're tiny and are useable, sharp even, from wide open. Use these lenses between f1.8 and f4 and you'll get a FF look (f3.6-8 equivalent.)

There's a nice little review here... note how fast the focusing is...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpSddnkIz9s


Quality v your 5D is another question. I have a FF Sony A7 and I'd say that the GX80 can give very nice full image pictures and even very nice 100% crops but when directly compared to my A7 the FF camera gives the better image quality especially if you go to the higher ISO's but I do think that it's only in direct comparison and when looking for the differences that they become easily seen. My A7 gives more dynamic range and sharper pictures... if I go looking for the differences. In isolation a GX80 will give you very nice pictures and as the 5DII is a little older than my A7 and as Canon are a little behind in sensors maybe the gap between a GX80 and your 5D maybe a little smaller?

There are some nice tiny kit zooms too. I have the prime sized 14-42mm and it's very nice, and I also have a very very nice 12-35mm f2.8. The 12-35mm f2.8 adds to the bulk and weight but used from f2.8-4 it's very nice indeed but if you want smaller and lighter a tiny kit lens zoom and a prime may suit a lot of occasions and subjects.

Good luck choosing.
 
Last edited:
Messages
24,938
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Actually the word preceeds the lenses. To zoom means something like to move fast.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/zoom
I think Phil made a valid point.

People talk about zooming with your feet and seem to forget that this alters perspective. You do as phil says end up with a different picture. I mostly use primes myself but it's important not to overlook the effect moving and altering the camera to subject distance has... you can't change this relationship without altering the perspective.
 
Last edited:
Messages
5,129
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Actually the word preceeds the lenses. To zoom means something like to move fast.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/zoom
It's a good point but it seems to have meant to move closer quickly (cars and aircraft) and that fits well with zoom lenses but not so much with zooming "with your feet". However "zooming with your feet" has definitely become a photographic expression for getting closer even though as others have said it changes perspective.
 
Messages
23,801
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
And a rude generally obnoxious smart ass might I add. Please refrain from quoting me in future thank you.
You can put me on ignore if you like, but you have no right to tell me what I can or can't post.

Sorry your ego wasn't up to an honest opinion, you make plenty of brash comments, I assumed you'd be grown up enough to accept a strong challenge to your perceptions.
 
Messages
1,861
Name
Soeren
Edit My Images
Yes
A
I think Phil made a valid point.

People talk about zooming with your feet and seem to forget that this alters perspective. You do as phil says end up with a different picture. I mostly use primes myself but it's important not to overlook the effect moving and altering the camera to subject distance has... you can't change this relationship without altering the perspective.
Actually its the other way around. You wont get the same perspective being lazy using a zoom at its 105 mm setting as walking up to your subject with a 35mm as there is a reason the smaller focallenghts, 28-50mm was/is the choice of most succesfull street photographing. The relationship between field of view and perspective of wider focallenghts at their "sweetspot" for people photographing is what draws the viewer into the pic and the story rather than seeing it from a distance so you cant just stay put zoom your lens and get thats pic.
I dont remember who said "No great photo was ever taken with a tele lens"
 
Messages
1,861
Name
Soeren
Edit My Images
Yes
It's a good point but it seems to have meant to move closer quickly (cars and aircraft) and that fits well with zoom lenses but not so much with zooming "with your feet". However "zooming with your feet" has definitely become a photographic expression for getting closer even though as others have said it changes perspective.
Hmm fast and quickly are relative terms :D
 
Messages
5,129
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Hmm fast and quickly are relative terms :D
Yes, and these days I am relatively slow. my feet :) so I don't think zooming with my feet would be a suitable description :)
 
Top