Camera suggestions required

[Nebular89]

So this is probably asking a lot but I have a list of requirements for a camera and have no idea where to start.
I am looking for a digital point and shoot that…

-Shoots raw
-Can fit in a trouser pocket relatively easily
-Has manual controls (no need for manual focus)
-decent auto focus
-can be had second hand in good condition for £300.

In an ideal world i would much rather a fixed focal length but that puts me in the Ricoh gr realm and that is far out of budget.

Sensor size isn’t too big of a deal providing its noticeably better quality than a phone and comparable to an APSC camera.

What I’m looking for is a camera that I can use in partnership with my Fuji xt for times when I can’t or don’t want to carry a full size camera. I own a Rollei 35 and I really like the size but my film use is drying up, I’m not enjoying developing and scanning much anymore.
I’m not in a position to buy anything just yet but if a camera catches my eye I can look to sell some bits to raise money.
Brand doesn’t matter to me

 

[Nebular89]

The sony RX100 doesn’t look too bad. MPB for just under £400. I think £300 might have been a bit ambitious

 

[sep9001]

Rx100 is a camera, problem is used prices of point and shoot size camera have shot up.

 

[Nebular89]

Rx100 is a camera, problem is used prices of point and shoot size camera have shot up.

That does seem to the problem. I need to have a think about how much I’ll use it before setting a budget. There was a lot of times last year while away when I just wanted to go for a walk and not have to carry a camera so I took my Rollei 35 and I ended up getting some of my favourite photos. I jsut don’t think I’m the kind of person to carry a full size camera with me all the time but I don’t like having my phone!

 

[sep9001]

That does seem to the problem. I need to have a think about how much I’ll use it before setting a budget. There was a lot of times last year while away when I just wanted to go for a walk and not have to carry a camera so I took my Rollei 35 and I ended up getting some of my favourite photos. I jsut don’t think I’m the kind of person to carry a full size camera with me all the time but I don’t like having my phone!

When out and about with the family the photos are usually taken on the phone, I take my z6ii and use that for landscape etc. I had the rx100 but as it was not getting used as much is sold it.

 

[realspeed]

so possibly a compact camera? I have the panasonic DC-TZ95

meets all your requirement and more

but here is a list might interest you

Panasonic Compact Cameras Price Comparison, Compare Prices And Save Now!

Compare genuine UK stock prices for Panasonic Compact Cameras, compare New & Used prices.

www.camerapricebuster.co.uk

PIcture quality

Unedited hand held Jpeg but does RAW as well with flip up screen highly recommend this model .

On sale in Japan will ship to UK according to advert, Import duties should still be withing your price range b ut at least an idea to think about
. look it up on youtube

https://www.amazon.co.jp/-/en/Panasonic-Compact-Digital-Optical-DC-TZ95-K/dp/B07QFV6D18?th=1

 

[woof woof]

The Panasonic TZ100 is maybe worth a look. It's a 1" sensor compact with a 25-250mm zoom. Not really trouser pocketable for me but there is a user on this site who was happy to put one in his shirt pocket so I suppose these things vary between people.

It shoots raw and has all of the usual modes etc. I've just Googled them and you can get a used one under £300.

 

[snerkler]

Sony RX100 and Canon G7x models seem the obvious choice to me if you’re happy just having “good” condition.

I didn’t realise how expensive used Ricoh GR’s were, they seem very steep to me.

 

[TimHughes]

I didn’t realise how expensive used Ricoh GR’s were, they seem very steep to me.

I've had the Sony RX100, still have the TZ, and Ricoh GRIV monochrome and colour are recent additions. For me, the Ricoh is by far the best pocketable option because it's truly pocket-sized, has an APS-C-sized sensor, and works really well.

 

[Nebular89]

I've had the Sony RX100, still have the TZ, and Ricoh GRIV monochrome and colour are recent additions. For me, the Ricoh is by far the best pocketable option because it's truly pocket-sized, has an APS-C-sized sensor, and works really well.

I’d love one but the price is just too high. I could justify it if it was my only camera but my xt2 is still going well enough for now. Potentially when it dies I could sell the 23mm and get one but I’d still another camera to use the 16-50 with for landscapes

 

[Nebular89]

Sony RX100 and Canon G7x models seem the obvious choice to me if you’re happy just having “good” condition.

I didn’t realise how expensive used Ricoh GR’s were, they seem very steep to me.

I think the Sony is what I’ll look into. Providing everything works I don’t really care about the condition, scratches and marks etc.

 

[Nebular89]

The Panasonic TZ100 is maybe worth a look. It's a 1" sensor compact with a 25-250mm zoom. Not really trouser pocketable for me but there is a user on this site who was happy to put one in his shirt pocket so I suppose these things vary between people.

It shoots raw and has all of the usual modes etc. I've just Googled them and you can get a used one under £300.

I’ll have a look. It doesn’t seem far off pocket sized, you wouldn’t be able to fit anything else in but not too bad

 

[gman]

The RX100 is very compact and a great camera. I think the autofocus system is the slow contrast detection type up until and including the iv (eye-tracking was introduced). It wasn't untl the Mk V that brought in phase detection as well as contrast detection. Unfortunately, the MkV will be double your original budget. If AF is important to you that is.

 

[Nebular89]

The RX100 is very compact and a great camera. I think the autofocus system is the slow contrast detection type up until and including the iv (eye-tracking was introduced). It wasn't untl the Mk V that brought in phase detection as well as contrast detection. Unfortunately, the MkV will be double your original budget. If AF is important to you that is.

I think I’d go for a Ricoh if I could stretch to that. Autofocus is important but I’m not expecting anything earth shattering on a camera that old

 

[TimHughes]

I think I’d go for a Ricoh if I could stretch to that. Autofocus is important but I’m not expecting anything earth shattering on a camera that old

Hmm, depending on what phone you have, the image quality from a compact within your budget vs your phone might be a toss-up? Worth testing if you can before you shell out.

 

[Nebular89]

Hmm, depending on what phone you have, the image quality from a compact within your budget vs your phone might be a toss-up? Worth testing if you can before you shell out.

I have the 16e. There is nothing inherently wrong with my phones photos, in fact it’s better than some cameras as I have a Lightroom subscription so if I use their app I can download the raw photos straight to the pc. I just really don’t like using a phone to take photos. I don’t particularly like touch screens and I’m conscious that I might drop it lol. I used it last year next to a harbour and without a strap I didn’t feel comfortable getting it out.

 

[Nebular89]

Is the Ricoh GR digitals worth a look? I know the sensors are smaller and they are CCD sensors but in decent light would they work ok? They can be had for £350

 

[Nebular89]

Just looked and it looks like getting the gr digital in the uk isn’t that easy

 

[snerkler]

Hmm, depending on what phone you have, the image quality from a compact within your budget vs your phone might be a toss-up? Worth testing if you can before you shell out.

I'd agree with your average compact however there is still a discernible difference between 1" compacts and even more so from APS-C compacts such as the Ricoh. How noticeable this difference is will be down to the indivual however

 

[Nebular89]

I'd agree with your average compact however there is still a discernible difference between 1" compacts and even more so from APS-C compacts such as the Ricoh. How noticeable this difference is will be down to the indivual however

For me it’s the lower light that really shows the difference. In good light when no cropping I’ve been pretty satisfied with the iphone16e but even at relatively low iso it becomes noisy and not in a nice way like my xt2 which can look film-y, at least when using black and white

 

[woof woof]

Hmm, depending on what phone you have, the image quality from a compact within your budget vs your phone might be a toss-up? Worth testing if you can before you shell out.

I think the smallest format I'd consider now and still enjoy photography with and be able to enjoy the final results is 1" and there are 1" sensor compacts such as the Panasonic TZ100 I had and the Sony RX100. I think the results I got from the TZ100 are way beyond anything I've seen from a phone, IMO phone pictures can look stunning on a phone but when they're on my pc the IQ issues are IMO there to be easily seen if you go looking.

As I don't like jabbing a finger at an oblong box 18" from my face with no ergonomics at all and if I was somehow banned from 1" and larger I'd probably use a small sensor compact rather than a phone.

 

[woof woof]

For me it’s the lower light that really shows the difference. In good light when no cropping I’ve been pretty satisfied with the iphone16e but even at relatively low iso it becomes noisy and not in a nice way like my xt2 which can look film-y, at least when using black and white

For me the ergonomics matter too and I just don't like phone photography. There's no ergonomics, you can't always see the screen clearly and it is IMO a joyless experience. Give me a camera every time

 

[Nebular89]

For me the ergonomics matter too and I just don't like phone photography. There's no ergonomics, you can't always see the screen clearly and it is IMO a joyless experience. Give me a camera every time

Yeah I don’t really like using a phone for photos.
I can’t seem to get consistent results either. Sometimes the photos look close enough to a “proper” camera and sometimes they’re hugely noisy with terrible dynamic range. If it was always bad you could learn to work with it.
I think I’ll take a look at the Panasonic you suggested and the Sony. In an ideal world I wouldn’t get a zoom lens but it won’t be a deal breaker for that price range.

If I can find a way to justify it I may look at a Ricoh gr. I’m tempted spend the money I was thinking of spending on a compact, £300-£400, and use that as a deposit of sorts and spread the cost of the rest. I can afford it but I can’t justify dropping that kind of money in one go on a camera. Even if could justify it to myself I couldn’t to the other half!

 

[woof woof]

I don't think the Richo has a vf does it? If not you're back to holding it 18" from your face and hoping you can see the screen. Years ago I had a Panasonic GF1 without a vf and decided I'd never have a camera without one again.

 

[TimHughes]

Yeah I really like using a phone for photos.
I can’t seem to get consistent results either. Sometimes the photos look close enough to a “proper” camera and sometimes they’re hugely noisy with terrible dynamic range. If it was always bad you could learn to work with it.
I think I’ll take a look at the Panasonic you suggested and the Sony. In an ideal world I wouldn’t get a zoom lens but it won’t be a deal breaker for that price range.

If I can find a way to justify it I may look at a Ricoh gr. I’m tempted spend the money I was thinking of spending on a compact, £300-£400, and use that as a deposit of sorts and spread the cost of the rest. I can afford it but I can’t justify dropping that kind of money in one go on a camera. Even if could justify it to myself I couldn’t to the other half!

I know what you mean too, I much prefer using a camera.

I agree a decent 1" sensor would be an improvement; I'm just not sure a decent can be had for GBP 300 at the moment. Maybe TZ100? Prices on compacts seem to have been rising recently.

I've fallen in love with the Ricoh as the perfect everyday camera for me, but it is a lot more expensive. Actually, I got the monochrome and the colour; the monochrome is insanely good IMO, especially if you like low light, as the lack of a colour filter array and demosaicing means high ISOs work really well, and the pics have so much fine detail.

 

[TimHughes]

I don't think the Richo has a vf does it? If not you're back to holding it 18" from your face and hoping you can see the screen. Years ago I had a Panasonic GF1 without a vf and decided I'd never have a camera without one again.

that's right it doesn't i have a small ovf that fits in the hotshoe

 

[Nebular89]

I don't think the Richo has a vf does it? If not you're back to holding it 18" from your face and hoping you can see the screen. Years ago I had a Panasonic GF1 without a vf and devided I'd never have a camera without one again.

No viewfinder doesn’t bother me. I’m fairly tall, 6”2, so when I take photos of the family if I hold it up to my eye every single photo points down! Plus my favourite every camera is a 6x6 TLR so I like using waist level cameras

 

[snerkler]

Yeah I don’t really like using a phone for photos.
I can’t seem to get consistent results either. Sometimes the photos look close enough to a “proper” camera and sometimes they’re hugely noisy with terrible dynamic range. If it was always bad you could learn to work with it.
I think I’ll take a look at the Panasonic you suggested and the Sony. In an ideal world I wouldn’t get a zoom lens but it won’t be a deal breaker for that price range.

If I can find a way to justify it I may look at a Ricoh gr. I’m tempted spend the money I was thinking of spending on a compact, £300-£400, and use that as a deposit of sorts and spread the cost of the rest. I can afford it but I can’t justify dropping that kind of money in one go on a camera. Even if could justify it to myself I couldn’t to the other half!

That's why I prefer shooting raw with the iPhone, apple's processing is very hit and miss, more miss than hit imo

 

[TimHughes]

No viewfinder doesn’t bother me. I’m fairly tall, 6”2, so when I take photos of the family if I hold it up to my eye every single photo points down! Plus my favourite every camera is a 6x6 TLR so I like using waist level cameras

You can also get an optical hot shoe waist-level viewfinder to help with framing those shots.

 

[Nebular89]

I know what you mean too, I much prefer using a camera.

I agree a decent 1" sensor would be an improvement; I'm just not sure a decent can be had for GBP 300 at the moment. Maybe TZ100? Prices on compacts seem to have been rising recently.

I've fallen in love with the Ricoh as the perfect everyday camera for me, but it is a lot more expensive. Actually, I got the monochrome and the colour; the monochrome is insanely good IMO, especially if you like low light, as the lack of a colour filter array and demosaicing means high ISOs work really well, and the pics have so much fine detail.

If I took as many photos as I did about 5 years ago it wouldn’t be a problem, it’s basically priced the same as a camera and a lens, at least the 2nd hand prices. It’s just currently I only really need a proper camera 5-10 times a year so justifying something more expensive is a struggle.
But would I use it more if it fit in pocket is the question….

 

[Nebular89]

That's why I prefer shooting raw with the iPhone, apple's processing is very hit and miss, more miss than hit imo

Yeah I only use the Lightroom app. The iPhones camera app is just for recording things like lists etc

 

[TimHughes]

If I took as many photos as I did about 5 years ago it wouldn’t be a problem, it’s basically priced the same as a camera and a lens, at least the 2nd hand prices. It’s just currently I only really need a proper camera 5-10 times a year so justifying something more expensive is a struggle.
But would I use it more if it fit in pocket is the question….

Try one if you can. It's noticeably thinner at 33 mm, which makes it very pocket-friendly. That's why I take it everywhere.

 

[snerkler]

Yeah I only use the Lightroom app. The iPhones camera app is just for recording things like lists etc

It's not just the app, it's shooting raw vs shooting jpeg

 

[Nebular89]

Try one if you can. It's noticeably thinner at 33 mm, which makes it very pocket-friendly. That's why I take it everywhere.

I am interested in one. I’m going to Scotland at the end of October so ideally whatever I do or do not end up getting will be before then.
i’ve even looked at hiring one but it doesn’t seem to be something that often gets rented out.

 

[woof woof]

No viewfinder doesn’t bother me. I’m fairly tall, 6”2, so when I take photos of the family if I hold it up to my eye every single photo points down! Plus my favourite every camera is a 6x6 TLR so I like using waist level cameras

I too often take pictures below eye level but good luck doing that with a camera or phone without a tilting screen.

 

[Nebular89]

I too often take pictures below eye level but good luck doing that with a camera or phone without a tilting screen.

It would take getting used to admittedly. I did have the xpro 1 that used that way on occasion, it worked, it was tricky but it worked. If I remember correctly I used the built in level so you could frame it and make sure it was straight without having to see the screen fully, it was work around though.

 

[Nebular89]

I am putting serious thought into trading my 23mm f2 with MPB and getting a Ricoh. I’d have to be sure I’d be happy with it being my main camera though. 35mm is my preferred focal length but i did a test not too long ago. I have a hot shoe viewfinder for a 28mm. I’d frame up the camera with the 23mm (35mm) lens and go between the cameras viewfinder and the 28mm hot shoe and there was less of a difference than I thought, essentially extending my arm maybe 10-15cm gave the 28mm the same field of view as the 35mm

 

[woof woof]

It would take getting used to admittedly. I did have the xpro 1 that used that way on occasion, it worked, it was tricky but it worked. If I remember correctly I used the built in level so you could frame it and make sure it was straight without having to see the screen fully, it was work around though.

I don't think it's a matter of "getting used to". I think not being able to see a non tilting screen properly if at all when held at waist level is quite a biggie and I'd get pretty irritated and frustrated very quickly if trying to shoot like that. Each to their own though and over to you.

 

[Nebular89]

I don't think it's a matter of "getting used to". I think not being able to see a non tilting screen properly if at all when held at waist level is quite a biggie and I'd get pretty irritated and frustrated very quickly if trying to shoot like that. Each to their own though and over to you.

No I get it. It’s been a while since I’ve had to deal with a non tilt screen. I can use phone for lower waist level stuff without too much issue but the screen is going to be a fair bit bigger.

 

[snerkler]

I am putting serious thought into trading my 23mm f2 with MPB and getting a Ricoh. I’d have to be sure I’d be happy with it being my main camera though. 35mm is my preferred focal length but i did a test not too long ago. I have a hot shoe viewfinder for a 28mm. I’d frame up the camera with the 23mm (35mm) lens and go between the cameras viewfinder and the 28mm hot shoe and there was less of a difference than I thought, essentially extending my arm maybe 10-15cm gave the 28mm the same field of view as the 35mm

It's not quite as simple as that as it will depend how far away you are from the subject. The difference is 25% so if you subject is at 2m away using a 28mm you'd need to be 2.5m away to get the same framing with a 35mm (2m x 1.25 = 2.5m). If the subject is 10m away with a 28mm you'd need to stand 12.5m away with a 35mm lens.

This can help get an idea

canon

lenssimulator-cna.academy.canon.de