Does anyone still use cheap, compact P&S cameras?

adrianday said:
Another 7MP compact! I pleased to see I'm not the only one who rates them.
Click to expand...
Alas, being an idiot I sold it on to a colleague who, to be fair, still uses it. However, I have a cunning plan... :naughty:
 
I have a Canon Ixus 70 which I inherited from my mum - a cracking little camera! I bought a Panasonic Lumix TZ55 in 2016, new, for £109, which was a great deal. I use both these cameras when I don't want to take the BIG camera for walkies :)!
 
When I got my original TZ70, back in 2018, it was around £250. It's replacement was £80. So I spent £330 in total, or an average of £165 per camera, and I'm ok with that. I got it for two reasons: 1) it's pocketable; 2) the zoom goes from a 24mm equivalent all the way up to 720mm. For me, it was the ultimate travel camera. There might be something better, in that it fits or exceeds those two criteria (e.g. with 4K video), but I haven't seen it (not that I've been looking). The nearest equivalent that I've found is the Sony HX60 that was available at about the same time the TZ70 came out. It's a very capable camera but it doesn't have an EVF, so cue the arm ache. It also has Sony menus, so cue the finger ache.

Both of these cameras are still over £100 new , though you can pick up a refurbished HX60 from CeX right now for £75, so if you're looking for a good, pocketable long-zoom travel camera and you see one of these for under £100, I'd say go for it.
 
I forgot to mention (further to my post #42 above), that when I bought my Lumix TZ55 in 2016, three colours were available: silver, black and red. The silver and black models were priced at over £250. The 'red' model (it's not red, it's burgundy!) was £109!! This has always puzzled me. I suppose that cameras are mostly bought by men (?). Is it that any self-respecting male photographer wouldn't be seen dead with a red camera :D?
Anyway, a great deal for me and it matches my winter jacket and burgundy suede boots;)!!

Panasonic DMC-TZ55 Compact Digital Camera 16 Megapixels 20 x Wi-Fi Red: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics & Photo

Shop Panasonic DMC-TZ55 Compact Digital Camera 16 Megapixels 20 x Wi-Fi Red. Free delivery and returns on eligible orders.
www.amazon.co.uk
 
Last edited:
Lemaildetom said:
I share with my 5 years old boy an Olympus TG5 that was £160 used. Very good at macro and totally waterproof. It's definitely not a match for full-frame camera but it fit very nicely in a pocket. If I go shooting for wildlife with a long lens I like having this in the pocket for pictures of plants and landscape.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the ability to take photos under water is because they are in competition with phones and phones AFAIK don't photograph under water.
 
davholla said:
I wonder if the ability to take photos under water is because they are in competition with phones and phones AFAIK don't photograph under water.
Click to expand...
Maybe it helps but the Olympus underwater type goes back to at least 2006, not sure about others.
 
I think the TG-5 (or all TG_x) is not really a mobile phone competitor but just an all-rounder outdoor camera, it is rugged, waterproof, underwater and macro little camera. It's definitly not a massive IQ but it is a nice camera.
 
I still use cheap Compact cameras mainly second hand from eBay ,I never pay more than £20 and carry one with me at all times. Carrying my more expensive cameras with me would without doubt end up costing me a fair bit with the possibility of them getting broken with some of my activities being quite high. In order to get any where near the quality with a phone camera I would need an expensive phone so I may as well just risk my more expensive cameras. The good thing with the compacts is I can carry them in a pocket rather than having the camera hanging from my side ( I hate carrying things !)
Here my latest every day carry Phone/camera setup, you will be able to see I carry many pence worth of equipment ;) Camera I think £12 came with a nice soft case and phone £10 new
Using this equipment I am 99% of the time surprised by the quality of the shots. If I ended up in the river I would have £22 worth of damage if I ended up in the river with My Sony A6000 I'd have 400 quids worth of damage and deep depression for a month !

phone.JPG
 
Last edited:
Eltheza said:
Is it that any self-respecting male photographer wouldn't be seen dead with a red camera :D?
Click to expand...

I've heard, though I don't really believe, that there are some men who wear red trousers! Maybe one of those, if they really exist, would love a read camera. ;)


"Wide 5x Zoom" :D Shouldn't there be a law against this kind of thing?
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Don't know about "read" cameras, which sound a bit too new age for me, but I have a red camera... :naughty: :coat:
Click to expand...

A former GF of mine was an internet seller and she once bought a batch of pink compacts. They looked nice and more significantly they sold well.
 
Do we need a post your photos from your sub £100 compact ?
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
If it works, go for it. To me, all that matters is the result. How you get it is secondary at best. :tumbleweed:
Click to expand...

To me using a camera is a part of the experience and holding an oblong box in front of my face and jabbing at it or clicking a bluetooth remote (with the other hand?) just aren't attractive. I have used phones and I have used vf-less compact cameras too and I don't like either of them.

As always good luck to those who love their phones and are happy to take pictures with them but for me it's a soulless experience that I don't enjoy.
 
Samsung made a 1/1.7" sensor 8mp compact called the S850 that was ok, and significantly better that many later 1/2.3” jobs. I still have a couple tucked away (1 bought new discounted to £80, one bought for £15 used on eBay) but can't imagine ever using one now.
 
It has become a market that has dwindled to almost non-existence since phones got better.

There's not much a modern phone can't do that a PAS compact camera can. Maybe optical zoom - but even that isn't a given. Some Samsung phones do have optical zooms on them for instance.

Over the years, I've had several. The best of the bunch was a Pentax Optio 550. Which cost £550 in 2003. I didn't realise it at the time, but it took RAW shots and could be used at f/2.8. I very much lamented the fact that it just wore out. The screws fell out and by the end, it was held together with duct tape. I loved the way it seemed to handle (good) light. But it was dreadful in underlit scenes and the videos it took were woeful. The biggest regret was that I never used any PP or shot in RAW as I didn't understand any of that at the time. But the biggest crime was that, as I didn't own a PC in the house to begin with, I pulled all the pictures off on my work PC and reduced the quality so that I could store the pics on a floppy disc. :eek:

It would fit in a jacket pocket, but it was just a little too big for jeans pockets, so I tried various replacements so that I could finally get rid of it. But was disappointed with all of them. Including (at least) three Panasonic Lumix TZ-somethings.

The final nail in the coffin for the Pentax was when my daughter manged to drop that on holiday. Then about two days later, dropped the first of the Panasonics. Neither was economical to repair.

After that, I bought one of the Lumix DMC waterproof jobs because of its drop protection. Pretty sure she ruined that as well by taking it into the pool without securing the flap that keeps it waterproof. Because that just stopped working one weekend.

Currently have a Fuji XP140 as a replacement for that. This gets taken on hikes, it's been canoeing, bike riding and to the beach. And been dropped a few times. But I wouldn't recommend it for IQ. It sort of smooths over the image. Doesn't bear pixel peeping at all.

I also still have a Panasonic TZ-something. Can't even remember what it is as I use it so infrequently.

I am currently toying with the idea of a Sony RX100. Probably the MKiii as that has the f/2.8 lens. But I know that's over the £100 mark by some considerable distance.

I'm still surprised by how many people rate the Panasoncs. I bought them all because the reviews have alwasy been positive. But I always felt that none of them produced as nice looking images as that Pentax. IQ was (sometimes) better, but there was something that I loved about the 550. Often thought about buying a SH one as the last time I saw one on eBay it was at £12.
 
Last edited:
I bought a Panasonic TZ100, it's certainly not a sub £100 camera but it's something I take with me when I think my interchangeable lens cameras will be too much. It's a 1" sensor compact with a 25-250mm zoom.
 
adrianday said:
I changed the thread name to clarify the type of camera I was referring to.
Click to expand...
Though what people call a P&S can be bit misleading. Often anything with a fixed lens eg Ricoh GR regularly so described and it’s anything but. I would call the Nikon DSLR that I bought used (D60 ??? ) a P & S because you couldn’t turn the flash off and I had to tape it down Until it gave up trying.

Fuji X100 series would be P & S for many and the X10/20/30 all are P &S.
 
sphexx said:
Though what people call a P&S can be bit misleading. Often anything with a fixed lens eg Ricoh GR regularly so described and it’s anything but. I would call the Nikon DSLR that I bought used (D60 ??? ) a P & S because you couldn’t turn the flash off and I had to tape it down Until it gave up trying.

Fuji X100 series would be P & S for many and the X10/20/30 all are P &S.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, the D60's automatic modes were called "Point-and-Shoot Modes". There was one specifically labelled "Auto (flash off)". Worked pretty much the same as Auto but... without the flash. No tape required!

I've got a Ricoh GR and wholeheartedly agree with what you've said - it's my goto small 'proper' camera these days when I can't be fluffed with humping my D810 around.
 
ANY camera that offers automatic exposure and automatic focus is a point and shoot. Anyone who uses those features is a point and shooter. I am not qualified to say whether that is good or bad.
 
Winslowe said:
ANY camera that offers automatic exposure and automatic focus is a point and shoot. Anyone who uses those features is a point and shooter. I am not qualified to say whether that is good or bad.
Click to expand...
Should we perhaps introduce a weight category to clear things up?
 
adrianday said:
Interestingly, the D60's automatic modes were called "Point-and-Shoot Modes". There was one specifically labelled "Auto (flash off)". Worked pretty much the same as Auto but... without the flash. No tape required!

I've got a Ricoh GR and wholeheartedly agree with what you've said - it's my goto small 'proper' camera these days when I can't be fluffed with humping my D810 around.
Click to expand...
You’re probably right about the D60, I can’t remember which model, but it must have been well hidden because I couldn’t find it and I do read manuals :(.
 
This is one of my current point and shoots. I think it may also qualify as a Travel Zoom... :thinking: :naughty:

Camera Sony A65 and Tamron 16-300 on papers DSC01407.JPG
 
Winslowe said:
ANY camera that offers automatic exposure and automatic focus is a point and shoot. Anyone who uses those features is a point and shooter. I am not qualified to say whether that is good or bad.
Click to expand...
I mean, all photography involves some degree of ‘pointing’ and ‘shooting’. Ansel Adams pointed his 8x10 at something and (eventually) shot. I think the definition of ‘point and shoot’ is a camera designed to be used that way (full auto).
 
Tom Pinchenzo said:
I mean, all photography involves some degree of ‘pointing’ and ‘shooting’. Ansel Adams pointed his 8x10 at something and (eventually) shot. I think the definition of ‘point and shoot’ is a camera designed to be used that way (full auto).
Click to expand...

adrianday said:
Should we perhaps introduce a weight category to clear things up?
Click to expand...

Probably best to ignore nit-picky forumites trying to be perverse about an obvious concept. We all 'know' a P&S camera is a compact designed to be used in a particular way, and not a DSLR that happened to have a mode the maker called point and shoot. The fact that many P&S compacts may have incorporated 'manual' modes to theoretically permit control of exposure and focussing doesn't matter because they weren't really intended, nor were they used that way.

Possibly the easiest way to define things would be to require the digital sensor (see what I did there) to be no bigger than 1/1.7" (to include things like the older Canon G series) and exclude the distinctly more intentionally controllable 1", M43 and APS-C offerings from various makers. Also excluded should be any camera with a control wheel automatically assigned to change aperture, shutter speed or focus rather than being required to dig into a menu: i.e. if manual control is obvious and intentional then the camera is immediately NOT a P&S device, even if it can be used that way.
 
Last edited:
I think we should just put in our tuppenceworth and not over lean over backwards to get it right! ;)

Photographer leaning over backwards ExeterCathedral E-PL5 P8040003 mono.jpg
 
ancient_mariner said:
Probably best to ignore nit-picky forumites trying to be perverse about an obvious concept. We all 'know' a P&S camera is a compact designed to be used in a particular way, and not a DSLR that happened to have a mode the maker called point and shoot. The fact that many P&S compacts may have incorporated 'manual' modes to theoretically permit control of exposure and focussing doesn't matter because they weren't really intended, nor were they used that way.

Possibly the easiest way to define things would be to require the digital sensor (see what I did there) to be no bigger than 1/1.7" (to include things like the older Canon G series) and exclude the distinctly more intentionally controllable 1", M43 and APS-C offerings from various makers. Also excluded should be any camera with a control wheel automatically assigned to change aperture, shutter speed or focus rather than being required to dig into a menu: i.e. if manual control is obvious and intentional then the camera is immediately NOT a P&S device, even if it can be used that way.
Click to expand...
Okay, I tried changing the thread title to, “Does anyone use a cheap point-and-shoot camera with a sensor no bigger than 1/1.7” and doesn’t have a control wheel that can be assigned to change aperture, shutter speed or focus these days?”

Unfortunately, this exceeds the permissible thread title length. It is however, absolutely on point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top