Looking for a smaller camera to sit alongside the D800

Sir SR

Sir SR

Messages
5,635
Name
Shaheed
Edit My Images
No
Hi

I love the d800 immensely and to be clear I don't want to get rid of it at all.

However I only have that and an iPhone 3 (and I suppose my old d90). I really want a smaller camera with raw capabilities to use when I don't fancy carrying the d800 about.

Any suggestions from real world users?!?

Ta

S
 
For pocketability, I use a Fuji XF-1 but also use another small Fuji, an X-20. Both have the ability to shoot in raw but I never use it since their JPEGs are so good. (I never use raw in my DSLRs either [which include a D800.])
 
Nod said:
For pocketability, I use a Fuji XF-1 but also use another small Fuji, an X-20. Both have the ability to shoot in raw but I never use it since their JPEGs are so good. (I never use raw in my DSLRs either [which include a D800.])
Click to expand...

Now, what's low light like with these, and also is it a fixed lens system?

Thank you!
 
How low do you want? It's fairly happy up to ISO800 but can go a fair bit higher, although it does get noisy. It's not an interchangeable lens system but it does have a zoom - 25mm - 100mm (35mm equivalent focal lengths).
 
Cheers guys. Will google those!!

Its for a few weddings as a guest where I don't want to lug the d800 around!

Would love an omd in an ideal world but not sure I could justify it. Also not sure about size/performance and how much different from lugging the d800 it would be.

Thanks again, would like to hear from anybody who's used an omd and a d800.

S
 
I have a D800 and a Fuji X-Pro 1. I also go to the odd wedding ;)

Fujis are nice. Low light is generally good enough. Lenses are stunning, size is small.

I believe the OMD is better at focusing speed and also gives access to some very nice lenses. Can't comment on size/weight.

A key difference in the CSC cameras is the weight of the lenses. My 24-70 alone weighs more than a Fuji with a zoom lens.
 
JonathanRyan said:
I have a D800 and a Fuji X-Pro 1. I also go to the odd wedding ;)

Fujis are nice. Low light is generally good enough. Lenses are stunning, size is small.

I believe the OMD is better at focusing speed and also gives access to some very nice lenses. Can't comment on size/weight.

A key difference in the CSC cameras is the weight of the lenses. My 24-70 alone weighs more than a Fuji with a zoom lens.
Click to expand...

The weight & size thing was my main issue. I love my d800 but would like something of decent quality with raw capabilities

I'll look into the Fuji. Might make me finally list my d90 and tamron 17-50 f2.8

S
 
Hi, The Fuji X20 is superb with a cracking lens.

If you want more pocketable the Fuji XF1 is basically a cut down version of an X10 same sensor, no viewfinder, slightly different lens but still very good.

If you can go larger and more expensive then the Fuji X-E1 will do just about everything you want, very versatile with lenses that are as good as anything I've ever used.

Hope this helps.
 
I love my Fuji X10. If I changed it I'd get an X20 or if I could stretch the wallet an X100s.
The X10 has RAW capabilities but as Nod said, you don't need the bother of RAW 'cos the Jpegs are so darned good.
 
After owning most of the CSCs Id recommend the XE-1 or OMD. I personally went XE-1, great little camera that produces fantastic images.
 
I have a D4 and have just got a D600. Great camera and noticeably smaller and lighter.
merv
 
I am pretty sure omd is not that much smaller then d90. infact nex 6 is not that much smaller either.
 
hyeongsoong said:
I am pretty sure omd is not that much smaller then d90. infact nex 6 is not that much smaller either.
Click to expand...

Body, not much smaller, but with lenses.....
 
hyeongsoong said:
So body is about 10% bigger. Lens are alot bigger but then again 2 lens are not the same thought.
Click to expand...

Quite a lot more than 10% bigger and they are both 24-70 2.8 equiv ish and theres probably a massive difference in weight. Im confused by your post, do you suggest to place the 17-55 on the M43?
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Quite a lot more than 10% bigger and they are both 24-70 2.8 equiv and theres probably a massive difference in weight.
Click to expand...

The DLRS weight 104% more than the Nex 6, so the site says.
 
twist said:
Quite a lot more than 10% bigger and they are both 24-70 2.8 equiv ish and theres probably a massive difference in weight. Im confused by your post, do you suggest to place the 17-55 on the M43?
Click to expand...

What I mean to say is They are not 24-70 2.8 equiv.

On dx to get a true FF 24-70-2.8 equivalent the lens needs to be 17-55 F1.8;
on MFT to get a true FF 24-70 2.8 equivalent the lens needs to be 12-35 F1.4;

as for NEX, the body is smaller but the lens are still dx size so you are not really save much weight/ size wise plus the lens selection are not that good unless you get adopters to use old lens. for second camera to go along with D800, camera such as X20, Sony rx-100 makes more sense.
 
Considering an NEX 6 only weighs 346g, that 400g extra is a lot. Thats 2x and a bit Nikon 50mm 1.8g lenses.
 
Sir SR said:
Cheers guys. Will google those!!

Its for a few weddings as a guest where I don't want to lug the d800 around!

Would love an omd in an ideal world but not sure I could justify it. Also not sure about size/performance and how much different from lugging the d800 it would be.

Thanks again, would like to hear from anybody who's used an omd and a d800.

S
Click to expand...

I'm guessing from this that you're after a camera that won't spoil the hang of a suit when the camera's in a jacket pocket.

woof woof said:
eh? :thinking:



Click to expand...

Doesn't look like any of these options would "suit" a pocket too well! In comparison, the XF in its leather case measures 117mm x 72mm x 42mm and weighs in at 280g. Its lens sits neatly in with the 24-70 range, although it's actually 25mm - 100mm equivalent. Slip it out of its case and it shrinks to 110mm x 62mm x 33mm - even more compact. Drops a few ounces too, down to 228g.

Best bet for the OP would be to visit a well stocked shop and try a few choices out, both for IQ and pocketability.
 
Nod said:
I'm guessing from this that you're after a camera that won't spoil the hang of a suit when the camera's in a jacket pocket.

Doesn't look like any of these options would "suit" a pocket too well! In comparison, the XF in its leather case measures 117mm x 72mm x 42mm and weighs in at 280g. Its lens sits neatly in with the 24-70 range, although it's actually 25mm - 100mm equivalent. Slip it out of its case and it shrinks to 110mm x 62mm x 33mm - even more compact. Drops a few ounces too, down to 228g.

Best bet for the OP would be to visit a well stocked shop and try a few choices out, both for IQ and pocketability.
Click to expand...

I think you might be right!
 
Its always a trade off, size vs image quality. Best bet if you want both is a compact with fast aperture, eg XZ-2 or a slower aperture at the longer end but larger sensor like the RX100.
 
A friend mentioned the older canon s100 as a pocket contender. I know nothing of this camera!! I'm a bit torn (the usual dilemma of size vs iq vs price!!)
 
Ricardodaforce said:
The LX7 has a much faster lens.
Click to expand...

Cripes there's so much choice!! Another friend mentioned some kind of Sony attachment to clip onto your smart phone!! This must be a complete sector of the market I've never looked at before!!

Anybody got some examples of shots from their cameras?

Ta

S
 
Sir SR said:
Cripes there's so much choice!! Another friend mentioned some kind of Sony attachment to clip onto your smart phone!! This must be a complete sector of the market I've never looked at before!!

Anybody got some examples of shots from their cameras?

Ta

S
Click to expand...

Have a look here.

The QX100 is basically the RX100 without a screen/body. An interesting development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top