What decent compacts are out there now?

Lensflare

Lensflare

Messages
3,156
Name
Simon Everett
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a Nikon P7800 and love it. The saltwater is starting to take its toll now, after 5 or 6 years of sterling service (might be longer the way time flies!) It is still working but the buttons are getting a bit dodgy at times. If I could find another one at reasonable money I would buy it in a heartbeat.... they are incredibly expensive second hand now. I do still have the predecessor, the 7700 sat upstairs in its box. Maybe that would suffice, but the sensor in the 7800 was an improvement. What is there out there that would be a suitable replacement - PLEASE NOTE a bridge camera is NOT suitable, don't bother arguing, it just isn't, it is far too bulky.
7800 is slow, but that doesn't matter, it produces large RAW files.
f2.0 lens 24mm-200m
does a bit of video.
folding and turn round screen for front viewing (setting up shots where you are in it, not just a selfie, but 'doing stuff')
Good battery life.
Infra red remote

I haven't been able to find anything that is comparable, they are all jpeg only jobbies. I bet there are some amongst the collective who are better at searching than I am.... Google never seems to answer my questions properly. Other people searching on my behalf obviously ask differently, because they get completely different answers.

Ideas please - and not £500 or up either!
 
I really rate my P7800 too but the mutli-controller is getting a bit flaky. I bought it as a fishing camera but it gets used for lots more than that. I've also searched for a suitable replacement and failed so will be following this with interest, if not with much hope.
 
Sony RX100 VI or VII are close as is the Panasonic TZ100 apart from the articulated screen.
 
Cameras that come to mind are the RX100 series, the G5X ii and the G7X ii. They all have tilting screens that allow it to face the front (although they stick out from the top rather than the side). The canon ones do 24-100/120, and the Sony does 24-200 which is a comparable reach.
 
RX100M4 onwards, nuff said.

George.
 
There's an "RX100M4" on fleabay as we speak that's reported to be in excellent condition for £399.00 + £12.00pp. Well under budget.

George.
 
If you can wait a while Black Friday (end of November) usually sees some very good camera deals.
 
Last edited:
Does the Mark 4 still have the pop-up viewfinder? Not sure how well that mechanism will stand up to salty spray.
 
Nod said:
Does the Mark 4 still have the pop-up viewfinder? Not sure how well that mechanism will stand up to salty spray.
Click to expand...
It does and it's not weathersealed or have the 200mm reach.

It's a fiddly little thing. Sorry I know there are many fans for these cameras here but I am not one of them lol
LX100/ii are much nicer to use.
 
Last edited:
I have a Mk 3 and like it but don't think it's what Simon needs.
 
The basic problem is that the compact market is all but dead apart from the high end so there's no intersect between the OP's requirements, budget and what's available. The last one ain't going to change so it's up to the OP to decide where he's prepared to be flexible to make what he wants and the real world meet.
 
Snapsh0t said:
The basic problem is that the compact market is all but dead apart from the high end so there's no intersect between the OP's requirements, budget and what's available. The last one ain't going to change so it's up to the OP to decide where he's prepared to be flexible to make what he wants and the real world meet.
Click to expand...

Indeed phone have basically killed the lower end. Funnily enough though the best camera phones cost as much or more than cameras. Same goes for ILCs. Every brand is making "entry level" high end FF these days for this reason.
 
nandbytes said:
You can get a good used Sony RX10ii for under £500.
Click to expand...

But how big is it? The P7800 is about the size of your hand, complete. It fits a coat pocket easily. Something tells me a bridge camera is going to be about twice the size or more.
 
omens said:
Cameras that come to mind are the RX100 series, the G5X ii and the G7X ii. They all have tilting screens that allow it to face the front (although they stick out from the top rather than the side). The canon ones do 24-100/120, and the Sony does 24-200 which is a comparable reach.
Click to expand...

I will have a butchers at the Sony version. 100/120 is not long enough for my needs.
 
Lensflare said:
But how big is it? The P7800 is about the size of your hand, complete. It fits a coat pocket easily. Something tells me a bridge camera is going to be about twice the size or more.
Click to expand...
Yes it's larger and would definitely not fit in your coat pocket.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
RX100M4 onwards, nuff said.

George.
Click to expand...

That is no good for me - only a 24-70. I NEED 24 (or wider) to 200 equivalent, and RAW, which your Sony does have, but a 70mm is useless for me.
 
Al1944 said:
If you can wait a while Black Friday (end of November) usually sees some very good camera deals.
Click to expand...

I have heard of this, but having seen the bun fights that it creates I weon't be joining in, especially with the viral situation pervading. We are shielding still.
 
I still have a RX100 M5 which is small and gets thrown in the bag when out and about. Only thing is the phone gets used more for some reason!
 
Lensflare said:
It would seem the nearest equivalent to our old P7800s is the Sony RX100 VI - it has the same f2.8 24-200 lens range (although I think ours is f2)... just goes to show how far ahead of the curve Nikon were with the P7800, which has done sterling service for 7 years now!
Click to expand...
The Sony does look about the closest. It's a shame the P7800 was the end of a line. I'll keep using mine until it stops working altogether.
 
Lensflare said:
It would seem the nearest equivalent to our old P7800s is the Sony RX100 VI - it has the same f2.8 24-200 lens range (although I think ours is f2)... just goes to show how far ahead of the curve Nikon were with the P7800, which has done sterling service for 7 years now!
Click to expand...

It's not really far ahead on anything to be honest. it has a smaller sensor in comparison and a old one at that. The larger more up to date sensor of Sony more than makes up for it.
 
nandbytes said:
It's not really far ahead on anything to be honest. it has a smaller sensor in comparison and a old one at that. The larger more up to date sensor of Sony more than makes up for it.
Click to expand...

Only the sensor is advanced. The rest is only JUST catching up with our old Nikons... which is why I have been so stumped for so long in finding anything that even comes close. The rest have either not had the lens coverage, been too big or not shot RAW. The Sony doesn't have a hit shoe.. the Nikon you can use the pop up flash as a commander for remote flashes too.
 
Last edited:
Ed Sutton said:
The Sony does look about the closest. It's a shame the P7800 was the end of a line. I'll keep using mine until it stops working altogether.
Click to expand...

Likewise. I am even tempted to take both my P7100 and P7800 (I skipped the 7700) up to Lehmans and see if they can cobble one good camera out of the two... the rotating MF button on the back is the same on both. I suspect the switches and buttons could be swapped across. That would do me just fine!
 
Lensflare said:
Only the sensor is advanced. The rest is only JUST catching up with our old Nikons... which is why I have been so stumped for so long in finding anything that even comes close. The rest have either not had the lens coverage, been too big or not shot RAW.
Click to expand...

Err... Ok. Smaller sensor means the lens needs to have a smaller image circle so you can make them smaller and faster (i.e. large aperture). Not to mention if you make the aperture smaller the diffraction well start to soften the images so they have to keep it fairly large.

Sure may be no one makes cameras such as this but as @Snapsh0t above put it that is simply because the market is dwindling for small sensor cameras. I don't really think Nikon was ahead of the curve or anyone is catching up, simply that they all have a different style cameras out of which Nikon seems to fit your needs.
 
Last edited:
Lensflare said:
Lens focal length range?
Click to expand...

The Sony RX100 V is equipped with a 8.8-25.7mm lens, offering an optical zoom ratio of about 2.9x, translating to a 35mm-equivalent focal range of about 24-70mm. The lens is very fast (bright), with a maximum aperture ranging from f/1.8 at wide angle to f/2.8 at telephoto.
 
redlion said:
The Sony RX100 V is equipped with a 8.8-25.7mm lens, offering an optical zoom ratio of about 2.9x, translating to a 35mm-equivalent focal range of about 24-70mm. The lens is very fast (bright), with a maximum aperture ranging from f/1.8 at wide angle to f/2.8 at telephoto.
Click to expand...

Exactly, nowhere the 200mm I need.
 
nandbytes said:
Err... Ok. Smaller sensor means the lens needs to have a smaller image circle so you can make them smaller and faster (i.e. large aperture). Not to mention if you make the aperture smaller the diffraction well start to soften the images so they have to keep it fairly large.

Sure may be no one makes cameras such as this but as @Snapsh0t above put it that is simply because the market is dwindling for small sensor cameras. I don't really think Nikon was ahead of the curve or anyone is catching up, simply that they all have a different style cameras out of which Nikon seems to fit your needs.
Click to expand...


I have no idea what all that is about. I use a camera, not an image circle.
 
Lensflare said:
I have no idea what all that is about. I use a camera, not an image circle.
Click to expand...

All I am saying is just because the lens is small with f2 wide aperture and large range on a smaller sensor doesn't automatically make it ahead of the curve compared to say a 1inch sensor body with a f2.8 wide aperture+large range or f1.8 wide aperture but with smaller range.
I do not want to derail this thread with equivalence equations, all i am saying is there horses for courses, one isn't necessarily better than the other and the Sony options are just as good if not better (but comes at a cost i.e. £££).
 
Last edited:
Lensflare said:
That is no good for me - only a 24-70. I NEED 24 (or wider) to 200 equivalent, and RAW, which your Sony does have, but a 70mm is useless for me.
Click to expand...

I have a Panasonic TZ100 which is a 1" sensor compact with a 25-250mm zoom, I think. It does raw too.

The image quality is ok but if you pixel peep at 100% on screen things will not be as nice as they would be with a larger sensor system and the lens is soft at some settings but these are the compromises you have to live with if going for a small sensor and a teeny tiny long range zoom.

On the plus side it's small and light, it does raw, the zoom range is nice, it has a useable evf, it has a flash, you can go full manual, all the controls are there, the image quality isn't bad and the files are IMO quite malleable with very high ISO's being useable after processing.

There's a TZ200 now but I have no idea what if any the improvements are.

There's a TZ100 thread here...

www.talkphotography.co.uk

Panasonic TZ100

Recently purchased from the forums - surprised not a bit more chatter about this fine little compact in the Equipment sub-forum. I'll kick off some photographs with a test of the zoom capability: TZ100 zoomed out by Jeff, on Flickr TZ100 zoomed in by Jeff, on Flickr These were after the...
www.talkphotography.co.uk www.talkphotography.co.uk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top