View Full Version : Digital camera!?
Hello everyone!
I am looking for a new digital camera. I'm an absolute layman in this topic.
My wife owns a Casio Exilim which is about 5 years old. But this Kamaera was not good from the beginning. Often misbehaved pictures much noise etc ...
What should the camera do very well?
Since many portrait pictures are taken, you should have a very good optical zoom .. And everything that goes with it ... Think it should also posses a good wide-angle lens.
Can someone recommend a good digital camera?
Hello everyone!
I am looking for a new digital camera. I'm an absolute layman in this topic.
My wife owns a Casio Exilim which is about 5 years old. But this Kamaera was not good from the beginning. Often misbehaved pictures much noise etc ...
What should the camera do very well?
Since many portrait pictures are taken, you should have a very good optical zoom .. And everything that goes with it ... Think it should also posses a good wide-angle lens.
Can someone recommend a good digital camera?
Leica, it will cost you but the lenses and cameras are world class.
https://www.l-camera-forum.com
walpurgis
13-12-2018, 14:51
That's a topic with an enormous amount of options. Would you buy new or also consider second hand? What will the budget be? What type of photos will the camera mainly be used for? Does it have to fit in a pocket? And so on..........
For me, the biggest bugbear is battery life. Many digital cameras go flat in next to no time, even with new batteries.
That's a topic with an enormous amount of options. Would you buy new or also consider second hand? What will the budget be? What type of photos will the camera mainly be used for? Does it have to fit in a pocket? And so on..........
For me, the biggest bugbear is battery life. Many digital cameras go flat in next to no time, even with new batteries.
Lieca M3 & M6 don't need no stinking batteries:eyebrows:
walpurgis
13-12-2018, 14:56
Lieca M3 & M6 don't need no stinking batteries:eyebrows:
The OP was about digital cameras. Yes the Leicas are very nice, but not necessarily ideal for everybody. :)
(anyway, the M6 does use batteries)
The OP was about digital cameras. Yes the Leicas are very nice, but not necessarily ideal for everybody. :)
(anyway, the M6 does use batteries)
Yes I know the OP wants a digital camera. I had a full Leica M3 kit (90, 135 & 50mm lenses) for about three years recently, best photos I've ever taken in my life, rangefinders are brilliant IMO.
Personally I couldn't afford or justify a Leica Digital camera and lenses when an iPhone XS/XR/8Plus has an amazing digital camera, well maybe not the XR, but the other two do and obviously not as good as a proper good DSLR but not far away.
Canon Ixus - compact an ultra reliable (about £100)
Wife has one which is going on for 10 years old and still going strong.
Worth looking at the Olympus or Panasonic m4/3 range for something with more scope and interchangeable lenses (Panasonic have joined forces with Leica)
More expensive ... but a damn sight cheaper than a Leica M9 or M10 (cheapest M lens about £1000)
Sherwood
13-12-2018, 15:22
Yes I know the OP wants a digital camera. I had a full Leica M3 kit (90, 135 & 50mm lenses) for about three years recently, best photos I've ever taken in my life, rangefinders are brilliant IMO.
Personally I couldn't afford or justify a Leica Digital camera and lenses when an iPhone XS/XR/8Plus has an amazing digital camera, well maybe not the XR, but the other two do and obviously not as good as a proper good DSLR but not far away.
The iPhone has a decent camera but it is a long way off in quality from a DSLR or even a good compact camera. I have a Panasonic LX-100 which is compact but with a big optical sensor and an excellent and quite fast (Leica) lens.
Expect to see it discounted heavily soon as the MKII version has been launched.
canon ones and sony ones are both excellent too.... again it comes down to budget.
using one of these now https://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-PowerShot-SX700-Compact-Zoom/dp/B00IE4ZFEA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1544716400&sr=8-2&keywords=canon+sx700hs
Canon Ixus - compact an ultra reliable (about £100)
Wife has one which is going on for 10 years old and still going strong.
Worth looking at the Olympus or Panasonic m4/3 range for something with more scope and interchangeable lenses (Panasonic have joined forces with Leica)
More expensive ... but a damn sight cheaper than a Leica M9 or M10 (cheapest M lens about £1000)
You’ll never lose money on a Leica especially Leica glass, other digital cameras and lenses are virtually worthless within about six months of buying them.
Sherwood
13-12-2018, 16:28
You’ll never lose money on a Leica especially Leica glass, other digital cameras and lenses are virtually worthless within about six months of buying them.
Methinks you like a Leica! :rolleyes:
You’ll never lose money on a Leica especially Leica glass, other digital cameras and lenses are virtually worthless within about six months of buying them.
Don't really think so....
I have three classic Leica M lenses, bought them for peanuts (relatively) ... with adapters I can fit them on a range of different digital bodies from other brands and update quite cheaply if needed :)
Incidentally, Leica M digital bodies lose their value quite dramatically almost immediately after you buy them. Did consider picking up an M9 a short while back. Cheap on eBay compared to their astronomical price new.
Don't really think so....
I have three classic Leica M lenses, bought them for peanuts (relatively) ... with adapters I can fit them on a range of different digital bodies from other brands and update quite cheaply if needed :)
Incidentally, Leica M digital bodies lose their value quite dramatically almost immediately after you buy them. Did consider picking up an M9 a short while back. Cheap on eBay compared to their astronomical price new.
I bought the M3 kit for circa £2,500 and sold the lot for more or less the same money three years later.
The pick of the bunch was a 1967 mint Summicron, an amazing lens, bought it for about £560 from a Dutch dealer and sold it for £650 I think or thereabouts to a guy in Singapore.
Methinks you like a Leica! :rolleyes:
Have you ever used one?
Rangefinder cameras are completely different from SLR cameras, there's no mirror shake so you can take excellent hand held photos in low light with no flash as a result of course the Leica lenses help especially fast ones but basically it's nearly impossible to take out of focus shots photos with them unless that's what you want to do.
I loved my M3.
RobbieGong
13-12-2018, 18:42
What about the Cannon Powershots ? G series etc
Dont know a lot about cameras but for simple use and good pics the ones I've had in the past have been great and not daft money.
Loads come up on ebay so plenty of choice and good deals to be had
Stryder5
13-12-2018, 18:46
Hello everyone!
I am looking for a new digital camera. I'm an absolute layman in this topic.
My wife owns a Casio Exilim which is about 5 years old. But this Kamaera was not good from the beginning. Often misbehaved pictures much noise etc ...
What should the camera do very well?
Since many portrait pictures are taken, you should have a very good optical zoom .. And everything that goes with it ... Think it should also posses a good wide-angle lens.
Can someone recommend a good digital camera?
Could you narrow it down a little?
Are you looking for a compact camera or an SLR, this would help?
Gary
Have you ever used one?
Rangefinder cameras are completely different from SLR cameras, there's no mirror shake so you can take excellent hand held photos in low light with no flash as a result of course the Leica lenses help especially fast ones but basically it's nearly impossible to take out of focus shots photos with them unless that's what you want to do.
I loved my M3.
+1. Cameras without mirrors are fantastic. The only SLR I still use is my Pentax MX, and that only for street shooting with a short tele. All others are either rangefinders, viewfinder cameras (zone focussing), or TLRs. Useable shutter speed range is so much better with these. SLRs have their strengths, but the compromises aren't worth it for me, for the type of photography I do (B&W, film, art photography).
To Morgan (the OP): yes, please do narrow it down for us. Camera type, budget, type of shooting you want to do, is good video needed, weatherproof/waterproof...? We can help you better with more info...
mad-moon
13-12-2018, 19:15
Canon powershot G16 is built like a tank and takes superb images..it also has a point and shoot mode, besides manual and semi manual settings...also Lumix cameras are excellent...and a lot of them do have a Leica lens...I have one and it takes exceptionally sharp images...
walpurgis
13-12-2018, 19:26
Canon powershot G16 is built like a tank and takes superb images..it also has a point and shoot mode, besides manual and semi manual settings...also Lumix cameras are excellent...and a lot of them do have a Leica lens...I have one and it takes exceptionally sharp images...
But the G16 is bloody enormous for a compact and not pocketable.
Also, I've had several Lumix compacts and they've all have short battery life.
I currently carry a Canon Ixus 100 IS for everyday point & shoot snaps. It's perfect, the size of a credit card and the battery lasts ages.
Sherwood
13-12-2018, 19:32
Another thing I like about my Panasonic LX-100 is that it shoots 4k video. Looks fantastic when played back on a 4k tv or monitor, but it helps to have some stabilisation kit or when used with a tripod!
walpurgis
13-12-2018, 19:44
Pixel count actually means very little these days. Anything over 6mp is perfectly adequate for the average domestic shot. In fact, when I'm after some decent pics, I dig out my ancient 8mp Kodak P880 as it has an excellent Schneider lens and the photo quality is very good.
Sherwood
13-12-2018, 19:53
Pixel count actually means very little these days. Anything over 6mp is perfectly adequate for the average domestic shot. In fact, when I'm after some decent pics, I dig out my ancient 8mp Kodak P880 as it has an excellent Schneider lens and the photo quality is very good.
I agree with you up a point. You will not notice the difference in pixels when printing out a photo at A4 size. However, the quality of the Panasonic's Leica lens really shines through when photos or movies are played back on my 4k HDR TV.
4k resolution is greater than 8mp
walpurgis
13-12-2018, 19:59
I know what the Leica branded Lumix lenses are like and they are good. I've had several of their better compacts, the first being a DMC-FX150 the best part of twenty years ago. That's not to say other make lenses are inferior though.
Sherwood
13-12-2018, 20:07
I know what the Leica branded Lumix lenses are like and they are good. I've had several of their better compacts, the first being a DMC-FX150 the best part of twenty years ago. That's not to say other make lenses are inferior though.
Careful, there is at least one person who might not agree with you. :doh:
One thing we need to know before recommending anything is the amount of money that you have to spend ?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Stryder5
13-12-2018, 20:59
Pixel count actually means very little these days. Anything over 6mp is perfectly adequate for the average domestic shot. In fact, when I'm after some decent pics, I dig out my ancient 8mp Kodak P880 as it has an excellent Schneider lens and the photo quality is very good.
What's an average domestic shot?
If I take a photograph I expect to be able to print it at A3 if I want, and may want a portion enlarging to A4 so pixel count is important, more so sensor size, and shooting in RAW if I don't want to discard large amounts of detail.
It's horses for courses though, I use a Sigma DP1 for most stills, but my GoPro still staggers me quality wise on both stills and movies. Both have their limitations that I recognize though, fixed focal length, but with their quality resolution I can generally get what I want with manipulation.
Gary
Reason I changed from the Sony was my canon had wifi which makes life easy getting the pics off it, especially if only a few. No cables needed
Think the Sony had a better sensor but the canon is a nice lens
mad-moon
13-12-2018, 22:59
But the G16 is bloody enormous for a compact and not pocketable.
Also, I've had several Lumix compacts and they've all have short battery life.
I currently carry a Canon Ixus 100 IS for everyday point & shoot snaps. It's perfect, the size of a credit card and the battery lasts ages.
I agree...but the OP hasn't mentioned anything about camera size Geoff....the lumix I have has an excellent battery life...not being a compact....I have a couple of slrs too...which i can highly recommend, but they may be a bit advanced for the OP....the lumix is an FZ38..old by todays standard but takes a good picture 12.1 megapixel and 18 x zoom...I don't have a G16.. but my pal does....and It's a small camera..with a big punch...and slr quality images...
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4803/44488655960_486d39be48_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2aMiZsq)DIGITAL (https://flic.kr/p/2aMiZsq) by alan moon (https://www.flickr.com/photos/145382488@N02/), on Flickr
dave2010
14-12-2018, 11:11
Depends what the requirements are.
Size, battery life, battery type, weight, detachable lenses (or not), telephoto, wide angle, low light performance, price, video (yes/no, HD, 4k), post to websites (yes/no?), speed (for action photography), response time (similar to speed - but some can take multiple frames - sometimes even a shortish delay is too long for action shots), ease of use, viewfinder, tiltable or rotatable screens, sound recording, in camera editing, GPS. RAW formats. Close up - macro, super macro capabilities. Mirrorless cameras, 4/3 frame cameras. Mechanical vs electonic shutters.
There are many variables.
I have several cameras, all good in their ways, but also with some not so good points. My Canon bridge camera SX1-IS was good for safari - now getting old and almost falling apart. Not as good as a DSLR, but often more practical. We also have a Panasonic bridge camera with a Leica lens - some lovely shots from that. The newer Panasonic TX100 is very good, and has post focus, but unfortunately in that mode it takes short movies, and the field of view changes. Also to export shots that either has to be done in the camera, or software such as Blender is needed to generate multiple shots to be stacked within photo editing software such as Photoshop or Affinity Photo to do the focus merge. That model also does very good 4k video. I have older cameras, such as a Fuji 602 - that takes lovely shots, but by modern standards it's horrendously slow. Even earlier is an Agfa 1280 which by today's standards is poor, but it has a nice tiltable screen, so taking ceiling shots is easier. I have a Fuji compact with GPS. In bright sunlight it's impossible to see the screen, so shots can be missed. GPS works, but runs the battery down completely each day. We have a couple of Canon Ixus cameras - these are nice and easy to use. They are very portable. One is better for very wide angle shots, the other more "normal". Neither is good for long distance telephoto work. An older Canon "compact" is chunky, but has an optical viewfinder. Optical viewfinders are hard to find nowadays.
Almost all cameras now use SDHC or XDHC cards, though some cameras may still use CF, and some work with more than one card or card type.
Most new consumer cameras will shoot RAW as well as JPEG. This is worth having if one knows how to,use it, and has the appropriate software. There is however one camera I know of which is otherwise very good for telephoto work (e.g bird photography) which only shoots JPEG. It's probably not that important for most people, but if you think RAW is going to help then check it's available.
Serious photographers will often prefer a DSLR, but they are heavier, and with expensive bodies and lenses it's quite easy to spend £10k. Travel with such kit adds weight and expense, and the risk of theft.
Pixel count actually means very little these days. Anything over 6mp is perfectly adequate for the average domestic shot. In fact, when I'm after some decent pics, I dig out my ancient 8mp Kodak P880 as it has an excellent Schneider lens and the photo quality is very good.
Agree The size of the sensor is more important - just as roll fim cameras were/are capable of better results than 35mm film cameras: there is less enlarging to do to make a large print.
(That said, I'm saving up for a Leica M10 (with a 36 x 24mm2 sized sensor), with which I can use my Leica prime focus lenses.)
dave2010
14-12-2018, 15:51
If you want to spend serious money there are always medium format digital cameras. See https://www.adorama.com/alc/5-best-medium-format-digital-cameras They are seriously large and heavy I think too.
I met a few people with some of these a year or so back on a trip to see the 2017 eclipse - mostly Pentax I think. In the days of film I had a friend with at least one Hasselblad - not sure if he's still got any.
If you want to spend serious money there are always medium format digital cameras. See https://www.adorama.com/alc/5-best-medium-format-digital-cameras They are seriously large and heavy I think too.
I met a few people with some of these a year or so back on a trip to see the 2017 eclipse - mostly Pentax I think. In the days of film I had a friend with at least one Hasselblad - not sure if he's still got any.
Yes, and seriously expensive too.
In the past I have toyed with the idea of buying a Bronica ETRS system, or maybe a used Hasselblad or Rolleiflex. But most of my photography is travel photography. I have been all over the world and to places where other cameras have frozen up or failed with extreme heat; my Leicas (M3 and M4) have just performed flawlessly regardless of environment.
Yes, and seriously expensive too.
In the past I have toyed with the idea of buying a Bronica ETRS system, or maybe a used Hasselblad or Rolleiflex. But most of my photography is travel photography. I have been all over the world and to places where other cameras have frozen up or failed with extreme heat; my Leicas (M3 and M4) have just performed flawlessly regardless of environment.
Good stuff, Barry. Those old Leicas have incredible glass, as is much of the German glass of that era. I've never owned a Leica, but if I ever had a hankering for one, it would be a 1950's era M-series.
In general, I think it's easy to underestimate the enlargement potential of a 35mm neg or chrome that's been shot with a top-rank lens. Despite being mainly a medium format shooter (Rolleiflex, Mamiya TLR, Agfa folder, etc.) I am repeatedly taken aback by how good are the prints made from my little Rollei 35SE (Sonnar lens). I have some 16"x20" and 20"x20" prints hanging on our living room wall taken with this camera, and they are nearly indistinguishable in quality from the same size prints beside them shot with the Mamiya 6x6. Save for a bit more grain, visible only if your nose is inches from the print, you would never know it was a 35mm camera. I'm certain the leaf shutter helps a lot at getting sharp images, not having a mirror whacking away in there. That little thing is my desert island camera...built like a tank and has that killer lens.
Yes, those little Rollei 35SEs were the perfect pocket-sized 35mm film camera. The only disadvantage being it was easy to loose the lens cap. My girlfriend had one.
Used to have a Bronica.. Nice camera but quite big and nowadays a little one does a decent job and fits in the pocket.
walpurgis
14-12-2018, 17:36
I expect Morgan has given up by now, as no sensible suggestions have been forthcoming. It's no good camera buffs going on about their own preferences and spouting terms that a novice will not be familiar with.
Although he hasn't said yet, I think he likely just wants a modestly priced pocketable zoom compact camera that will provide decent everyday family and outdoor snaps, as well as being able to take good close-up (macro) shots and having a portrait and maybe sports mode.
My recommendation would be to search out reviews of modern compacts.
Then I would suggest a Lumix. A reasonably priced, fully automatic 'point and shoot' jobbie with a Leica designed zoom lens. I have one.
I expect Morgan has given up by now, as no sensible suggestions have been forthcoming. It's no good camera buffs going on about their own preferences and spouting terms that a novice will not be familiar with.
Although he hasn't said yet, I think he likely just wants a modestly priced pocketable zoom compact camera that will provide decent everyday family and outdoor snaps, as well as being able to take good close-up (macro) shots and having a portrait and maybe sports mode.
My recommendation would be to search out reviews of modern compacts.
thats what I gave hi.. a canon like mine... its very good and can be had for decent money now and still be in good nick
I expect Morgan has given up by now, as no sensible suggestions have been forthcoming. It's no good camera buffs going on about their own preferences and spouting terms that a novice will not be familiar with.
Although he hasn't said yet, I think he likely just wants a modestly priced pocketable zoom compact camera that will provide decent everyday family and outdoor snaps, as well as being able to take good close-up (macro) shots and having a portrait and maybe sports mode.
Fair enough, Geoff. But with the OP being basically AWOL here since his first post, this sort of thing happens...thread drift, people tossing suggestions out hoping for feedback from the OP as to what he really wants, etc.. Several, including me, have asked him to be more specific and provide some background, but he's not been heard from. Can't blame the others for trying to be helpful and having a bit of side chat about a favourite subject.
To the OP (Morgan). best to narrow down what you want a camera for and what sort of monies you want to spend.
Although now two years old this camera selector tool (https://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/buying-advice/buying_guides/what-digital-camera-selector-62866?utm_source=Mainsite&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_campaign=keycontent) may help you get some focus on what you want.
I expect Morgan has given up by now, as no sensible suggestions have been forthcoming.
Absolutely not the case Geoff ... I suggested a Canon Ixus as early as post#7 and this has been repeated a fair few times since, along with other very useful suggestions of equally fine and eminently affordable (and pocketable) cameras.
That Morgan hasn't respond at all since is down to him, not really the content of replies.
dave2010
14-12-2018, 18:31
To the OP (Morgan). best to narrow down what you want a camera for and what sort of tmonies you want to spend.
Although now two years old this camera selector tool (https://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/buying-advice/buying_guides/what-digital-camera-selector-62866?utm_source=Mainsite&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_campaign=keycontent) may help you get some focus on what you want.That's a really good flowchart plus tool. I followed it through to get to this - https://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/roundup/camera-roundups/best-budget-compact-of-2015-62686 but start again from the begining answering the questions to get other possibilities. Of course those results are perhaps for earlier models - but similar cameras should still be available now.
I am repeatedly taken aback by how good are the prints made from my little Rollei 35SE (Sonnar lens). I have some 16"x20" and 20"x20" prints hanging on our living room wall taken with this camera, and they are nearly indistinguishable in quality from the same size prints beside them shot with the Mamiya 6x6. Save for a bit more grain, visible only if your nose is inches from the print, you would never know it was a 35mm camera. I'm certain the leaf shutter helps a lot at getting sharp images, not having a mirror whacking away in there. That little thing is my desert island camera...built like a tank and has that killer lens.
Amen to that - I used to have one back in the day ... loved it. So much so that i did a trawl of eBay a while back with a view to buying one again :)
My favourite portrait camera is a Mamiya RB67 Pro-S with an 180mm lens.
But not digital and very 20c tech. Can't really pop it in your pocket and just take grab shots. :lol:
Agree The size of the sensor is more important - just as roll fim cameras were/are capable of better results than 35mm film cameras: there is less enlarging to do to make a large print.
(That said, I'm saving up for a Leica M10 (with a 36 x 24mm2 sized sensor), with which I can use my Leica prime focus lenses.)
Watch yourself mate they don't like people who like Leica round here or one punter doesn't and likes to make disparaging remarks with no positive alternative suggestions.
Jealousy is a terrible thing.
Yes, those little Rollei 35SEs were the perfect pocket-sized 35mm film camera. The only disadvantage being it was easy to loose the lens cap. My girlfriend had one.
True - my lens cap is long gone. Luckily a cap from a Fuji 135 film canister snaps perfectly into the collapsed lens hood, so a free lens cap there.
Honestly, the only thing I (occasionally) miss is a rangefinder. Guessing focus slows things down at times, so not the quickest camera to use. But then the camera would be larger...
Mike -- I hope you find another one. They pop up every now and then in our online classifieds locally, so there are still some out there to be had. My Mother has one with a Tessar lens, the 35TE model...would that interest you? Or is it the Sonnar you want? PM me if interested.
mad-moon
14-12-2018, 20:50
I expect Morgan has given up by now, as no sensible suggestions have been forthcoming. It's no good camera buffs going on about their own preferences and spouting terms that a novice will not be familiar with.
Although he hasn't said yet, I think he likely just wants a modestly priced pocketable zoom compact camera that will provide decent everyday family and outdoor snaps, as well as being able to take good close-up (macro) shots and having a portrait and maybe sports mode.
My recommendation would be to search out reviews of modern compacts.
Goodness me...who's upset you Geoff...I've recommended a Lumix FZ38 bridge camera...excellent zoom range....good size regards megapixels...good battery life...and can be bought very cheaply on the used market in nice condition...The OP didn't express any preference, and I think this is a good all rounder of a camera...for little money...
Hello
No matter which camera you buy, you should always pay attention to sufficiently short exposure time, and low sensitivity. (ISO) Both require light from the lens of the camera.
A buddy of mine recently bought a Samsung model for 80$. In good light conditions she takes nice pictures, but ..... the performance is very special and for so little money you can not expect a wide range of services. (as an example)
I recommend you a system camera like the Sigma SD Quattro H (https://productz.com/en/sigma-sd-quattro-h-digital-camera), with which you can change both zoom and fixed focal lengths. It is compact and without a mirror very robust, and lighter than a DSLR camera.
Pigmy Pony
17-12-2018, 18:45
A lot of vintage enthusiasts on AOS - but no one's mentioned a Box Brownie"!
dave2010
18-12-2018, 10:57
Hello
No matter which camera you buy, you should always pay attention to sufficiently short exposure time, and low sensitivity. (ISO) Both require light from the lens of the camera.
A buddy of mine recently bought a Samsung model for 80$. In good light conditions she takes nice pictures, but ..... the performance is very special and for so little money you can not expect a wide range of services. (as an example)
I recommend you a system camera like the Sigma SD Quattro H (https://productz.com/en/sigma-sd-quattro-h-digital-camera), with which you can change both zoom and fixed focal lengths. It is compact and without a mirror very robust, and lighter than a DSLR camera.That particular camera uses a Foveon image sensor - see http://www.foveon.com/article.php?a= Do you really believe the hype about the Foveons? I'm neutral about it right now, though I view claims about the first digital camera to record RGB with some sceptism.
For any camera which is in the market now, I'd recommend doing a search for reviews, and looking at the galleries which usually are embedded within. See if any pictures look like ones you'd like to take, and what the quality is.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-sd-quattro-h/5
Also look at sites like Flickr, and type in the name of the camera you might buy, and see if any people have uploaded photos of that camera - and again - see if the photos might be ones you'd like to take.
For the Sigma - here is the Flickr gallery - https://www.flickr.com/groups/2907345@N25/pool/
It's not really fair to knock a Samsung camera for $80 against a camera listed over $1000 and costing over £1000 in the UK - see https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-C41900-SD-Quattro-H-black/dp/B01N5C96X3
Without knowing what parameters our OP is working with or wanting, we are just shooting in the dark, and putting forward our own preferences.
Stryder5
18-12-2018, 13:39
That particular camera uses a Foveon image sensor - see http://www.foveon.com/article.php?a= Do you really believe the hype about the Foveons? I'm neutral about it right now, though I view claims about the first digital camera to record RGB with some sceptism.
For any camera which is in the market now, I'd recommend doing a search for reviews, and looking at the galleries which usually are embedded within. See if any pictures look like ones you'd like to take, and what the quality is.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-sd-quattro-h/5
Also look at sites like Flickr, and type in the name of the camera you might buy, and see if any people have uploaded photos of that camera - and again - see if the photos might be ones you'd like to take.
For the Sigma - here is the Flickr gallery - https://www.flickr.com/groups/2907345@N25/pool/
It's not really fair to knock a Samsung camera for $80 against a camera listed over $1000 and costing over £1000 in the UK - see https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-C41900-SD-Quattro-H-black/dp/B01N5C96X3
Without knowing what parameters our OP is working with or wanting, we are just shooting in the dark, and putting forward our own preferences.
My Sigma DP1 uses the Fovean sensor, really impressive results, as I said on earlier post, the quality printed at A3+ has to be seen
Gary
dave2010
18-12-2018, 15:34
My Sigma DP1 uses the Fovean sensor, really impressive results, as I said on earlier post, the quality printed at A3+ has to be seen
GaryDoes look pretty good, and from some of the sites - such as the review site I linked to - it’s possible to download the demo files (but may be huge size) and play with them. Useful for testing out RAW software or doing comparisons between RAW and JPEG.
Stryder5
18-12-2018, 15:42
Does look pretty good, and from some of the sites - such as the review site I linked to - it’s possible to download the demo files (but may be huge size) and play with them. Useful for testing out RAW software or doing comparisons between RAW and JPEG.
In reality there is a huge difference in RAW compared to JPEG when it comes to manipulation and printing. This is true for any camera brands RAW files.
I find it best to use Sigma's software to manipulate RAW data up to a point then save to TIFF if I need more control and open in Photoshop.
Gary
Picking up a Sony RX100 II for a trip early in the new year.
Small size and practicality is important to me, as long as image quality isn’t compromised.
Reviews say it’s a good’un and the compact to get.
Hello everyone!
I am looking for a new digital camera. I'm an absolute layman in this topic.
My wife owns a Casio Exilim which is about 5 years old. But this Kamaera was not good from the beginning. Often misbehaved pictures much noise etc ...
What should the camera do very well?
Since many portrait pictures are taken, you should have a very good optical zoom .. And everything that goes with it ... Think it should also posses a good wide-angle lens.
Can someone recommend a good digital camera?
Maximum Price?
SLR or Compact or Micro 3/4 / mirrorless?
Yatsushiro
19-12-2018, 09:20
Quite obvious that Morgann was/is a troll. However, lot's of good discussion and information in response to his original post...
the thread was moved so may have caused him some issue
walpurgis
19-12-2018, 09:38
Quite obvious that Morgann was/is a troll.
And you deduce that from one pretty innocuous post from a new member?
Yatsushiro
19-12-2018, 11:05
Yes, obviously.
I think you might be on your own there.
To cut through the chaff, I recommend this: http://bit.ly/2DYS0f0
walpurgis
19-12-2018, 15:34
To cut through the chaff, I recommend this: http://bit.ly/2DYS0f0
I don't know, but I wouldn't mind betting that's maybe five times the OP's budget.
I don't know, but I wouldn't mind betting that's maybe five times the OP's budget.
The LX100 can be had for £549.00 . Not much difference.
Picking up a Sony RX100 II for a trip early in the new year.
Small size and practicality is important to me, as long as image quality isn’t compromised.
Reviews say it’s a good’un and the compact to get.
Actually strike that,
picked up an RX100 Mark 3 after doing some reading.
Better lens, faster image processor, built in flash and electronic viewfinder swung it.
Actually strike that,
picked up an RX100 Mark 3 after doing some reading.
Better lens, faster image processor, built in flash and electronic viewfinder swung it.All the hi-fi pics I used to post on here until about Munich were on the MK1. People seemed to like them.
Just be careful with it. They are not ruggedised by any means.
The zoom motor went bats on mine.
That said MK1 is a 2012 camera. It'll take great shots but the current mid price phones are getting closish or equal+ to giving it a run for its money. Took some stills on holiday and videos on a OnePlus 6 that were, quite frankly, better than the MK1 could manage. Even with a crap phone type LED flash clever s/w means it can still do well in low light.
MK3 should be better.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.