Best Point & Shoot Cam 2013
 

Pelican Brain Trust...

Is this the best point & shoot to get right now? This would be at the top of my budget...

Amazon.com: Sony DSC-RX100 20.2 MP Exmor CMOS Sensor Digital Camera with 3.6x Zoom: SONY: Camera & Photo

What's the best bang for the buck?

I want something portable that I can keep in my pocket...instead of lugging around a SLR type camera.

Thx!

definitely a contendah!

best bang for the buck would be a used Canon S-90

there is an Olympus to look at also - I was just looking at a recent dpreview article while talking a friend long-distance - he is way into photography - at the last stop before falling into the trap of going pro...

do you want a camera that fits in a pocket?

I promise these will be superseded during the next 12 months, tho not obsoleted...

ok, here is that article:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2367736880/roundup-enthusiast-zoom-compact-cameras

I like my Cannon EOS Rebel T3.

yes, I want a pocket camera for sure...maybe would go a little bigger if their was a big advantage in doing so.

I have a G12 Canon, and I really like it. I bought it on the strength of excellent reviews. A little bulky, but loaded with features and I get great battery life.
Since I bought mine last spring, Canon has introduced the G15.

Though pricey, you may want to look into the Nikon 1. Significantly better lens choices than most point and shoot digital cameras.
-Z-man

ok, the Canon S90/95/100/110 - depending on how much you want to spend

Sony 100 is quite a bit thicker but has a killer sensor in it... but much more $$ - as much as a low end DSLR

read the dpreview article & then go play with a couple to be sure

Don't buy a Nikon Coolpix S4300, we bought one on vacation last year after forgetting our camera and hate it. We've gone back to using our old Canon SD850IS even though it's older and lower resolution, just because it's much more user friendly for easy point and shoot operation.

I just ordered a Nikon D3000 DSLR to try some real photography. If you don't need a true pocket size, they are selling on Amazon for $409 with two Nikkor lenses and a camera bag. Lots of camera for not much more than a little one.

I am going through the same decision. We usually travel with 2 cameras. A Canon XSi DSLR & my trusty Panasonic LX2. My wife can't get the hang of an LCD so she shoots with the Canon. But . . . it stays on Auto 95% of the time :rolleyes: & we never use extra lens. I carry the LX2 in a small belt case so it is always attached to me. And guess which one gets used more often? Our picture count after a holiday is usually 3:1 for the LX2. So for us, the convenience of a small camera is unquestionable.

I thought a halfway option might work, so we ordered a mirrorless Sony NEX-3F 2 weeks ago after seeing some of the pictures from the Room Monkey's holiday in Europe last month. But it hasn't come out of the box & it is being returned because it is just too big. Lugging a case around - esp at night in restaurants etc - just isn't feasible. The Sony RX-100 looks like the best option for us.

Analyse your needs & how you will use the camera to help with your decision.

Ian

I have to admit, this is probably one of the handiest cameras I have in my arsenal.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1356624881.jpg

I would think the latest version of this model would be great too.

why do you hate it?

Ergonomics? I also use Nikon DSLRs (and SLRs) but did not like their compact cameras, so I use Canon S- series compacts.

The "BEST"?

how about the Leica D-Lux?http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1356645024.jpg

Very sensitive to movement, the image stabilization is non-existent. If the camera isn't held very still the pictures are blurry. I haven't tried playing with settings, it is always used in auto mode for pics of kids. I've used it for pictures for my RX8 for an ad, it has the capability to take higher quality pictures than the Canon but isn't nearly as user friendly. For something that lives in my wife's purse for quick family photo opportunities, I'll sacrifice some quality to insure that we get usable pictures.

Slightly more superficial, but it also feels flimsy. The case doesn't seem particularly high quality and many of the buttons feel loose. Again, all compared to the Canon.

I have the lumix lx-5
same camera built in the same place half the cost
to me there is no difference between the two as I shoot RAW format
for the money it can not be beat-

my .02

pros have not used Leicas for many decades now - they are used by rich amateurs


- whippedpup - thx for the additional info; sounds like one to avoid

Not saying it's perfect, but I picked one of these up a week ago at Costco for $350.

Nikon Coolpix P510. Newly released in July of 2012.

I like the mid sized grip, fits my hand well, I really don't like the super thin, hard to grip, and itsy bitsy optics lens of the 1/2" thick wide lines of "pocket sized" cameras from mfr XYZ.

http://c.shld.net/rpx/i/s/pi/mp/4554...61df2a0d22d8a1


Nikon Coolpix P510 Review: Digital Photography Review


I'd put it between a basic point and shoot, and a full sized DSLR. Mid sized, but won't fit in a shirt or pants pocket.

Simple to operate, very straight forward.

the selling point if you shoot wild-life animals or birds, is that it has a huge zoom lens on it. 42X true optical zoom. 28mm-1000mm lens. 16 meg pixels. full HD video.




I really really wanted a Sony NEX 5, 6, or 7 for a 4:3 format and interchangeable lenses, but couldn't warrent the $1000-$1400 out the door price tag.


For $350 it's a lot of camera.


I shot these of deer in my yard from 100 feet away at full zoom, zero cropping or color photoshop from me. Just resized them to 1200x1600 pixel for web friendly viewing, raw JPG file is about 5 meg from camera at ~4500x3000 pixel.

Handheld at full zoom, full auto exposure, the focus hunts a bit and is slow or honestly doesn't focus well at full zoom, but snap a couple of handheld shots and toss the blurry ones. as I said, this was from 100 feet away.


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1356738033.jpg


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1356738053.jpg

Webb, my dad is a bit of a camera geek and has told me that different models from the same brand can be good or crap, it just depends. Bottom line is that there is no one best brand, each has their good and bad products. Even though I had bad luck with my little Nikon, I still ordered a Nikon D3000 as an entry level DSLR because it was so well reviewed. CNet as well as Amazon are great for both professional and amateur reviews.

or maybe it is the model lines - I like the Nikon DSLRs - mostly use a D5100 (has that rotatable screen) in preference to my D80, D70s (and F3, FE2, N90S, FM2...)

Or maybe, it really doesn't really matter about XYZ manufacturer, or matter about a review, but go pick it up, and touch it, and test-drive the software screens. I want something that I can USE, and drive/operate, and it fits my needs.


Why buy the Ferrari if a Toyota meets your needs most the time.


80% of the cameras these days will meet 95% of the consumers expectations, the rest is a price point.

You want a decent photo of Aunt Martha openning her christmas sweater, a $100-200 left on full auto by Uncle Harry will meet your needs. If you want to shoot a fast lens, in full manual with huge F-stop range shutter speed and ISO speed grainy / non-grainy control, then you'll be spending $1000+ on a body alone and even more on lenses.............

The nit-picking of even camera reviewers is amazingly anally almost brand loyal.

Do you need ISO 24,000? or 24-36 mega-bit RAW files that choke most computers in post processing?

The OP was for a point and shoot camera, not a 5 pound DSLR body alone with so many buttons and software programable screens it's simply hard for mere mortals to operate.

I like the LX-5 idea.

Seems like the Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX7K 10.1 MP is the newest version.


Seems like a good compromise for 1/2 the price of the sony RX-100