I wussed out and got a compact.

[shortylickens]

Such as it is.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006TR0FCQ/

Cheaper than a good flash or decent lens. But unfortunately has no manual zoom or focus nor optical viewfinder. Good WB range though. Takes decent photos but has fewer options than I am used to. Also has a hotshoe which was the main selling point for me. Wanted to get the most basic power zoom that could still use my own flash.
Was hoping to save a few bucks but that means giving up too much. Guess I'll be going back to an SLR. After I sell everything else I'll be able to get a D3200 and 18-200mm lens.

Bought it used but came as if new. Everything still in original plastic, perfect body, no indication its ever been touched. Very light and still feels sturdy.

 

[shortylickens]

Nope. No good.

http://i.imgur.com/KnY5rm6.jpg

Pixel level detail is shit, auto zoom doesnt work worth a damn, even in sunlight. Manual controls dont help much, proprietary data plug, no, this is not acceptable.

I either need a top of the line compact like the LX7 or a starter SLR.

 

[randomrogue]

That picture is terrible. However it's acceptable to 99% of earth. Keep in mind that you're pixel peeping. If you print it and don't pixel peep the camera will fit your snapshot needs.

Since you're in this section though I doubt you want to just do snapshots of your cat and are looking for something better so go ahead and return that and get a better camera.

 

[Spoooon]

What's the point? To spend as little as possible and still be able to use your flash? Maybe look at Panasonic? My old Lumix is still a pretty solid camera. Woot has a Pentak K-01 for 399, Samsung NX1000 for 279. I don't know anything about the Pentak, was choosing between the Samsung and an NEX-F3 as a camera for my wife.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Ugh. That thing is soft as hell even at 40% to fit in my browser. That looks like some Instagram crap where it's been all "vintaged" up to look crappy on purpose.

Although you will never find a compact sensor P&S that looks sharp at 100%, you can do much better than this. At "fit on my monitor" resolutions it should look quite sharp. Just to compare, I pulled up a photo taken with my Canon ELPH 500HS. Not saying it's a good photo at all, just that it was taken with outdoors lighting and it looks pretty damn sharp, especially considering that it was shot through a glass window. This is scaled 50%.

 

[shortylickens]

I just ordered the LX7.

Its expensive but after selling a bunch of junk on ebay I have more than enough money for it. Zoom isnt great but everything else is perfect for me.
Good pixels even at high ISO. Fast low light focus. Plenty of options and manual controls. Also has the aperture ring which should be fun to play with.

 

[Throckmorton]

I lost my LX7 but I was really disappointed by the distortion and poor image quality. Don't try to photograph people with it. They'll look like they have stubby legs.

 

[Midwayman]

That's not a compact. Its cheaper at than a DSLR at least...

 

[Childs]

I had an LX7 for a couple of days, and it was alright. Just be aware that it is very small. People say its not pocketable, but I can't imagine anyone with normal to above average sized hands being comfortable with it. Had the feature set I wanted, so I returned it and bought a G6.

 

[SAWYER]

Should have bought my nice little Sony NEX5N!

 

[jhansman]

Were I to get a "compact," it would be the Samsung NX300. At 5"x2.5"x1.5", this thing has it all , including interchangeable lenses. Pricey, to be sure, but as an alternate to a full blown dSLR, I'd pay it. It's only major drawback is the lack of a viewfinder. I can't stand composing on an LCD screen.

 

[shortylickens]

Mini powerzooms seem to be getting very popular these days.
I saw one at Walmart this morning, I think it was a GE and HOLY FUCK BALLS, that sucker was smaller than my dick!!

 

[shortylickens]

I think it was this basterd:

The picture doesnt show it but that thing is TINY!
You cant even have both your hands wrapped around it. Just have to get use to the idea of a one-hand operation. Maybe rest it on your left knuckles for balance.

 

[Childs]

You can buy a handle like this that you can put in the tripod mount.

 

[shortylickens]

OK, the LX7 arrived thanks to Amazon being awesome.

AND I FREAKIN LOVE IT!!

http://imgur.com/a/rMeLG

Imgur shrunk them despite me having a paid account, but whatever, I'm happier with the results.
Pixel level detail is outstanding, and that Tide shot was in extremely low light.

This will be my work horse from now on.

 

[jpeyton]

Micro-4/3rds cameras are commonplace, and becoming inexpensive enough that they warrant a serious look from anyone considering a "premium" compact like the LX7. The Lumix GF series or Olympus E-PM series are quite small in size.

The bottom line is bigger sensor > smaller sensor. The LX7 has a 1/1.7" sensor.

Hell, B&H is selling the EOS-M (APS-C, includes a kit lens and external flash) for $420.

 

[shortylickens]

It was inexpensive. And does more than an adequate job for a stalker like myself.

 

[desura]

Man, that thing is like the worst of all worlds. It's bulky like a DSLR but takes iphone-level photos.

You know, I've been really disappointed by Bridge cameras. I've never seen a good one.

 

[ControlD]

OK, the LX7 arrived thanks to Amazon being awesome.

AND I FREAKIN LOVE IT!!

http://imgur.com/a/rMeLG

Imgur shrunk them despite me having a paid account, but whatever, I'm happier with the results.
Pixel level detail is outstanding, and that Tide shot was in extremely low light.

This will be my work horse from now on.

Those samples look quite good to me. One nice thing about the LX7 is that is has pretty fast glass for a small camera. f/1.4 to f/2.3 should give pretty good low light performance.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Those samples look quite good to me. One nice thing about the LX7 is that is has pretty fast glass for a small camera. f/1.4 to f/2.3 should give pretty good low light performance.

Agreed, nothing wrong with those photos that I can see. Far better than the Fuji.

 

[Spoooon]

Those look good, much better than the original.

Am seriously tempted by this: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/07/18/Panasonic-announces-lumix-dmc-fz70-60x-optical-zoom

60x zoooooom!!!

 

[finbarqs]

Nope. No good.

http://i.imgur.com/KnY5rm6.jpg

Pixel level detail is shit, auto zoom doesnt work worth a damn, even in sunlight. Manual controls dont help much, proprietary data plug, no, this is not acceptable.

I either need a top of the line compact like the LX7 or a starter SLR.

You know why it came out like that right?

#1 - Shooting in low light.

My guess is that you were hand holding it, and you snapped the shutter at something that's fairly low 1/10th? 1/15th? Maybe even 1/30th.

#2 - Shooting @ high ISO

your camera (auto feature) over compensated trying to give you the maximum shutter by increasing the ISO.

We're seeing 2 things going on with the picture: hand movement + high ISO (with a small sensor) = that kind of picture. If you have a manual function of the Fuji, then set it on a tripod and get exposure.

You can probably get similar results (might be better -- i'm partial to their velvia preset for JPG)

That picture you posted is worse than an iphone 3g

 

[shortylickens]

1. it was 5 in the afternoon

2. high ISO shouldnt kill the focus.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Yeah, you can see clear blue sky and bright white clouds. It's not even overcast. Exposure on a day like that should easily be ISO 200-400, f/5.6+, 1/100 or more.

It may be that there was simply something wrong with the camera. Maybe a lens element wasn't aligned properly or something. Stuff like that happens.

 

[iGas]

Yeah, you can see clear blue sky and bright white clouds. It's not even overcast. Exposure on a day like that should easily be ISO 200-400, f/5.6+, 1/100 or more.

It may be that there was simply something wrong with the camera. Maybe a lens element wasn't aligned properly or something. Stuff like that happens.

Sunny 16 Rule:

f/16 & shutter at 1/ISO speed = camera setting at f/16 and 1/100s for ISO-100, 1/400s for ISO-400, etc...

That picture look like it is slightly overcast, hence is should be shot at f/11 & shutter at 1/ISO speed. OR, f8 at 1/200s for ISO-100.