Looking for a camera

[smilodon]

How does the NEX cameras stack up .NEX 5R ,NEX 6.

Apart from being a very odd looking camera, which is no reason not to buy it, the only issue is that Sony haven't produced a huge range of lenses for the camera, there's currently about half a dozen. Also it doesn't come with a viewfinder as standard, you'll have to buy one if it's important to you. Finally at £550 - 600 it's priced slap bang in the middle of the traditional consumer DSLR range and there are some outstanding cameras that it has to compete with.

I've never actually picked one up myself but I've seen them being used by other people and with the standard kit lens they do look to be a near perfect size. Not as small and fiddly as a compact or camera phone but not as big as a DSLR.

But most importantly though is that they are very capable of taking a stunning picture http://www.flickr.com/cameras/sony/nex-5/

Compacts are great though and until I got my Samsung SII which has a very decent camera I always carried my Olympus XZ-1 with me everywhere

[suicidal_monkey]

Pen, I reckon you need to decide on your parameters lest you get shoved towards something someone else would like

dpreview used to have a decent camera chooser thing and I'd be surprised if there wasn't a good compact that met your description. SLR is more of a toy/hobby (assuming you're not wanting to become a pro...) where you more or less play with the camera and accessories. I still use my ancient little 6Mpix fuji compact for any occasions where my a200 is too much of a pain to carry around. It's good enough in low light, and if you use a tripod (or balance on a wine glass or whatever - same thing) the image quality is still really good.

I've had a go with one of the little sony dslr and they're pretty nice! Made my a200 seem really massive, and lacking in fancy processing features. Then again, when I looked up the pricing my old dslr was something of a bargain!

[DrunkenZombiee]

Sorry Penfold to hop on this thread ,but as you guys know your stuff

How does the NEX cameras stack up .NEX 5R ,NEX 6.
 
Looking for an in between camera that small like my tz7 which i take every where
so it get used ,but not a full on dslr jobbie .That wouldn't get used .
Any advice welcome

As Smilo says you are paying a lot of money on something which currently is limited in it uses and has an uncertain future as you can invest 2k in glass just for the format to dissapear. You can buy a fully fledged DSLR for considerably less money and feel safe in your investment in glass with more available in terms of a range too.

I have a friend that was thinking the same way and has his heart set on one of the new little samsung nx1000's. I was in the shop with him doing some simple camera drills like changing the ISO, Apterure etc and it was pretty horrendous as the shot would have been long gone in the time it took even wit shortcuts set up. The killer for him was when he accidentally started to take a video when turning it off auto to Av. The sonys in my experience are much the same. Yes they are smaller and look sexy and can have a lot of the feature of the full DSLR but my god they can be hard to operate if you have big man hands. Other things like battery life and durability are also a concern as its in a smaller package to both will suffer. I know you are all going to shout me down here too but they are actually pretty large if a zoom attached. A Canon 550D with a 50mm prime takes more less room than the NEX 5R and 6 in my pocket with a kit zoom and with the 550D kit zoom there is not much in it in terms of pocket-ability as both require a huge pocket to fit in with kits attached.

Personally if I wanted a good small camera I would look at one of the Olmypus Pen style cameras or a Leica knock off that are about these days. Other offerings are the compact cameras with tons of bells and whistles like the Canon PowerShot G12 or GX1. The other thing.... Use your phone... Most phones have great cameras on them for most uses. Low light and bright sunlight they are not great but for pictures of your mates and recording family stuff they get the job done!

Hope this helps.

DZ

[Sky]

OI stop talking about me haha.

Yeah after going and trying out the Compact System camera's (including the NX1000) I kind of met the same philosophy as I did when I wanted to get a small form factor computer that was a beast, its pretty difficult and I ended up going for a fully blown out E-ATX rig and haven't regretted it since. Going back to camera's fortunately my dad had a 30D kicking around that he said I could have so I saved myself £££ and used that instead. DZ also subbed me some lenses for the time being and I'm good to go The compact system camera's are too fiddley to play with for a guy like me who has massive fingers, there is a reason the NX1000 advert has a lady showing it off as her fingers are small enough to tinker with all the buttons on the camera.

The other major concern I had was that the focus ring was not actually physically attached to the lense and is totally controlled by motors internally, I found this out because the focal adjustment was slow and when the camera's firmware locked up I couldnt adjust the focus anymore. Having an SLR really makes a difference in this respect, I recommend sticking with it if you want the ease of use and additional control over the shot.

I dont know if this helps at all but if you're still interested in getting a new camera I found this quite good for me to compare the quality of a variety of camera's: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare

Hope this helps.

-- Sky

[essy]

So is a nx or nex not even suitable if you are after a large sensor small body camera , camcorder
that's small enough that it goes every where with you .
I take a very small man bag :lmfao: well ,gadget bag with me for my tablet ,phone ,wallet old tz7 on all day trips etc.
One of these nx nex cameras would go in a treat with a spare lens .

I know they are pricey for what they are ,but for an old SLR owner that never really
used it because of the bulk of it ,it was and expensive camera .

Pound per photo ,hours of use  ive had 1000 times the use out my tz7 .

So is there a place for the nx or nex for as enthusiast photographer not semi or pro?

If not and full DSLR is best what is the smallest DLSR out there in the same price bracket

I found this tool ,site for size comparison

http://camerasize.com/

[smilodon]

The Nex cameras are very good and do carry a decent sized sensor, so if you're looking to get away from a DSLR they are seriously worth considering. As they are priced like a DSLR it mightbe worth looking at something like the Nikon D3100 is a great camera and quite small, so it might be an option as well. Although the form factor is maybe still too big for what you need. The D3100 certainly isn't pocket sized, where as the NEX=5R is. http://j.mp/Wexc6N

[Penfold]

So I'm making headway on this.

Had another play on the Eos400D and actually took some OK photos with it but it's still a bit too much like hardwork so I'm set on the point and click bridge cameras.

I think I've narrowed it down to two:

Panasonic Lumix FZ200 (http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/panasonic/lumix-dmc-fz200-digital-bridge-camera-86308/show.html)
or
Canon Powershot SX50 http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/powershot-sx50-hs-digital-camera-87327/show.html)

Looking at the following compare they're much of a muchness of the Powershot just won in the hands-on test.

http://sortable.com/cameras/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-FZ200-vs-Canon-PowerShot-SX50-HS

However if anyone has any comments or experience then I'm all ears.

Thanks

[DrunkenZombiee]

I would be careful with this type of comparison as the a cameras tech specs don't necessarily maker it a better camera.

The glass in front of the sensor is arguably the most important part. Sharpness is much prized followed by maximum aperture for low light shooting and zoom range (aperture over the zoom range too), ISO performance and range etc. If the photos are 2.8 are not sharp, of have distortion, vignetting so you cant take photos at that f/ stop focal length combination then there no is no point in having it on the camera. A lot of manufacturers will add the option to take pictures with high spec but the pictures with those settings would not be usable.

I know a fair few people with Canon bridge cameras and their are fairly happy with them, Panasonic I don't know about in terms of cameras. Fuji do some very nice little compact offering at a much lower price point too which seem like a very similar spec (I think around £150). Those little Fuji's are very popular.

I will ask around to see if any of my photo pals have any recommendations on a bridge and snoop around the net there are any in depth review on the pictures these take, but both look fine for trade faire shooting.

[Penfold]

That would be great, thanks.

[smite]

Right, my turn to Hijack.
My missus wants a DSLR for her 40th and after a search of all makes in the <£500 price range I have decided on this:
http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/cameras/digital-cameras/digital-slr-cameras/nikon-d3200-digital-slr-camera-with-18-55-mm-telephoto-zoom-lens-55-200-mm-telephoto-zoom-lens-lp36510-format-120-dslr-camera-bag-black-performance-sdhc-memory-card-16gb-twin-pack-pn980476-pdt.html
I call on the knowledgeable to educate my ignorance
Smite

[DrunkenZombiee]

What is she going to use the camera for?

Where and when is she going to use it?

What cameras does she use now and have experience with?

There is no "Best camera" or "Best sub £500 camera" only different options for the way you shoot.

[smite]

She wants to take better pictures for all occasions. Holidays, kids, parties etc...
Currently using a cheap Sony compact and mobile phones for all pictures.
No previous experience of DSLR but fancies one. No more, no less

[Sneakytiger]

canon powershot sk50 looks a good all round camera. in agros for 349.99 at the moment

[DrunkenZombiee]

She wants to take better pictures for all occasions. Holidays, kids, parties etc...
Currently using a cheap Sony compact and mobile phones for all pictures.
No previous experience of DSLR but fancies one. No more, no less

"Better pictures" doesn't really help unfortunately mate =). You need different equipment for different uses.

I have to say that the need for a fully fledged DSLR is rapidly diminishing with Mirrorless Camera's getting almost the same image quaility in a much smaller and less expensive package. DSLR have moving parts, are pretty heavy and they have bigger heavier lenses meaning that they are not particularly compact, they cost more money to upkeep and to service and are a real investment. Saying this they have still the best image quality and flexibility and you can shoot pretty much anything if you have the right lenses.

I have to say that if I was starting out I would probably go for a micro four thirds camera as the lenses are great quality and cheap, the cameras are small and lighter and the noise at high ISO is almost as good as APS-C. I think that this price point you get the most bang for your buck and a better all round package as you can get some very good glass in front of your sensor for M4/3 at that price point where you will struggle for APS-C SLR's. The only drawback is no optical viewfinder but you can get a cheap digital one which can often be a benefits for exposure control over optical but this depends on what you like.

If you do want to go for a DSLR I would possibly recommend going for a nifty fifty (50mm) as your first lens, which on an APS-C body will give you around 80mm which is a great portrait length. Getting a cheap prime with a wide aperture is great for learning and a 50mm f/1.8 is about £80 maximum and will be the sharpest lens you will own until you spend £500 and up on a single lens. Superzooms are great for convenience but you sacrifice a lot in sharpness, distortion and low light. Plus they make you lazy as you will find yourself composing the shot less but using your feet to get angles etc. So a 50mm is great to learn with.
Getting a standard kit lens for 18 to 55 is the next most important as this will be on the camera the most for taking pictures indoors and of family. These lenses are cheap and cheerful but not sharp at all and they will suffer from distortion.

The next choice will depends on what you want to do, you can go for a telephoto superzoom like a 55-200 or 70-300 or even the opposite and got for a super wide or fisheye for getting a massive viewing angle.

I have recently fallen in love with the new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 that a friend has which is £800 but its a f/1.8 zoom and the sharpness on it is excellent.

That is my thoughts anyway =).

Smilo is the professional tog so he will know a lot more.

DZ

[smite]

"Better pictures" doesn't really help unfortunately mate =). You need different equipment for different uses.

I have to say that the need for a fully fledged DSLR is rapidly diminishing with Mirrorless Camera's getting almost the same image quaility in a much smaller and less expensive package. DSLR have moving parts, are pretty heavy and they have bigger heavier lenses meaning that they are not particularly compact, they cost more money to upkeep and to service and are a real investment. Saying this they have still the best image quality and flexibility and you can shoot pretty much anything if you have the right lenses.

I have to say that if I was starting out I would probably go for a micro four thirds camera as the lenses are great quality and cheap, the cameras are small and lighter and the noise at high ISO is almost as good as APS-C. I think that this price point you get the most bang for your buck and a better all round package as you can get some very good glass in front of your sensor for M4/3 at that price point where you will struggle for APS-C SLR's. The only drawback is no optical viewfinder but you can get a cheap digital one which can often be a benefits for exposure control over optical but this depends on what you like.

If you do want to go for a DSLR I would possibly recommend going for a nifty fifty (50mm) as your first lens, which on an APS-C body will give you around 80mm which is a great portrait length. Getting a cheap prime with a wide aperture is great for learning and a 50mm f/1.8 is about £80 maximum and will be the sharpest lens you will own until you spend £500 and up on a single lens. Superzooms are great for convenience but you sacrifice a lot in sharpness, distortion and low light. Plus they make you lazy as you will find yourself composing the shot less but using your feet to get angles etc. So a 50mm is great to learn with.
Getting a standard kit lens for 18 to 55 is the next most important as this will be on the camera the most for taking pictures indoors and of family. These lenses are cheap and cheerful but not sharp at all and they will suffer from distortion.

The next choice will depends on what you want to do, you can go for a telephoto superzoom like a 55-200 or 70-300 or even the opposite and got for a super wide or fisheye for getting a massive viewing angle.

I have recently fallen in love with the new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 that a friend has which is £800 but its a f/1.8 zoom and the sharpness on it is excellent.

That is my thoughts anyway =).

Smilo is the professional tog so he will know a lot more.

DZ

Hi DZ,
Thank you for replying and in depth.

We visited the lovely Currys yesterday and looked at all of the cameras and had some decent demo's from the "Camera Guy".
He pointed out some of things you mentioned, showed us pictures from different cameras with different lenses. In fact it's the most helpful I have found anyone in Currys.
But it all came down to the Mrs going, I want that one (the Nikon D3200). It was close between the Canon EOS100D but megapixels, guide mode, additional 55-200mm lens won out.

Again cheers for replying. I know nothing about camera's before this .

Mick