Simple Digital Camera Recomendations

[boojum]

That's not fair...he said a lot more than that.

You want to talk about fair? How about an iPhone is as good a camera as you can find. Where the hell are you looking?

There was a lot more waffling in the post. Like if you did not know good pictures. That was a great line. I remain unmoved, if you are satisfied with "pretty good" maybe an iPhone is what you need. I can get some pretty good pics with my Samsung. But alongside a real camera, same time, same place, they are not very good. So now the question goes back, again, are you satisfied with "pretty good" or do you want to do your best? If nothing else were available I would use the Samsung. But I usually have a camera with me. I may shoot crap but I do it on good gear and am trying to up my game.

 

[JohnGellings]

You want to talk about fair? How about an iPhone is as good a camera as you can find. Where the hell are you looking?

He said (AAlfano by the way...) "I think unless you're willing to carry something with a micro 4/3 sensor or larger and deal with the lousy digital camera UI, which for the most part has not improved or gotten worse as digital cameras have become more advanced and added features over the last 20 years, the iPhone is about as good a camera as you're going to find."

I think his point is completely fair as someone who has used and has hated 1" sensor or smaller cameras. Do you have a camera that does not fit his description? When someone says iPhone, I think they tend to mean other similar level phones like Samsung.

I do not use anything less than APSC because I do not want to use a phone either... but that supports his point. I'm pretty sure you do not either.

 

[boojum]

OK, Samsung vs camera:

Samsung



B0001971 by West Phalia, on Flickr

 

[JohnGellings]

OK, Samsung vs camera:

Samsung

View attachment 4842646

B0001971 by West Phalia, on Flickr

Which high end Samsung vs. which COMPACT camera? A very easy comparison to make badly and in a biased manner... i.e. wrong color temp, bad framing, etc.

 

[boojum]

He said (AAlfano by the way...) "I think unless you're willing to carry something with a micro 4/3 sensor or larger and deal with the lousy digital camera UI, which for the most part has not improved or gotten worse as digital cameras have become more advanced and added features over the last 20 years, the iPhone is about as good a camera as you're going to find."

I think his point is completely fair as someone who has used and has hated 1" sensor or smaller cameras. Do you have a camera that does not fit his description? When someone says iPhone, I think they tend to mean other similar level phones like Samsung.

I do not use anything less than APSC because I do not want to use a phone either... but that supports his point. I'm pretty sure you do not either.

John, yes, the attribution was incorrect, my bad and I apologize for that.

I do not sign onto the digital has gotten worse screed. I see it a lot. I think what is happening is that some cameras are offering a lot more options. More options means more choices. More choices means more complex menus. I have two cars which are examples of the extremes: a Citroën 2CV which is hardly more complicated than a sit-down lawnmower and a Honda G1 Insight hybrid which is a mass of computers with four wheel stuck on it. Along with an engine, motor and large battery pack. Either will get me from A to B. The Honda has more choices.

As for small sensor cameras, I have a Pentax Q S1 which has pretty good images considering the sensor is only 12.4 MP and I have been posting some old images from when I was living in Mexico that were taken with a Sony DSC S70 that has a 3.4MP sensor. The Sony has great color. So I think that for my purposes the iPhone and its ilk are non-starters. OTOH they may be just wonderful for other folks. As my uncle used to say, "We can't all love the same woman."

 

[JohnGellings]

John, yes, the attribution was incorrect, my bad and I apologize for that.

Ok, it's ok.

I do not sign onto the digital has gotten worse screed. I see it a lot.

I don't either... I may not like everything that is happening but there are some all time great cameras being made right now.

I think what is happening is that some cameras are offering a lot more options. More options means more choices. More choices means more complex menus. I have two cars which are examples of the extremes: a Citroën 2CV which is hardly more complicated than a sit-down lawnmower and a Honda G1 Insight hybrid which is a mass of computers with four wheel stuck on it. Along with an engine, motor and large battery pack. Either will get me from A to B. The Honda has more choices.

Yes, exactly... they are more complex because they offer more and more. Some menus are better than others.

As for small sensor cameras, I have a Pentax Q S1 which has pretty good images considering the sensor is only 12.4 MP

Yes, this was a pretty cool camera and very unique. Could work for the OP actually.

and I have been posting some old images from when I was living in Mexico that were taken with a Sony DSC S70 that has a 3.4MP sensor. The Sony has great color. So I think that for my purposes the iPhone and its ilk are non-starters. OTOH they may be just wonderful for other folks. As my uncle used to say, "We can't all love the same woman."

Great color but only 3x5" prints 😉 If I'm honest, I'll take the latest iPhone over that Sony. I used those Sonys back then too. There are a few great books that are made with iPhone 4 and iPhone 5 cameras. Michael Christopher Brown - Libyan Sugar and Kathy Ryan - Office Romance. If you dedicate your time and energy to any camera, and have vision, you can pretty much use anything.

 

[Godfrey]

There is only one truly simple digital camera, in the parlance of simple being 'ISO, aperture, shutter time, and focus' ... That was the Leica M-D 262. No menus, no LCD, no way to erase or review images captured, just the absolute bare bones needed to have a Leica M with a digital sensor instead of film. I had one, I loved it, and I foolishly sold it and moved on to other things. Dumb on me.

That's not to say that you cannot obtain a quality digital camera and set it up to be used simply, in similar context. That's possible with most digital cameras of any worth. A problem in our heads is that because there are all these options on most of them, we have to try to use them. And sometimes they are useful... but they clutter our mental space.

So the trick is to find a camera that you can learn ONCE, set up ONCE, and then just use until you wear it out. Just like you do with a film camera. And that, once in a while, when you find yourself needing a funky setting for something or other, it doesn't take three hours and a 500 page book to discover the setting and use it, then get the camera back to normal. I use the Leica M10 Monochrom and M10-R this way. The menus are relatively brief and understandable, and once I had them set up, I rare use the menus for very much at all.

A friend of mine, Ed, had one of the Olympus cameras that had been ballyhooed a good bit, I think it was the Olympus Pen F of 2016. A nice camera ... I had one of that generation's models too. But it drove him nutty just like it did me ... Too many options, in a word. I sold mine after a year of trying to use it and the person who bought it is delighted with it still. Ed just couldn't get his head around the menu system design. After debating it a long, long time, he bought a Leica Q2 Monochrom. A far, far simpler camera to use, in every way, and he had it nicely setup for use in ten minutes. The Q2/Q3 are excellent travel cameras, nice in the hand, excellent lens, and a minimum of nice, usable features.

That's what I'd recommend. Unless you want interchangeable lenses...

G

 

[boojum]

Which high end Samsung vs. which COMPACT camera? A very easy comparison to make badly and in a biased manner... i.e. wrong color temp, bad framing, etc.

You are absolutely right. Point and shoot in each case. Full auto in each case. The fault lies not with the camera, it lies with the phone. It is a Samsung A13 5G. I bought it for phone calls. I am not any sort of engineer but I think that the tiny lens, short focal length and so on do not lend themselves to good images no matter how much software jiggery-poke is done to them. I'll bet that the iPhone has a larger sensor than the little 25 year old Sony. But that 3.3MP camera cranks out very good images. Better color.

Our famous Crater Lake by West Phalia, on Flickr

Bar View by West Phalia, on Flickr

 

[boojum]

Ok, it's ok.

I don't either... I may not like everything that is happening but there are some all time great cameras being made right now.

Yes, exactly... they are more complex because they offer more and more. Some menus are better than others.

Yes, this was a pretty cool camera and very unique. Could work for the OP actually.

Great color but only 3x5" prints 😉 If I'm honest, I'll take the latest iPhone over that Sony. I used those Sonys back then too. There are a few great books that are made with iPhone 4 and iPhone 5 cameras. Michael Christopher Brown - Libyan Sugar and Kathy Ryan - Office Romance. If you dedicate your time and energy to any camera, and have vision, you can pretty much use anything.

I post what is allowed here, 1600MP breadth. Click the link under the photo and you can be taken to what is posted on Flickr. How large can they become? I have no idea. But as I find the color kind of "post card" hyped in iPhone pics we get into a quality vs quantity discussion now. Do you prefer a large photo with bad color over a smaller one with good color?

And while it is possible to edit the iPhone into something better why not just start with a camera with a better image out of the blocks. And a RAW image if wanted. Do iPhones do RAW?

I think it devolves into an "I can do that with my iPhone" argument but how well can you do it? And with a camera there is the option of different lenses. This is RFF, as I am occasionally reminded, and that means RF cameras with interchangeable lenses. The lens seems the key to me. True, a lot can be done in post. But with a good lens you have some magic in your pocket at the start. Yeah, you can get good pics with phones. This is true. And folks may have put together books of this. But it is sort of like teaching a dog to walk on its hind legs. What purpose does it serve? ;o)

 

[DownUnder]

Easy peasy, this one. A Nikon D90 with the 18-55 kit lens. Old, yes. But as cheap as chips, highly reliable, not too complex, with enough MPs for you to make easy big prints if you want, and of course post online.

Set on ISO 200, lens at f/8, on A (aperture), you point it at your subject and press the 'click' button, and that's it. If you traveling in Australia or Asia where the light is (to put it politely) harsh, maybe expose at the -1/3 setting, butt only in strong light, otherwise your shadows will go to midnight black.

Then forget about the technicalities, and take photos, and hoo, Bob's your uncle, as they say in these here parts.

And BTW, entirely by coincidence of course, I have an as new-bought new Nikon D90 with the kit lens, bought new more years ago than I want to remember... 🌚

 

[splitimageview]

So the trick is to find a camera that you can learn ONCE, set up ONCE, and then just use until you wear it out. Just like you do with a film camera.

This. And interestingly, all digital cameras can do this. It's just up to the user to filter out all the extraneous options, which of course vary per individual.

However most people don't spend enough time filtering things out...

My biggest complaint about digital in general is the user interface, the 1980s MS-DOS-like menus. Poor menus make for an extended filtering process.

IMHO Sony is the worst. Fujifilm isn't much better. Nikon is acceptable but not outstanding. It's been too long since I used a Panasonic or Olympus so I have no comment on their menus, and I don't remember the menu system on the Canon that I owned. I won't buy a Leica digital for reasons I've outlined in other threads but when I had a Q those menus were good, as menus go.

 

[Darthfeeble]

Look at the Panasonic Lumix L100 series. MFT sensor, 24-70 near equivalent lens when retracted makes the camer a pocketful but will fit unless you wear tight pants. Oh, and it's a fast lens, 1.7 if I remember right.

 

[tortellini_man]

Most of the time I don't need to go into menus shooting a digital camera. If you're already not doing fancy things or shooting video, what are you going into menus for? What are you doing, tortellini_man?

If you want something that functions similarly to a film camera, you can get one with a shutter speed dial like a Fuji X or Nikon Zf. Most Fuji X lenses even come with aperture rings!

i suppose you are probably right - most of the stuff that i have to go digging into the menus for on my interchangeable lens mirrorless camera are probably not going to do with a compact travel camera. on mirrorless, i am typically just trying to do stuff like switching between autofocus modes, bracketing/stacking, switching between program modes, and setting self timers; however, when doing these things i struggle to figure out which other settings i have accidentally adjusted because of the different unmarked knobs and lever combinations needed to do relatively simple things

Unfortunately, the cameras that will appeal to you are going to be expensive. My "travel" camera is the GRIIIx. However, travel photography is not important to me. If it was, I'd use whatever was best for my project.

I´ve also used a version of the RX100 or two. The Ricoh, in either 28mm or 40mm, is a lot better (experience and IQ wise) if you aren't a zoomer. Yeah, they are hard to find right now... because all compact cameras that are really good are hard to find. People have rediscovered these in recent years.

However, if the New Leica M43 camera appeals to you, you can always go for the earlier version. It basically is the same camera with a worse VF and is just a little bit uglier. It'll be cheaper by far. The Panasonic version, the LX100 II, even more so.

That said, you are an M43 user. Surely there is a small body and lens combo you can add for pretty cheap.

some of the smaller panasonic bodies look intriguing, maybe i can simply just get a slightly smaller m43 body and stick with an interchangeable lens mirrorless setup

I am not much for digital though I do use them occasionally. Unfortunately my favorites come and go, sometimes pretty quickly. Right now and for about the last year, my favorite has been the Pentax Q7, primarily because of the size. It is an absolute dream to pack around airports and on the road.

If I keep the lens aperture at f4 or lower and the ISO at 400 or lower I avoid the diffraction limits and get some pretty amazing images that clean up very, very nicely. I rarely ever print larger than 16x20. However if you are a bokeh fanatic then this probably isn't the kit for you. Not that it is bad, just not a whole lot of it.

the Q7 looks super interesting - it is both compact and cheap!

There is only one truly simple digital camera, in the parlance of simple being 'ISO, aperture, shutter time, and focus' ... That was the Leica M-D 262. No menus, no LCD, no way to erase or review images captured, just the absolute bare bones needed to have a Leica M with a digital sensor instead of film. I had one, I loved it, and I foolishly sold it and moved on to other things. Dumb on me.

That's not to say that you cannot obtain a quality digital camera and set it up to be used simply, in similar context. That's possible with most digital cameras of any worth. A problem in our heads is that because there are all these options on most of them, we have to try to use them. And sometimes they are useful... but they clutter our mental space.

So the trick is to find a camera that you can learn ONCE, set up ONCE, and then just use until you wear it out. Just like you do with a film camera. And that, once in a while, when you find yourself needing a funky setting for something or other, it doesn't take three hours and a 500 page book to discover the setting and use it, then get the camera back to normal. I use the Leica M10 Monochrom and M10-R this way. The menus are relatively brief and understandable, and once I had them set up, I rare use the menus for very much at all.

A friend of mine, Ed, had one of the Olympus cameras that had been ballyhooed a good bit, I think it was the Olympus Pen F of 2016. A nice camera ... I had one of that generation's models too. But it drove him nutty just like it did me ... Too many options, in a word. I sold mine after a year of trying to use it and the person who bought it is delighted with it still. Ed just couldn't get his head around the menu system design. After debating it a long, long time, he bought a Leica Q2 Monochrom. A far, far simpler camera to use, in every way, and he had it nicely setup for use in ten minutes. The Q2/Q3 are excellent travel cameras, nice in the hand, excellent lens, and a minimum of nice, usable features.

That's what I'd recommend. Unless you want interchangeable lenses...

G

these do look nice, but probably outside of my price range 😛

Easy peasy, this one. A Nikon D90 with the 18-55 kit lens. Old, yes. But as cheap as chips, highly reliable, not too complex, with enough MPs for you to make easy big prints if you want, and of course post online.

Set on ISO 200, lens at f/8, on A (aperture), you point it at your subject and press the 'click' button, and that's it. If you traveling in Australia or Asia where the light is (to put it politely) harsh, maybe -1/3.

Then forget about the technicalities, and take photos, and hoo, Bob's your uncle, as they say down here.

And BTW, entirely by coincidence of course, I have an as new-bought new Nikon D90 with the kit lens, bought new more years ago than I want to remember, about to go up for sale... 🌚

i am not opposed to nikon DSLRs, but the D90 is actually larger than my m43 mirrorless camera that is already slightly too big to carry around gracefully when packing light

Look at the Panasonic Lumix L100 series. MFT sensor, 24-70 near equivalent lens when retracted makes the camer a pocketful but will fit unless you wear tight pants. Oh, and it's a fast lens, 1.7 if I remember right.

i will start looking into the details about how the LX series, ZS series, and older leica D Lux are different; they definitely seem to fit my size requirements and all sort of share some heritage


thank you everyone for all of the helpful replies! 😊
i will do some more looking about Pentax Q7 vs Panasonic LX vs Panasonic ZS vs Leica D Lux in particular

 

[boojum]

There are cameras powerful and grand that are just too complex for some folks. These are the same people who appear in "Just Rolled In" on YT. As with cameras, some folks just should not have cars. But we do.

I have some great gear, yes. It far outstrips my abilities but I love good gear no matter what I am doing. I used to record music, another high stakes game. I got some good pulls and could crank them out regularly. But it is such hassle running to venues, setting up, getting the take, folding it all up and hoping nothing "walks away" and then getting it home for editing. Sound editing is never done, you just give up. Unless you know the hall and the group it will take a good month to get it where it is bearable.

With cameras today SOOC JPG's look pretty good. Yes, I know I can take a RAW, whatever format it is, and fuss with it and then export it as a JPG. So I am stuck with 8-bit regardless.

But back to the thread, small and simple. There are small capable cameras. Many come with lots of bells and whistles. As some other person has pointed out, all the bells and whistles do not have to be used. Almost any camera can be tuned to point-and-shoot or very close. Many of us set the camera to aperture priority. pick one of maybe three f-stops we use and let the camera figure out the rest. I think the problem is overblown. How many of us have ever had to say, "That would have been a great picture except for the camera"? I know I can't blame any camera for my shortcomings, even though it may deserve it. LOL The quest for the camera which suits perfectly is endless. Just get something that sort of suits you for about what you want to spend. Then go out and use the hell out of it. The worst thing that can happen is you will have a better idea of what you don't want.

 

[JohnGellings]

I post what is allowed here, 1600MP breadth. Click the link under the photo and you can be taken to what is posted on Flickr. How large can they become? I have no idea. But as I find the color kind of "post card" hyped in iPhone pics we get into a quality vs quantity discussion now. Do you prefer a large photo with bad color over a smaller one with good color?

I do not find that the iPhone has bad color but even if it did I know how to post process. That said, I am also not a huge prints fan. I´ve had to make big prints for galleries, but if I have my say, I prefer to make smaller prints or books.

And while it is possible to edit the iPhone into something better why not just start with a camera with a better image out of the blocks.

Well, that is why I only use APSC, FF and medium format cameras. Remember, I'm not using a phone for my photography either. However, I could if it was all I had.

And a RAW image if wanted. Do iPhones do RAW?

Yes, they do and have had RAW for a long time.

I think it devolves into an "I can do that with my iPhone" argument but how well can you do it?

Again, people have made great projects using a phone. It takes commitment to the tool just like any other tool.

And with a camera there is the option of different lenses.

But that isn't the kind of camera we are talking about here.

This is RFF, as I am occasionally reminded, and that means RF cameras with interchangeable lenses.

or fixed lens RF cameras too. That said, this forum was changed with the advent of mirrorless right?

The lens seems the key to me. True, a lot can be done in post. But with a good lens you have some magic in your pocket at the start. Yeah, you can get good pics with phones. This is true. And folks may have put together books of this. But it is sort of like teaching a dog to walk on its hind legs. What purpose does it serve? ;o)

It serves the same purpose as any other camera. If you can make it work, and make compelling photography with it, then it works.

 

[JeffS7444]

It's zoom range is limited, but I consider Olympus / OM System Stylus Tough "king of macro", focusing down to less than 1 cm at all focal lengths. I've thought it might be the ideal naturalist's camera, as it's also sealed against water and dust, and can embed GPS location data into photos. TG-3 (which is what I had) and succeeding models offer raw output too. I accessorized mine with the ring illuminator, and rarely took it off. Admit that I never explored it's full-auto mode, however.

I've tended to overlook whatever ergonomic issues Sony cameras may have, because I really like the results they produce. The novelty of the hardware has worn off long ago, particularly with my RX100, which is the oldest. But it's still useful. Was kind of surprised that cameras made by a consumer electronics company best known for game consoles should be among the most enduring for me, but life is funny sometimes.

But if the wildlife you seek involves birds in trees, that can be a whole 'nother ball of feathers.

 

[boojum]

I do not find that the iPhone has bad color but even if it did I know how to post process. That said, I am also not a huge prints fan. I´ve had to make big prints for galleries, but if I have my say, I prefer to make smaller prints or books.

Well, that is why I only use APSC, FF and medium format cameras. Remember, I'm not using a phone for my photography either. However, I could if it was all I had.

Yes, they do and have had RAW for a long time.

Again, people have made great projects using a phone. It takes commitment to the tool just like any other tool.

But that isn't the kind of camera we are talking about here.

or fixed lens RF cameras too. That said, this forum was changed with the advent of mirrorless right?

It serves the same purpose as any other camera. If you can make it work, and make compelling photography with it, then it works.

All of what you say is true and I agree with you. And it is not the chisel that makes the sculptor. And if the phone is all you have at the moment the phone is what you use. You have made this point and we agree. But not all chisels are the same. And I try to follow Thorsten Overgaard's rule of "Always wear a camera". That camera is not doing me any good at all at home on a shelf. Granted, most of what I shoot is probably crap but I am trying to make the best possible capture of that crap and up my game into the bargain. I can do that with a phone but I can do it better with a camera. I keep dragging up the old "you can play golf with a croquet mallet and make love standing up in a hammock" but why would you? It is hard enough for me as it is. Why make it harder? Sheesh, man, give me a break. ;o)

Oh, and finally, I see photos of sights around town posted that were taken with phones, often iPhones. The color is wrong. If I did not know what the scene was it would be OK. But I know what the scene is and the color is wrong. It's close.

 

[Godfrey]

Made with iPhone 15 Pro, edited with SnapSeed.



I do a lot of product and tabletop work with the iPhone. It's all in what you do with it, not what the camera is.

G

 

[Tim Murphy]

Made with iPhone 15 Pro, edited with SnapSeed.



I do a lot of product and tabletop work with the iPhone. It's all in what you do with it, not what the camera is.

G

Dear Godfrey,

I'm not trying to be a jerk here. I'll admit that maybe it's just me but spending $ 1500.00 on a pocketable annoyance that needs periodic replacement and that takes pictures with everything in the FOV out of focus seems like a waste to me.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg PA 🙂

 

[splitimageview]

I'm not trying to be a jerk here. I'll admit that maybe it's just me but spending $ 1500.00 on a pocketable annoyance that needs periodic replacement and that takes pictures with everything in the FOV out of focus seems like a waste to me.

Huh? This one needs further explanation. 🙂

My digitals, chosen for sensor size:

1. full-frame mirrorless
2. 1" P&S with a wide to slight tele
3. iPhone 15 Pro

They all serve various purposes, each of them excel for those purposes.

Alternatives for this trio would be an m4/3 camera for the P&S. I don't see the point of having an APS-C in position 2 since the performance is so close to full-frame as to be indistinguishable for my purposes.

APS-C can substitute for full frame for #1. The difference between the two is so minimal as to be non existent, for my needs.