Small camera advice

[JChristophe]

Hi everyone, I'm thinking about buying an everyday camera and I'd like to have your thoughts and advice.

I've been a happy NX1 user for a few years now but my setup is very heavy (16-50S, Ronin S) and I'm looking for a second camera I could carry easily with me everyday and on travel. Something light for some run and gun shooting, fast lens, good 4K, nice for stills too.

First I wanted a pocket camera like the RX100 IV but I think the 1" sensor is not for me. I've been a GH2 user a long time ago and I loved the M4/3 format so I think it would be a very good way to go.

There are 3 cameras that have caught my attention. They all are a few years old :

- Lumix Lx100 (1st version) : Very small camera, almost pocketable. The lens looks wonderful. Possible to mount ND filters. Great 4k with just a slight crop. Good photo. The perfect camera for what I need, but one big down : no IBIS.

- Lumix GX80/85 : Everything great, excellent IBIS. One big downside for me : The 2 kit lenses are beautiful zoom pancakes but are not fast at all. I'd like a fast zoom lens but those are too expensive and way too big for my use.

- Olympus E-M10 III : Very close to the GX80, although a bit bigger, no crop in 4K, great IBIS, but same problem with the lenses.

What do you guys think of my request? What compromise do you think I should do? Is the LX100 optical stabilisation that bad? Any other camera to suggest me?

Thanks for your help.

[newfoundmass]

The LX100 is a lovely camera, but as you said, the lack of IBIS hurts it. I guess you kinda have to weigh that against using larger or slower lenses. The GX85 and the 12-35 isn't that big of a combo; you could easily find a little pouch to put it in if necessary. My favorite hoodie has huge pockets so I put the lens in one and the body in the other

[rawshooter]

DJI Osmo Pocket. Seriously, that camera is amazing for its price, and really fits the bill of an ultraportable run-and-gun camera. Its image is astonishingly good within the limitations of its small sensor and 8bit 4:2:0.

 

[ac6000cw]

3 hours ago, JChristophe said:

- Lumix Lx100 (1st version) : Very small camera, almost pocketable. The lens looks wonderful. Possible to mount ND filters. Great 4k with just a slight crop. Good photo. The perfect camera for what I need, but one big down : no IBIS.

- Lumix GX80/85 : Everything great, excellent IBIS. One big downside for me : The 2 kit lenses are beautiful zoom pancakes but are not fast at all. I'd like a fast zoom lens but those are too expensive and way too big for my use.

I own both of those.

LX100 is a great stills camera, and the on-board audio is much better than the GX80. Stabliisation is 'OK' but nowhere near as good as the GX80. Lens is great, although avoid zooming it during video shooting - it tends to look a bit jerky and 'flickery'. No tilting or touch screen, no in-camera charging.

The GX80 is a better video camera - better stabilisation, better 1080p, easier to use as a hybrid i.e. switch instantly between stills and video. Tilting touch screen. Has in-camera charging. Poor sounding on-board audio (and there is no mic socket).

Viewfinders are about the same on both. Batteries are the same type on both, and battery life (shooting video) isn't brilliant on either, but decent third-party batteries are cheap (as are USB chargers for them) so just carry a few spare batteries with you.

I'd go for the GX80 with the 12-32mm pancake, and add the cheap/light/small 25mm F1.7 prime for low light etc. If you want a 'travel zoom' then get the 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 - it makes a nice 'super-zoom' combo while still being pretty small overall. All of those lenses are cheap used, and the two zooms support dual-IS.

[JChristophe]

Thank you, it helps me, even if I'm really torn. I already had the 14-140 and 20 f1.7 with my GH2. It was a very nice combo but today I need something else.

I'd like not having to switch lenses, and the 12-32 looks great but slow. The closest comparison with the Lx100 lens would be the Lumix X Vario 12-35 mm f/2,8. Great lens but expensive and not what I call pocketable.

I know my research is a little bit paradoxal with the nature of the M4/3 system, but when I discovered the compactness and polyvalence of the Lx100, I just fell in love. A compact with a M4/3 sensor. Although it doesn't look as easy to use as the 2 other cameras, the only thing that bugs me is the lack of a good stabilisation.

This camera is so unique. How could they build such a fast zoom lens in so little space? This is something I don't understand. And why don't we see other examples of that today, 6 years after its release? All the fast M4/3 zoom lenses are so huge compared to that one...

[ac6000cw]

LX100 isn't a M4/3 camera - it has a 16MP M4/3 sensor, but it doesn't use the whole area (it uses slightly different parts of it depending on the aspect ratio you select). That's why it's a maximum of 12.7MP stills. The lens needs to cover a smaller sensor area, so can be more compact. I think it relies very heavily on electronic correction of the lens distortions, as a trade-off for the small size - even so there is some barrel distortion visible at the wide end, and it's prone to flare sometimes.

[homestar_kevin]

I have the gx85 and love it as a travel camera. Went on a trip with the gx85, g7, 12-32mm, 45-150mm, 14mm, 25mm, and more all in a smaller/light backpack. Had a great time.

The kit zooms are slow, but they really are nice and compact. Definitely worth having around IMO

But I also have the nx1 and nx500.

It doesn't make sense for most people to buy samsung nx stuff at this point, but you might be an exception.

The nx500 is pretty sweet. It doesn't have all the feature of nx1, but feels very similar. It has the 16-50 PZ lens that is super tiny. It's slow, but it's a good kit lens. You could also get some of the NX Prime lenses, which are faster, but with slower/noisier AF. 

The nx500 also has a pretty crazy crop in 4k. It is hackable, but out of the box the 4k is really zoomed in.

Again, it might not make sense for most to buy more NX gear, but it depends on how you like the nx1 and how long you plan on sticking with it, and also what samsung lenses you currently have. If you keep an eye out for a good deal, the nx500 may be a worth while addition to your NX gear

[Thomas Hill]

I had the nx500 and it is an awesome travel camera for stills. I took it, the kit lens and the 30mm to Boston a few years ago and got some great shots out of that tiny set. I also rented the 50-150mm for the Red Sox games that I went to.

I've also owned a few Panasonics and I've never enjoyed them as much or gotten as good SOOC image IQ as the NX500. But @Mattias Burling has made me ponder an lx100 purchase a few times 

 

[newfoundmass]

I love Gunpowder

[JChristophe]

5 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

LX100 isn't a M4/3 camera - it has a 16MP M4/3 sensor, but it doesn't use the whole area (it uses slightly different parts of it depending on the aspect ratio you select). That's why it's a maximum of 12.7MP stills. The lens needs to cover a smaller sensor area, so can be more compact. I think it relies very heavily on electronic correction of the lens distortions, as a trade-off for the small size - even so there is some barrel distortion visible at the wide end, and it's prone to flare sometimes.

Yes, I forgot about that. This is obviously why this lens can be that small. Still it's way more interesting than a 1" sensor.

3 hours ago, homestar_kevin said:

I have the gx85 and love it as a travel camera. Went on a trip with the gx85, g7, 12-32mm, 45-150mm, 14mm, 25mm, and more all in a smaller/light backpack. Had a great time.

The kit zooms are slow, but they really are nice and compact. Definitely worth having around IMO

But I also have the nx1 and nx500.

It doesn't make sense for most people to buy samsung nx stuff at this point, but you might be an exception.

The nx500 is pretty sweet. It doesn't have all the feature of nx1, but feels very similar. It has the 16-50 PZ lens that is super tiny. It's slow, but it's a good kit lens. You could also get some of the NX Prime lenses, which are faster, but with slower/noisier AF. 

The nx500 also has a pretty crazy crop in 4k. It is hackable, but out of the box the 4k is really zoomed in.

Again, it might not make sense for most to buy more NX gear, but it depends on how you like the nx1 and how long you plan on sticking with it, and also what samsung lenses you currently have. If you keep an eye out for a good deal, the nx500 may be a worth while addition to your NX gear

I love my NX1 for work and I'm sure the NX500 is great but it's not what I'm looking for. It combines what I don't want on the 3 other cameras : big lenses (even bigger with APS-C) and no serious stabilization.

Thanks for your suggestions.

1 hour ago, Thomas Hill said:

I had the nx500 and it is an awesome travel camera for stills. I took it, the kit lens and the 30mm to Boston a few years ago and got some great shots out of that tiny set. I also rented the 50-150mm for the Red Sox games that I went to.

I've also owned a few Panasonics and I've never enjoyed them as much or gotten as good SOOC image IQ as the NX500. But @Mattias Burling has made me ponder an lx100 purchase a few times

Yes, very very nice pictures. The lack of stabilization is not a problem on certain sequences but it does put some limits. Some would say those limits boost their creativity... It can be true but when I see the beautiful stabilization on the GX80 and the Olympus, it's a bit frustrating not having it on this little piece of technology.

[noone]

I have been looking for a while for a pocket camera but i have just gone the other way and am getting a RX100 iv (Mine has a few small issues but was really really cheap so I can test the waters with no huge loss).

Others i was looking at included the RX100 iii and Rx100 v and LX100 (first version) as well as the Canon G1x ii and Canon G1X iii and the Canon 1 inch sensor cameras.

The Canon G1X ii has a larger sensor than M43 and a still fairly fast f2-3.9 lens while being not that much bigger but a little heavier than the LX100.

The G1X iii has an even bigger APSC sensor and is virtually the same size and weight as the LX100 ..the iii has some really nice features but a slower lens.

The thing that would let the Canons down for you though is I do not think the video is all that great from them.

G1X ii is almost my ideal camera for a hybrid point and shoot optional EVF rather than fixed one of the iii

I do think the image quality of the cameras with the Sony one inch sensors is on a par with M43 cameras other than 20mp ones for stills and for video depends on the camera compared to.

I am more stills oriented though.

I would love someone to put out a camera with ND filter, mic jack, headphone socket, 24-120 f2-f4 zoom, articulating screen, 1 inch or larger sensor with decent 4k 30p and full HD at around 16mp and fitted in a larger pocket....Oh and a decent EVF that can be optional or slides into the body....bonus points for tilting.

Sooo many have lots of those but i think there are none that have all. 

[fuzzynormal]

So I'm currently shooting my personal stuff with the EM10III, and I keep the rig very small by going an extreme route:  I've put a 24mm f2.8 Pentax A110 lens on the body.  (I also carry an A110 50mm  and 18mm f2.8 - these things are TINY, so why not)  So, with the Oly and the 24mm lens I get a 48mm FF field-of-view equivalent. 

IN your particular case You could also keep it small with a more modern prime too.  Panasonic make a decent pancake 20mm f1.7.  You'd get more light gathering from that and not a lot of additional bulk.

I imagine you're not thrilled with considering a fixed prime, but here's the thing regarding the EM10III, in 4k mode they have a 2x punch in feature that's actually decent IQ-wise, especially if you're editing mostly in 1080 like I am.  Basically, you get to have a FF equiv 40mm lens and 80mm lens with the touch of a button.  Not sure if that moves the needle for you in your decision, but that's an option to think about, two FOV 's out of one lens.

[JChristophe]

2 hours ago, noone said:

I have been looking for a while for a pocket camera but i have just gone the other way and am getting a RX100 iv (Mine has a few small issues but was really really cheap so I can test the waters with no huge loss).

Others i was looking at included the RX100 iii and Rx100 v and LX100 (first version) as well as the Canon G1x ii and Canon G1X iii and the Canon 1 inch sensor cameras.

The Canon G1X ii has a larger sensor than M43 and a still fairly fast f2-3.9 lens while being not that much bigger but a little heavier than the LX100.

The G1X iii has an even bigger APSC sensor and is virtually the same size and weight as the LX100 ..the iii has some really nice features but a slower lens.

The thing that would let the Canons down for you though is I do not think the video is all that great from them.

G1X ii is almost my ideal camera for a hybrid point and shoot optional EVF rather than fixed one of the iii

I do think the image quality of the cameras with the Sony one inch sensors is on a par with M43 cameras other than 20mp ones for stills and for video depends on the camera compared to.

I am more stills oriented though.

I would love someone to put out a camera with ND filter, mic jack, headphone socket, 24-120 f2-f4 zoom, articulating screen, 1 inch or larger sensor with decent 4k 30p and full HD at around 16mp and fitted in a larger pocket....Oh and a decent EVF that can be optional or slides into the body....bonus points for tilting.

Sooo many have lots of those but i think there are none that have all. 

Thanks a lot for your help. Yes, I tend to exclude the Canons because of the video.

If you're mainly stills oriented, what made you chose the RX100 over the LX100? Is it the size? the fact it has built-in ND filters? Tilt screen? 1080p slo-mo and stabilization?

[noone]

35 minutes ago, JChristophe said:

Thanks a lot for your help. Yes, I tend to exclude the Canons because of the video.

If you're mainly stills oriented, what made you chose the RX100 over the LX100? Is it the size? the fact it has built-in ND filters? Tilt screen? 1080p slo-mo and stabilization?

Main reason was the price!      I just found one with three small issues (that do not affect image quality) and the photos of it were pretty high res ones that show items a lot worse than it likely is (I know when i sold some lenses, if I took a photo with higher end gear, an external little dust spot could make it look bad while you would not even see it in real life) that no one else wanted on Ebay...I got it for LESS than what some people are selling the RX100 FIRST version for.     Of course it remains to be seen how well it works but it was sold as in good working condition.

Tilt screen and NDs are big factors for me though and the more I see stuff about it the more I want to play with the super slow mo but that is only SINCE buying it.

The video in HD (which i will mainly use it for) I think MIGHT be better too ...up to 100mbps VS 28 MBPS for the LX100 (Why is it so many Panasonic cameras max their 1080 out at 28mbps but their 4k can be much higher?).

Any of them really would have done me as long as it is pocketable in a decent size jeans pocket or coat pocket at least (it will not replace my FF A7s).

[noone]

My RX100 iv turned up.     As expected, MUCH better in looks than the photos showed and no different to any other i suspect and of the three small issues, one is no issue for me, another has not happened at all yet (and if it does will not affect image quality) and the third I would never have known really if i had not been told about it and again, no affect to IQ...bargain of the year for me (in a year i have gotten a few real bargains).

I am going to, love this camera on the one hand and get very frustrated (just occasionally) as i have large clumsy hands and it is small with tiny buttons.

Already i can highly recommend it (i am used to Sony menus so no problems using it right away).

[JChristophe]

19 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

So I'm currently shooting my personal stuff with the EM10III, and I keep the rig very small by going an extreme route:  I've put a 24mm f2.8 Pentax A110 lens on the body.  (I also carry an A110 50mm  and 18mm f2.8 - these things are TINY, so why not)  So, with the Oly and the 24mm lens I get a 48mm FF field-of-view equivalent. 

IN your particular case You could also keep it small with a more modern prime too.  Panasonic make a decent pancake 20mm f1.7.  You'd get more light gathering from that and not a lot of additional bulk.

I imagine you're not thrilled with considering a fixed prime, but here's the thing regarding the EM10III, in 4k mode they have a 2x punch in feature that's actually decent IQ-wise, especially if you're editing mostly in 1080 like I am.  Basically, you get to have a FF equiv 40mm lens and 80mm lens with the touch of a button.  Not sure if that moves the needle for you in your decision, but that's an option to think about, two FOV 's out of one lens.

Thanks for your advice. I've read about that button on the Olympus. Correct me if I'm wrong but I guess it's a 2x digital zoom/crop that I can do myself in post with any 4K footage if I edit in Full HD.

The Olympus beeing bigger and more expensive than the GX80/85 (even if it has better audio), I think my preference goes to the latter. And I think I can also eliminate the Sony RX100 IV. Although it looks very good for stills and 1080 slo-mo, I'm not sure I can play a lot with the depht of field with such a tiny sensor, especially in day light with these in-body ND filters.

My dilemma : LX100 with no stabilization but fast tiny zoom lens and good audio / or stabilized GX80/85 with bad audio and 2 tiny lenses : slow 12-32mm kit lens (f3.5-5.6) + fast 20mm f1.7 pancake.

Very, very difficult choice for me.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

Have both the LX100 and the GX85 (and GX9 now). One aspect not so much mentioned of the LX100 - the sensor / image pipeline is (I suppose) from the GH4. It's colors have that greenish tint from Panasonics from that era, and the low light performance is a tad worse compared to the GX85.

Audio, yeah, the LX100 is a little bit better, but still worse (in my opinion) than the GH2 / GX7 that I've had in the past.

[fuzzynormal]

6 hours ago, JChristophe said:

I guess it's a 2x digital zoom/crop that I can do myself in post with any 4K footage if I edit in Full HD.

The IQ resolves a bit better in camera than doing it in post. 

I also made a 6-part doc series in 2016 with two GX85's.  The EM10 and GX85 are pretty much the same size. IQ between both cams is similar.  The eyepiece is in the middle on the Olympus though, and I like that.  I also like that the Olympus is more affordable right now.

Any camera on your list will give you creative options.  No worries there.

[JChristophe]

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I've got a very good deal for a GX80 with the 20mm and 12-32mm pancakes and I'm very happy with my choice. Now let's see what I can do with it :)

[ntblowz]

I've gone through a few small P&S this recent year, from G1XIII to HX90V to G5X to RX100VI, and currently eyeing on a denim olympus e-pl9 cause I always want a blue camera!   (Too bad Panasonic didnt release any colour variation after G2/GH1)

 

Though most ppl tend to comment on the photos I took on my S10.