Travel Photography - Best Compact as of Today

Hi, all. So it's time for a new compact. Sharpness of photos in Auto mode is absolutely imperative. I want a decent optical zoom, a reasonable number of megapixels (no, I don't need 10), and, very importantly, tha ability to take decent pictures in dark room (for example, go to see the niece's play in a dark school auditorium, want to be able to take perfect pictures while sitting in the back of the audience). Price is not a significant consideration, within reason for a compact.

Suggestions?

Have you tried looking at dpreview.com? They compared the best slim/compact cameras.

Ultra compact cameras (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q408slimgroup/)
Premium compact (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q408premiumgroup/)
Enthusiast compact (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q408enthusiastgroup/)

If price isn't a significant consideration, read the "enthusiast compact" reviews. They'll definitely give you the best image quality.

for example, go to see the niece's play in a dark school auditorium, want to be able to take perfect pictures while sitting in the back of the audience
I'm not so sure this camera actually exists. Let us know if you find it. ;)

I'm not so sure this camera actually exists. Let us know if you find it. ;)

No. But if I have to do it, I'll probably get a dSLR and a 200/2.8 lens. 200/2.8 are not that large, and fairly affordable. Canon's version is about $700, and it's a L lens, nonetheless. Pentax's $900.

Or probably even better, a 135/2.0 lens. And carry a 1.4x extender if one needs it. Extender is cheap, and a Canon 135/2.0L is about $950.

To get "perfect" pictures at low light, there's no substitute for sensor size (for low noise at high ISO) and large aperture (to capture action at relatively fast shutter speed).

If you don't need 10MP, the 6MP Nikon D40 dSLR plus a VR (vibration reduction) lens will be one of the best for low light. The 18-55mm VR lens is highly regarded and very inexpensive. The 55-200mm VR is the companion lens for longer reach.

If you don't need dSLR and don't mind an older camera, the Nikon Coolpix 8800 (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/nikon8800.html) has a large 2/3 size sensor and VR function. This camera still can command $200-300 in the used market.

If you want a still smaller camera, the Fujifilm F30 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf30/) and several siblings used the very innovative Super CCD HR (http://www.fujifilm.com/about/technology/super_ccd/index.html) sensor and one of the best for low light. Unfortunately they ran out of space for this dual cell design in newer higher mega-pixel P&S cameras. This sensor technology continues in Fujifilm dSLRs.

How do you feel about the Lumix LX3 relative to those?

Thanks for the links, by the way, guys - the LX3 seems popular and unless you convince me otherwise, that's what I'm leaning towards.

How do you feel about the Lumix LX3 relative to those?

Thanks for the links, by the way, guys - the LX3 seems popular and unless you convince me otherwise, that's what I'm leaning towards.

LX3 is a great camera, but its lens only goes to 60mm equivalent. That will give you a very small object size when shooting from the back of an auditorium. I'd consider its prime competitor, the Canon G10, which has a longer zoom (but not as wide) than then LX3.

I'm not surprised to see some basic DSLRs offered up as alternatives here but I have to wonder one thing. Would you feel comfortable using one during a performance? The noise of the mirror/shutter action is audible while a compact can be set to be silent. It isn't like you're going to the Met, but I still don't know that I'd want to be the guy with the camera making all the noise.

. . . very importantly, the ability to take decent pictures in dark room (for example, go to see the niece's play in a dark school auditorium, want to be able to take perfect pictures while sitting in the back of the audience).

Lots of nice P&S cameras to choose from at nice prices to boot. I second the Dpreview suggestion as you'll find good infomation on that site. Best to go into the store and handle the cameras to see which one best fits your own photo personna.

I don't understand the pixel aversion. Indeed 'more' pixels does not imply "best" but most manufacturers are adding pixels so I would not lean on that pixel criteria too heavily as memory is cheap and pixels add resolution which gives you nice photos should you elect to print them.

Don't know that your final criteria is easily achievable with a P&S as you're dealing with the laws of light and physics. Better to arrive to the auditorium early and stake out a seat near the front to assure a better chance to grab the shot.

Have fun shopping.

Barry

I'm looking at a Canon SX200is to replace my 880 that my Sister stole from me.

I'm looking at a Canon SX200is to replace my 880 that my Sister stole from me.

If you need a fairly long zoom, the SX200 IS certainly seems to be in the same realm as the Panasonic TZ3/TZ4/TZ5.

That Nikon Coolpix 880 is a nice little camera with great dynamic range contributing to these shots:

SFO (http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f228/oar8/DSCN0202b.jpg)
Audi (http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f228/oar8/AudiA8a.jpg)

It has a 8MP/CM2 sensor. I dropped my copy on a stone walk and it kept on taking pictures for the rest of that day. It was sent to Nikon for repair afterward and still in the extended family.

If money is really not important and you want something compact and quiet, do consider the Leica M8.2 with a Leica 135 mm lens.

Very, very, very expensive, but certainly much better quality than the P&S's with dinky little sensors.

You could get a top-of-the line DSLR for that money, but it would not be a compact...

Cheers,
T.

I don't understand the pixel aversion. Indeed 'more' pixels does not imply "best" but most manufacturers are adding pixels so I would not lean on that pixel criteria too heavily as memory is cheap and pixels add resolution which gives you nice photos should you elect to print them.


More pixels on the same size sensor can actually reduce the image quality at the same time that they add resolution. More pixels truly is not necessarily better.

If money is really not important and you want something compact and quiet, do consider the Leica M8.2 with a Leica 135 mm lens.

Very, very, very expensive, but certainly much better quality than the P&S's with dinky little sensors.
...

In the same realm is the Epson R-D1, still available in retail at BIC Camera in Tokyo. A friend has one of these. Not quite as expensive as the Leica.

LX3 is a great camera, but its lens only goes to 60mm equivalent. That will give you a very small object size when shooting from the back of an auditorium. I'd consider its prime competitor, the Canon G10, which has a longer zoom (but not as wide) than then LX3.

Well it's these two that I'm stuck deciding between.

And I'm really stuck. B&H guy seems to think LX3. Any other votes?

i really like Lumix...I've had several. I would consider the FX150...lots of good features and really decently prices (<$200). I have a TZ3 and really like it...but it's a bit bulky to carry around. but, great quality, features, etc. I've been using a smaller version...the FX55...with pretty decent results. I like the LX3, except the focal length...and feel the FX150 may be a good alternative. check it out.

Well it's these two that I'm stuck deciding between.

And I'm really stuck. B&H guy seems to think LX3. Any other votes?

The G10 and the LX3 are quite different beasts. G10 has a lot more zoom range but it is a big beast.

The Lumix is small and elegant. It only has about half of the zoom range of the G10, but it does have very nice wide-angle and it has the unbeatable constant F2.0 maximum speed which makes it probably the best compact for low-light shooting.

The comparison, I think, is apples and oranges. Both are excellent cameras but for somewhat different needs.

So that things would not be too easy, take a look at the new Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7 (it could be called the ZS-3 in the states). Compact, long zoom (up to 300 mm) and decent maximum aperture (not nearly as good as the LX3, though).

Cheers,
T.

:rolleyes:.

It appears that the lens cover is a dealbreaker (shared camera). :rolleyes:

So, let's try this again. Same requirements, but need a camera with a lens that doesn't need extra work (or, as it was put to me, a camera that will fit in a pocket with no qualms about bringing it everywhere and potentially losing pieces).

I really am sorry. Both to be a pain, and that we're not going to do the LX3.

I think the G10 might be your best option, but for low light there isn't anything better than a small dslr like a rebel or bigger. The rebel really is quite small, but the low light performance on canons is second to none. I think the sensor on the G10 offers similar low like, high iso low noise performance.

Honestly, no small pocket compact is going to get your REACH (large enough optical zoom) and low noise at high ISO to satisfy for high quality pics.

I think the G10 might be your best option, but for low light there isn't anything better than a small dslr like a rebel or bigger. The rebel really is quite small, but the low light performance on canons is second to none. I think the sensor on the G10 offers similar low like, high iso low noise performance.

Honestly, no small pocket compact is going to get your REACH (large enough optical zoom) and low noise at high ISO to satisfy for high quality pics.

The OP's last requirement was a pocketable camera with integrated lens protector. The G10 does not fit that bill unless he goes around in cargo pants at all times.

While the picture quality is not quite stellar, I have had good experiences with both the Pentax Optio series and the Canon IXUS series. Our current P&S camera is the IXUS 870 (SD880 IS) and it is a really nice little camera.

Cheers,
T.

P&S really is the right term in light of the updated requirements. And, man, am I still pissed about the fact that the LX3 doesn't fit the bill.

But the previous requirements still remain:

Gorgeous image quality and sharpness, a decent zoom, and indoor low-light capabilities.

Fuji F100fd.

Considered pretty much universally to be the best overall compact digital .

[i]"Overall winner: Fujifilm F100fd:

[T]he F100fd shines, especially at higher ISO settings. The gap has narrowed considerably since Fujifilm waved the white flag in its unilateral war against the megapixel race and introduced the latest 12 megapixel version of its acclaimed Super CCD sensor. But the gap is still there, and if you ever shoot in less than perfect light the F100fd is just that bit better than anything else in this sector of the market.

But it's not all about high ISO; the F100fd did well in every one of our tests, whether shooting in broad daylight, in the studio or in a dimly lit bar. It's fast, reliable and has the best zoom range of any camera here. That it's also one of the cheapest is merely the icing on the cake; add it all together and you've got a winner."

Personally I have owned just about all of Fuji's 'F' [high-end compact digital] line; the F10, F30, F31, and F50 and they all were in fact just that much better than all of the competition. While the F100 is pretty much a push with the F31/F50 in terms of image quality I do appreciate the F100's wider 28mm.

12MP.

Compact and pocketable.

Best high ISO performance of any compact digital - period. Great up to ISO400, very good at 800, good at 1600, and acceptable in a pinch at 3200.

High quality 28-140 Fujinon lens [built in lens cover].

Battery gets 300+ shots to a charge.

Takes XD, SD, and SDHC cards.

<$300

Fuji Finepix F100fd (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?ci=0&shs=finepix+f100fd&sb=ps&pn=1&sq=desc&InitialSearch=yes&O=jsp%2Fproduct.jsp&A=search&Q=*&bhs=t)

Gorgeous image quality and sharpness, a decent zoom, and indoor low-light capabilities.

You don't say if you'd be happy with an all-auto camera or need to fiddle with the focus and exposure settings manually?

Similarly you should try to define what "decent" zoom range means to you. If you are unsure yourself, we are not going to be able to guess for you. :)

Anyway, if usual suspects don't fit the bill---and LX3 along with its Leica twin is the king of that hill these days---look at a few dark horse candidates:

Fuji F200EXR
Ricoh GX100
Ricoh GX200

For those who can get over the pocketability issue, the Panasonic Lumix FZ28 is an astounding package in its own right.

Good luck.

If you don't need 10MP, the 6MP Nikon D40 dSLR plus a VR (vibration reduction) lens will be one of the best for low light. The 18-55mm VR lens is highly regarded and very inexpensive. The 55-200mm VR is the companion lens for longer reach.

If you don't need dSLR and don't mind an older camera, the Nikon Coolpix 8800 (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/nikon8800.html) has a large 2/3 size sensor and VR function. This camera still can command $200-300 in the used market.

If you want a still smaller camera, the Fujifilm F30 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf30/) and several siblings used the very innovative Super CCD HR (http://www.fujifilm.com/about/technology/super_ccd/index.html) sensor and one of the best for low light. Unfortunately they ran out of space for this dual cell design in newer higher mega-pixel P&S cameras. This sensor technology continues in Fujifilm dSLRs.

Fuji has launched a new CCD sensor called Super CCD EXR.
The first camera with this new sensor is the F200fd (http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/advanced-compact/finepix-f200-exr) which is getting rave reviews (http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/advanced-compact/finepix-f200-exr/reviewsAndImages)!

If money is really not important and you want something compact and quiet, do consider the Leica M8.2 with a Leica 135 mm lens.

Very, very, very expensive, but certainly much better quality than the P&S's with dinky little sensors.

You could get a top-of-the line DSLR for that money, but it would not be a compact...

Cheers,
T.

Wouldn't do anyone any good, if they don't know how to expose and RAW develop properly though.

I'd suggest a Sigma or Ricoh GR-D II with tele adapter instead, otherwise as mentioned, a flash won't do any good from such a distance (oh the horror of on-camera flash). If you want to take it another step, try off camera, remote-triggered flash @ strobist.com. Join the flickr group and post questions, and find out more information.

Regarding the Ricoh GR Digital; great little camera [I had one, a GR II] but the fixed [non-zoom] 28mm lenses doesn't meet the OP's stated needs.

Also, Ricoh does not officially import or support their cameras in the U.S.

They can only be purchased from Adorama and PopFlashPhoto and any warranty service or support comes from the store itself.

As for the Finepix F200exr it does look promising [though I have yet to see a reputable review] but the ~$400 price tag might be a bit more than the OP was looking for [?]

[I want] tha ability to take decent pictures in dark room (for example, go to see the niece's play in a dark school auditorium, want to be able to take perfect pictures while sitting in the back of the audience).


You're out of luck, really. I use a nice Nikon D200 with the 80-200 f/2.8 for such an application. The package probably weighs five (5) pounds or so and is quite ungainly. I will say that it's a couple of generations old at this point and there are probably better sensors out now.

Even with a monopod, I get marginally acceptable results from let's say 75-100 feet, under typical stage lighting. I'm shooting wide open and at a lofty ISO, and still am working with slower-than-I'd-like shutter speeds.

Best bet is to sit closer and to get them to turn up the lights. :D

Fuji has launched a new CCD sensor called Super CCD EXR.
The first camera with this new sensor is the F200fd (http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/advanced-compact/finepix-f200-exr) which is getting rave reviews (http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/advanced-compact/finepix-f200-exr/reviewsAndImages)!

I think this new Super CCD EXR sensor is not a dual cell design. The dual cell design gave great dynamic range, large cell for low light and small cell for bright light.

...I'd suggest a Sigma or Ricoh GR-D II with tele adapter instead, otherwise as mentioned, a flash won't do any good from such a distance (oh the horror of on-camera flash). If you want to take it another step, try off camera, remote-triggered flash @ strobist.com. Join the flickr group and post questions, and find out more information.

I have all that, a nice Nikon Coolpix 5000 with 8MP/CM2 5MP sensor, TC-E3ED 3x converter. Or a Coolpix 8800 10x zoom with VR and 8MP/CM2 sensor. But I am afraid all that would not help if even dSLR with f/2.8 can not do.

You're out of luck, really. I use a nice Nikon D200 with the 80-200 f/2.8 for such an application. The package probably weighs five (5) pounds or so and is quite ungainly. I will say that it's a couple of generations old at this point and there are probably better sensors out now.

Even with a monopod, I get marginally acceptable results from let's say 75-100 feet, under typical stage lighting. I'm shooting wide open and at a lofty ISO, and still am working with slower-than-I'd-like shutter speeds.

Best bet is to sit closer and to get them to turn up the lights. :D

...I'd suggest a Sigma or Ricoh GR-D II with tele adapter instead, otherwise as mentioned, a flash won't do any good from such a distance (oh the horror of on-camera flash). If you want to take it another step, try off camera, remote-triggered flash @ strobist.com. Join the flickr group and post questions, and find out more information.
You did note that the OP wanted to quietly take unobtrusive photos of theatrical productions?

Any kind of flash is absolutely a non-starter.

You did note that the OP wanted to quietly take unobtrusive photos of theatrical productions?

The six year old would be thrilled to hear you refer to her violin recital as a theatrical production! :D

Another thought: If money is no object you might want to look at the Panasonic G1. Not pocketable but amazing capability/size ratio.

You did note that the OP wanted to quietly take unobtrusive photos of theatrical productions?

Any kind of flash is absolutely a non-starter.

Right, but for their situation, the better sensors in the Sigma and Ricoh are more cost-effective than a Leica M8 (especially if you don't know how to expose manually) — without flash.

My only point was if flash was going to be used, then off-camera, near the subject is far better than an audience viewpoint (no on camera flash in built in any camera is going to have enough candlepower to light properly from those distances). Again, if flash could be an option.

The fundamental point of photography is light. LIGHT. LIGHT. LIGHT. :)


Sounds like the Fuji F100fd fits the bill.

What did you buy? Are you satisfied with your purchase?

The Panasonic or Fuji with a telescoping monopod (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/486892-REG/Induro_465_025_MA25_Alloy_6M_5_Section.html#specif ications) would be a SWEET combination.

(I just travelled with a DSLR, lenses and Bogen/Manfrotto tripod - a little bulky)

The Fuji F100fd can be had for $145 after a $100 mail-in rebate. I'm tempted to pick one up.

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=FJFPF100&omid=151&ref=cay

I think that new items are the wrong way here. If you have THAT specific a need then go find a used Fuji F31 or F31 and pay the asking price. Its worth it, because for your particular purpose, there hasnt been any better product released since then - unfortunantely.

If you wont do that then get a new Fuji F200 and accept its faults as it is. Best of a bad bunch for that usage.

Personally, I love Canon's P&S. I also have a Nikon one which i bought because it is skinnier and easier to fit into my jeans pocket. But I find the Canon one much better when taking night pictures with the flash off. It comes out much much better than the Nikon one.

The two cameras I used are:
Canon A560
Nikon Coolpix L16

The Olympus E-P1 (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e_p1-review) is a new arrival, but with the same slow lens choices. Any thoughts?

And there's the Leica D-Lux 4 (http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/compact_cameras/d-lux_4/). There's another thread just started on this camera. It has an 5.1-12.8 mm/ f2.0-2.8 lens! Price is right too!

(forgive my ignorance, is this the LX3 twin?)

Also, Ricoh does not officially import or support their cameras in the U.S.

They can only be purchased from Adorama and PopFlashPhoto and any warranty service or support comes from the store itself.

I don't think that's true. I had a Ricoh GX100, bought from Adorama, and I sent it to CRIS Camera in Arizona for sensor cleaning.

The Ricoh GX cameras are wonderful, but I got rid of mine because dust kept appearing on the sensor. Paying for that cleaning outside of warranty would have been too expensive.

I don't think that's true.

Actually, it is in fact "true" - though it seems that there are now three [wow!] stores importing Ricoh camers into the U.S.

Ricoh North America (http://www.ricoh.com/r_dc/contact/contact_us.html)

"Ricoh official warranty service can be applied only at the [3] Ricoh authorized dealers in the United States [Adorama, PopFlashPhoto, and Photo Village]."

This is a silly thing to argue about, but have you ever sent in a Ricoh camera for warranty repair in the US? Adorama directed me to CRIS Camera in Arizona. That's where I sent my camera for warranty repair, twice. Their website shows them to be the factory authorized repair center for Ricoh.

http://www.criscam.com/cameraservices/retail/

I wish Ricoh had more presence in the US, but they do "officially" import their cameras and "officially" provide warranty repair service. I believe the link you included has some odd wording ("...service can only be applied at..."?) that is misleading.

Self-Edited. This isn't Omni.

I repeat my question, have you sent in a Ricoh camera for US warranty service?

I have. So have many people on DP's Ricoh forum. All of us US owners sent our cameras, regardless of where they were purchased, to CRIS Camera. Adorama had nothing to do with the warranty work, other than to tell me, the first time, how to get in touch with the factory authorized service center. I doubt Adorama was even aware I had warranty work done.

If you contact Ricoh Japan about US warranty work, they will direct you to CRIS Camera.

:confused:

Considering that I edited my post before you made your post I am not quite sure to what, "your condescension is getting a bit much" refers.

ibid Ricoh North America (http://www.ricoh.com/r_dc/contact/contact_us.html)



Cheers.

Folks - play nice :)

I'll refrain from editing this thread if you all keep it civil.

THANKS! :)

Considering that I edited my post before you made your post I am not quite sure to what, "your condescension is getting a bit much" refers.

I read your post, composed an answer, dawdled about, hit Submit, then saw that you had removed the post I had just answered, LOL. Maybe I should have quoted what I was answering?

Very much in the spirit of helpful civility, my point was, and remains, that there is official Ricoh service for digital cameras available in the US, based upon my own experience and that of many other Ricoh users, regardless of where we bought our cameras. Potential Ricoh buyers are free to browse the Ricoh forum on dpreview or contact dealers for more information about warranty work.

ibid CRIS Camera Services "Factory Authorized for Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Pentax, Ricoh, Sigma" (http://www.criscam.com/cameraservices/retail/)

And a very good day to you all!

I am not trying to be argumentative, just trying to get on the same page here.

First, I was given my GRII as a gift, it never broke, and I have long since shifted it.

Second, I never questioned whether or not CRIS would repair Ricoh cameras under the terms of [a] warranty.

Third, my point was simply that Ricoh themselves do not officially import or support their cameras in the U.S.

If you can point to some legal document that disproves this I am more than willing to admit being wrong and would also appreciate the upated info.

If you buy a Ricoh from Adorama et al unlike NikonUSA, CanonUSA, etc., there is no higher authority to which one can appeal, as Ricoh do not themselves import their cameras into the U.S.

Now, Ricoh does voluntarily [as opposed to gray market transshipping] sell their cameras to exactly three dealers but it is these dealers who are officially/legally importing the cameras and, as Ricoh states clearly on their website, it is these three dealers who are responsible for any warranty and/or support.

Whatever the terms of the warranty you have with your Ricoh, that warranty is I believe through the store as is clearly stated on Ricoh's website. Since Adorama et al is the importer and warrantor, if Adorama wished to, they could require that you send your camera to them and only them for warranty work.

Now, I have no doubt that Ricoh has certified that CRIS [or whomever] has the skills and experience to fix their cameras, nor do I have any doubt that Ricoh sells and supplies parts and tools to CRIS [or whomever] but, at least according to Ricoh’s website, the ultimate legal responsibility for any warranty or support lies solely with the three official importers – Adorama, PopFlash, and PhotoVillage - regardless of to which repair facilities those three importers instruct you to send your camera.

Again, if this is incorrect, and Ricoh have themselves re-started officially importing their cameras into the U.S then I would sincerely appreciate any new information as this would be a wonderful and fundamental change.

When I had recurring warranty issues with my GX100, I contacted Ricoh Japan directly, and they told me to send the camera to CRIS Camera. If you lurk about on the DP Review Ricoh forum, you will see numerous mentions of CRIS Camera doing official US warranty repair, and no mentions at all of CRIS Camera being contracted by Adorama or Popflash to do repairs on their behalf.

Whether these are 'legal' enough, only you can decide:

Ricoh Japan Service Contacts (http://www.ricoh.com/r_dc/support/service.html) Notice that CRIS Camera is identified as "Ricoh Service Center" for all of the Americas.

CRIS Camera website, which I have posted before, clearly stating they perform "Factory Authorized" repairs on Ricoh:
CRIS Camera Retail Services (http://www.criscam.com/cameraservices/retail/)

The above information has been true for several years, to my personal knowledge.

I certainly agree that I wish Ricoh had more presence and stronger support in the US, but they are here. They only sell their cameras through three US dealers, but nonetheless those three are "authorized dealers" per the Ricoh page you linked. I am not sure how else you could define "officially importing" beyond listing authorized dealers.

I think most people would agree on the meanings of "factory authorized service" and "authorized dealer".

If you buy a Ricoh from Adorama et al unlike NikonUSA, CanonUSA, etc., there is no higher authority to which one can appeal, as Ricoh do not themselves import their cameras into the U.S......

Whatever the terms of the warranty you have with your Ricoh, that warranty is I believe through the store as is clearly stated on Ricoh's website. Since Adorama et al is the importer and warrantor, if Adorama wished to, they could require that you send your camera to them and only them for warranty work.




If you have any concerns or queries regarding ordering from Adorama Camera, please don't hesitate to contact me directly: helen.oster@adoramacamera.com.

Sincerely

Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador