Camera alternative to using iPhone 6 on trips
Apr 1, 2015, 5:04 pm
#16
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: EWR
Programs: UA, AA, Hyatt Plat.
Posts: 314
Absolutely agree! What would you recommend? Thx!
Apr 1, 2015, 5:06 pm
#17
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Not too familiar with point and shoots but RX100 is rather pricey for a point and shoot, though there are even more pricey models.
If you just wanted to get one with an idea of seeing if you want to ultimately move on to a DSLR or a micro 4/3, you may want to stay under $400, just to see if you like the results better. Then spend more on something better at a later point.
But here's a roundup of the high-end point and shoots:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/665...t&ref=mainmenu
Some of the high-end point and shoots approach $1000. For the same money you can probably find a closeout on an older (last year's model or maybe from 2 years ago) DSLR.
But you may not want a larger, heavier camera.
If you just wanted to get one with an idea of seeing if you want to ultimately move on to a DSLR or a micro 4/3, you may want to stay under $400, just to see if you like the results better. Then spend more on something better at a later point.
But here's a roundup of the high-end point and shoots:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/665...t&ref=mainmenu
Some of the high-end point and shoots approach $1000. For the same money you can probably find a closeout on an older (last year's model or maybe from 2 years ago) DSLR.
But you may not want a larger, heavier camera.
Apr 1, 2015, 5:09 pm
#18
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: EWR
Programs: UA, AA, Hyatt Plat.
Posts: 314
Not too familiar with point and shoots but RX100 is rather pricey for a point and shoot, though there are even more pricey models.
If you just wanted to get one with an idea of seeing if you want to ultimately move on to a DSLR or a micro 4/3, you may want to stay under $400, just to see if you like the results better. Then spend more on something better at a later point.
But here's a roundup of the high-end point and shoots:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/665...t&ref=mainmenu
Some of the high-end point and shoots approach $1000. For the same money you can probably find a closeout on an older (last year's model or maybe from 2 years ago) DSLR.
But you may not want a larger, heavier camera.
If you just wanted to get one with an idea of seeing if you want to ultimately move on to a DSLR or a micro 4/3, you may want to stay under $400, just to see if you like the results better. Then spend more on something better at a later point.
But here's a roundup of the high-end point and shoots:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/665...t&ref=mainmenu
Some of the high-end point and shoots approach $1000. For the same money you can probably find a closeout on an older (last year's model or maybe from 2 years ago) DSLR.
But you may not want a larger, heavier camera.
Apr 1, 2015, 5:13 pm
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
One thing you'll find with better cameras is that you'll have to post-process and want something to manage a growing library.
Often, people leave their smart phone pictures on their phones or upload to Facebook, Flickr, whatever.
But with better cameras, you'll want to import the higher-quality files into your computer and the better cameras give you RAW files (you can shoot JPEG too but you should shoot RAW). Then you can get drawn into editing and then getting hard drives to back up your growing collection of photos.
Often, people leave their smart phone pictures on their phones or upload to Facebook, Flickr, whatever.
But with better cameras, you'll want to import the higher-quality files into your computer and the better cameras give you RAW files (you can shoot JPEG too but you should shoot RAW). Then you can get drawn into editing and then getting hard drives to back up your growing collection of photos.
Apr 1, 2015, 5:56 pm
#20
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Central California
Programs: Former UA Premex, now dirt
Posts: 6,531
This is really going down the road of bad advice for a non-photographer. The OP does not want to become a "PHOTOGRAPHER," he just wants to take better travel pictures than he currently gets with his phone.
No. A P&S with a 1" sensor is not a good choice for this.
No. A DSLR is not a good choice for this.
No. Shooting Raw and post-processing everything is not a good choice for this and telling the OP he should is not good advice. It might come later but not to start out. Getting a good quality P&S that will take Raw + Jpeg is probably a good idea in case the OP wants to go that way eventually.
Yes. A good quality, non-interchangeable lens, small camera is a good choice for the OP. Several good choices have been offered here, including the excellent RX100. There are others that would serve as well, such as the Ricoh GR and others. Portability, useability, image quality right out of the camera and affordability are all important factors.
OP, you should go into a good store and handle several models. If you can find some of the ones discussed here that would be good. Find what fits your hand and eye and don't let the lure of marketing (Nikon, Canon) suck you away from what will work best for you. The best P&S cameras are not made by the big names.
Find a good camera that you like and that fits your needs and then practice with it to improve your skills. A skilled photographer can take excellent pictures with any camera. An unskilled photographer will not take good pictures with a $3k 5Dmiii and "L" lenses. Just get something you like and get good with it.
No. A P&S with a 1" sensor is not a good choice for this.
No. A DSLR is not a good choice for this.
No. Shooting Raw and post-processing everything is not a good choice for this and telling the OP he should is not good advice. It might come later but not to start out. Getting a good quality P&S that will take Raw + Jpeg is probably a good idea in case the OP wants to go that way eventually.
Yes. A good quality, non-interchangeable lens, small camera is a good choice for the OP. Several good choices have been offered here, including the excellent RX100. There are others that would serve as well, such as the Ricoh GR and others. Portability, useability, image quality right out of the camera and affordability are all important factors.
OP, you should go into a good store and handle several models. If you can find some of the ones discussed here that would be good. Find what fits your hand and eye and don't let the lure of marketing (Nikon, Canon) suck you away from what will work best for you. The best P&S cameras are not made by the big names.
Find a good camera that you like and that fits your needs and then practice with it to improve your skills. A skilled photographer can take excellent pictures with any camera. An unskilled photographer will not take good pictures with a $3k 5Dmiii and "L" lenses. Just get something you like and get good with it.
Apr 1, 2015, 6:03 pm
#21
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: EWR
Programs: UA, AA, Hyatt Plat.
Posts: 314
One thing you'll find with better cameras is that you'll have to post-process and want something to manage a growing library.
Often, people leave their smart phone pictures on their phones or upload to Facebook, Flickr, whatever.
But with better cameras, you'll want to import the higher-quality files into your computer and the better cameras give you RAW files (you can shoot JPEG too but you should shoot RAW). Then you can get drawn into editing and then getting hard drives to back up your growing collection of photos.
Often, people leave their smart phone pictures on their phones or upload to Facebook, Flickr, whatever.
But with better cameras, you'll want to import the higher-quality files into your computer and the better cameras give you RAW files (you can shoot JPEG too but you should shoot RAW). Then you can get drawn into editing and then getting hard drives to back up your growing collection of photos.
This is really going down the road of bad advice for a non-photographer. The OP does not want to become a "PHOTOGRAPHER," he just wants to take better travel pictures than he currently gets with his phone.
No. A P&S with a 1" sensor is not a good choice for this.
No. A DSLR is not a good choice for this.
No. Shooting Raw and post-processing everything is not a good choice for this and telling the OP he should is not good advice. It might come later but not to start out. Getting a good quality P&S that will take Raw + Jpeg is probably a good idea in case the OP wants to go that way eventually.
Yes. A good quality, non-interchangeable lens, small camera is a good choice for the OP. Several good choices have been offered here, including the excellent RX100. There are others that would serve as well, such as the Ricoh GR and others. Portability, useability, image quality right out of the camera and affordability are all important factors.
OP, you should go into a good store and handle several models. If you can find some of the ones discussed here that would be good. Find what fits your hand and eye and don't let the lure of marketing (Nikon, Canon) suck you away from what will work best for you. The best P&S cameras are not made by the big names.
Find a good camera that you like and that fits your needs and then practice with it to improve your skills. A skilled photographer can take excellent pictures with any camera. An unskilled photographer will not take good pictures with a $3k 5Dmiii and "L" lenses. Just get something you like and get good with it.
No. A P&S with a 1" sensor is not a good choice for this.
No. A DSLR is not a good choice for this.
No. Shooting Raw and post-processing everything is not a good choice for this and telling the OP he should is not good advice. It might come later but not to start out. Getting a good quality P&S that will take Raw + Jpeg is probably a good idea in case the OP wants to go that way eventually.
Yes. A good quality, non-interchangeable lens, small camera is a good choice for the OP. Several good choices have been offered here, including the excellent RX100. There are others that would serve as well, such as the Ricoh GR and others. Portability, useability, image quality right out of the camera and affordability are all important factors.
OP, you should go into a good store and handle several models. If you can find some of the ones discussed here that would be good. Find what fits your hand and eye and don't let the lure of marketing (Nikon, Canon) suck you away from what will work best for you. The best P&S cameras are not made by the big names.
Find a good camera that you like and that fits your needs and then practice with it to improve your skills. A skilled photographer can take excellent pictures with any camera. An unskilled photographer will not take good pictures with a $3k 5Dmiii and "L" lenses. Just get something you like and get good with it.
Apr 1, 2015, 6:50 pm
#22
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: NCL
Programs: FB Plat; BAEC Gold
Posts: 930
I've used it for my trip to Seattle and this week in Japan and not regretted it. Fits into my back pocket so it doesn't weigh me down when walking around.
You can set it to automatic and it will do everything for you which is what I did to start with and my normal setting, however this week I've been experimenting with user settings and found the results and ease of use just as good.
Apr 1, 2015, 7:57 pm
#23
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: EWR
Programs: UA, AA, Hyatt Plat.
Posts: 314
I went with the first version as the ability to add a viewfinder, wifi or tilting screen didn't interest me. This combined with the £300 price (including case, tripod, screen protector, extra battery) was a good deal I though and more than half the iii price.
I've used it for my trip to Seattle and this week in Japan and not regretted it. Fits into my back pocket so it doesn't weigh me down when walking around.
You can set it to automatic and it will do everything for you which is what I did to start with and my normal setting, however this week I've been experimenting with user settings and found the results and ease of use just as good.
I've used it for my trip to Seattle and this week in Japan and not regretted it. Fits into my back pocket so it doesn't weigh me down when walking around.
You can set it to automatic and it will do everything for you which is what I did to start with and my normal setting, however this week I've been experimenting with user settings and found the results and ease of use just as good.
Apr 3, 2015, 4:57 pm
#24
Join Date: Nov 2011
Programs: UA 1p
Posts: 104
The RX100 models are all excellent cameras and small, so easy to carry everywhere. So are all of the other higher end compact cameras linked above. If size isn't such an issue, also look at ultra zoom or so called "bridge" cameras such as Canon Powershot SX60 or the prior models. Much larger and heavier, but better zoom length. The image quality won't approach the RX100, but will be better than your phone. These cameras seem complicated, but have good program settings.
As others have suggested, go to a bricks and mortar camera store when it is not busy and spend some time looking and holding cameras. I'd suggest a dedicated camera store as opposed to the camera section of a big box store.
As others have suggested, go to a bricks and mortar camera store when it is not busy and spend some time looking and holding cameras. I'd suggest a dedicated camera store as opposed to the camera section of a big box store.
Apr 3, 2015, 5:18 pm
#25
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 960
I'm going to the opposite direction of OP...
I have a Canon G12, but for "remembrance" pictures, I'm using more & more my iPhone. I may confess I still have my pictures for New Year holiday at the memory card, and I didn't use the G12 since then...
The G12 pictures are much better than the iPhone's, but at 99% of the time I just want to remember the occasion, not publish or share them. The iPhone camera is good enough for me. ^
I have a Canon G12, but for "remembrance" pictures, I'm using more & more my iPhone. I may confess I still have my pictures for New Year holiday at the memory card, and I didn't use the G12 since then...
The G12 pictures are much better than the iPhone's, but at 99% of the time I just want to remember the occasion, not publish or share them. The iPhone camera is good enough for me. ^
Apr 3, 2015, 7:40 pm
#27
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: EWR
Programs: UA, AA, Hyatt Plat.
Posts: 314
Thanks all! I plan on heading into a store to look at a few different ones before I make a decision. Really appreciate the responses on here!
Regardless, my iPhone 6's camera is still very impressive for a phone!
Regardless, my iPhone 6's camera is still very impressive for a phone!
Apr 3, 2015, 8:54 pm
#28
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: UA*Lifetime GS, Hyatt* Lifetime Globalist
Posts: 12,339
I'm going to the opposite direction of OP...
I have a Canon G12, but for "remembrance" pictures, I'm using more & more my iPhone. I may confess I still have my pictures for New Year holiday at the memory card, and I didn't use the G12 since then...
The G12 pictures are much better than the iPhone's, but at 99% of the time I just want to remember the occasion, not publish or share them. The iPhone camera is good enough for me. ^
I have a Canon G12, but for "remembrance" pictures, I'm using more & more my iPhone. I may confess I still have my pictures for New Year holiday at the memory card, and I didn't use the G12 since then...
The G12 pictures are much better than the iPhone's, but at 99% of the time I just want to remember the occasion, not publish or share them. The iPhone camera is good enough for me. ^
I had been a long time fan of the Canon G series, and have been a user of G-12 for about three years. It is an excellent camera with an articulated screen I like. I have taken some wonderful photos using the G-12, but have found it too bulky and and too slow. As an alternative, I have had iPhone taking most of the photos requiring less processing time between each frame or for moments that I find G-12 too troublesome to do the job.
Then, I found Sony RX-100. What a wonderful camera that it provides everything I need between an iPhone and the G-12. Fast camera, great panorama feature, and small enough to fit into pockets and better image quality than the G-12.
Keep us informed on your decision!
Apr 5, 2015, 10:48 am
#30
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Redwood City, CA USA (SFO/SJC)
Programs: 1K 2010, 1P in 2011, Plat for 2012,13,14,15 & 2016. Gold in 17 & 18, Plat since
Posts: 8,826
And for a completely-different take on this-
The iPhone is really a pretty decent tool for opportunities useful for its fixed focal length. Generally anything from pretty wide (panorama capability) to normal wide (approximately 35mm focal length equivalent to a film camera). It's actually hard not to get a decent picture from it, if used within its normal range of capabilities (don't try to digitally enlarge, for example, to accomplish a telephoto shot).
So what I'd consider recommending to someone who's used to shooting with an iPhone and wants something that can "do more" would be a "bridge" camera, one of the higher-end superzooms, which can cover a range from 24 to 1200mm. They're not going to excel at low noise low light conditions, but they're relatively simple tools that are going to let the less-experienced photographer "get the shot" he or she is looking for. Such cameras are inexpensive enough that you could upgrade later and sell it and do pretty well.
Such cameras aren't going to satisfy a pixel-peeper (raising my hand high here!) but the simplicity and range might be something to consider. The only thing they'll lack is the small size of a compact camera.
For what it's worth, i take a LOT of photos with my iPhone 6 (because it's convenient and does a great job with both panoramas and close-ups), but always carry my Canon S120 with me for quick & dirty stuff (because it's such a fast camera in real-world use and really easy to hold).
My "real" camera is an entry-level Canon T3i (soon to be upgraded to a T6s) with one of four lenses attached to it-
10-22 Canon EF-S (very inexpensive, very sharp, kinda slow but a good intro to wider-angle photography)
15-85 Canon EF-S (huge upgrade over the standard kit lenses, very sharp across its entire range, 15mm end very useful, 85 often feels not quite long enough)
70-200 F4 L (this is my tack-sharp lens, unfortunately not stabiliized)
150-600 Tamron (bought for a single purpose, Safari in Tanzania, pretty amazing what it can do, too big for day-to-day use).
I don't think it makes sense for most people to go the route of the DSLR with a lens collection like mine; they'll likely be very happy with a camera they don't have to change lenses on, just frame the subject and take the shot. In my case, I might spend some time thinking about different ways to look at something, switch lenses, play around a bit... the convenience of being able to do so with just one lens is significant. Someone who really knows what they're doing can see the opportunities without going to so much trouble. That's not me, that's likely not the OP.
Interested in hearing what others think!
So what I'd consider recommending to someone who's used to shooting with an iPhone and wants something that can "do more" would be a "bridge" camera, one of the higher-end superzooms, which can cover a range from 24 to 1200mm. They're not going to excel at low noise low light conditions, but they're relatively simple tools that are going to let the less-experienced photographer "get the shot" he or she is looking for. Such cameras are inexpensive enough that you could upgrade later and sell it and do pretty well.
Such cameras aren't going to satisfy a pixel-peeper (raising my hand high here!) but the simplicity and range might be something to consider. The only thing they'll lack is the small size of a compact camera.
For what it's worth, i take a LOT of photos with my iPhone 6 (because it's convenient and does a great job with both panoramas and close-ups), but always carry my Canon S120 with me for quick & dirty stuff (because it's such a fast camera in real-world use and really easy to hold).
My "real" camera is an entry-level Canon T3i (soon to be upgraded to a T6s) with one of four lenses attached to it-
10-22 Canon EF-S (very inexpensive, very sharp, kinda slow but a good intro to wider-angle photography)
15-85 Canon EF-S (huge upgrade over the standard kit lenses, very sharp across its entire range, 15mm end very useful, 85 often feels not quite long enough)
70-200 F4 L (this is my tack-sharp lens, unfortunately not stabiliized)
150-600 Tamron (bought for a single purpose, Safari in Tanzania, pretty amazing what it can do, too big for day-to-day use).
I don't think it makes sense for most people to go the route of the DSLR with a lens collection like mine; they'll likely be very happy with a camera they don't have to change lenses on, just frame the subject and take the shot. In my case, I might spend some time thinking about different ways to look at something, switch lenses, play around a bit... the convenience of being able to do so with just one lens is significant. Someone who really knows what they're doing can see the opportunities without going to so much trouble. That's not me, that's likely not the OP.
Interested in hearing what others think!