Point & shoot cameras

[AZlady]

I'm new on this page I have a DSR and love it , but don't want to take it on my upcoming trips. Do you guys have a point and shoot you like ? I'm looking at the Canon xs260- it has great reviews on amazon & best buy.
Thanks!

 

[hakepb]

The SX260 is a travel zoom compact. It's main advantage is a 20x zoom in a compact package, but it has the same small sensor as most other PnS cameras. If you want a compact camera and don't want to frequently play with settings, it can be a nice DSLr companion (especially if you do not have a 500mm equivilent zoom for your DSLr). I would also check out reviews at DPReview.com and look at the Panasonic ZS15 and ZS20, as well as the Sony HX20/30 (I have the HX30, all 3 makes have different blends of features/performance and another one may fit you better). The SX260 is a quality choice in that market.

But..... Most Disney World photography is wide angle (except the Safari), and there is a category of enthuiast compact point and shoots with bigger sensors (for closer to DSLr quality) and faster lenses (for those difficult dark ride photos and slightly better Bokeh) than the typical small sensor point and shoots. In this range you have the Canon s100/s110, G1X, and for an actual DSLr sensor, the G1X. The best quality you can get in an almost SX260 package is the Sony RX100. If you are wanting the best Disney World camera, I would get an enthuiast camera. Here is a good overview of top choices:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6698413448/dpreview-recommends-top-5-compact-cameras

 

[mikegood2]

Hakepb gives some great info and saves me some typing

The first question I would ask is how much you want to spend or have budgeted? What features are you looking for? Is zoom or low light important to you?

Do you want better results in low light? If so your, and you still want to shoot RAW (like a DSLR) your choices are much less, but here are a few options. small P&S like the Canon s100/s110 or you could go slightly larger and get the Panasonic LX7, Nikon P7700 or Canon G15.Those cameras run up to $400. Something like the Sony RX100 or G1X are wonderful cameras but they also cost over $650! Micro 4/3 are also a great alternative and give you the ability to get additional lenses, but again they are going to cost you more (and more and more) money.

 

[havoc315]

Lots of great cameras have been suggested.
The sx260 is a very good travel zoom for the price.
It will satisfy many users.

Where budget isn't a big concern, the Sony rx100 would be the top choice of many. It's $650-- but it is very capable of outperforming your dSLR with kit lens. So for people wanting pocketable top quality, it's worth the price. Downside other than price, limited zoom-- though enough for most of Disney.

Between those extremes, you have the other cameras mentioned.

 

[AZlady]

The SX260 is a travel zoom compact. It's main advantage is a 20x zoom in a compact package, but it has the same small sensor as most other PnS cameras. If you want a compact camera and don't want to frequently play with settings, it can be a nice DSLr companion (especially if you do not have a 500mm equivilent zoom for your DSLr). I would also check out reviews at DPReview.com and look at the Panasonic ZS15 and ZS20, as well as the Sony HX20/30 (I have the HX30, all 3 makes have different blends of features/performance and another one may fit you better). The SX260 is a quality choice in that market.

But..... Most Disney World photography is wide angle (except the Safari), and there is a category of enthuiast compact point and shoots with bigger sensors (for closer to DSLr quality) and faster lenses (for those difficult dark ride photos and slightly better Bokeh) than the typical small sensor point and shoots. In this range you have the Canon s100/s110, G1X, and for an actual DSLr sensor, the G1X. The best quality you can get in an almost SX260 package is the Sony RX100. If you are wanting the best Disney World camera, I would get an enthuiast camera. Here is a good overview of top choices:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6698413448/dpreview-recommends-top-5-compact-cameras

Thanks!! Of these 5 cameras, I think the Sony rx100 would be for me. Price is not an issue. I want one that is small(ish). Fast. And can do continuous shooting. I will be in all environments, Disney, NYC, beach and just need a break from my DSR
Thanks for the suggestions.

 

[AZlady]

My DSLR - not sure why I can't get that right

 

[hakepb]

If price is really not an object, there is the niche camera, the Sony RX1. With a full frame sensor mated to a Zeiss fixed focal length 35mm f/2 lens giving image quality that takes a back seat to no DSLr (unless you want to pick an argument with the 36mp D800)....but for most folks, the RX1 is not a realistic option and is too limiting. And the lens does not retract, so its not pocketable, and the video is not as good as the RX100... But ergonomically and control wise, it addresses any RX100 complaint.

An sit down before you read the price.
$2800
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2013/02/25/imaging-resource-camera-of-the-year-awards-2012

 

[mikegood2]

Thanks!! Of these 5 cameras, I think the Sony rx100 would be for me. Price is not an issue. I want one that is small(ish). Fast. And can do continuous shooting. I will be in all environments, Disney, NYC, beach and just need a break from my DSR
Thanks for the suggestions.

I think the rx100 would be a great choice for you then. Although, before making that choice I would take a look at a micro 4/3 camera and see what you think about the size and feel.

 

[havoc315]

I think the rx100 would be a great choice for you then. Although, before making that choice I would take a look at a micro 4/3 camera and see what you think about the size and feel.

Micro 4/3rds cameras are great, but they are not a substitute for a true pocketable compact. Further, between the sensor and lens quality, IMHO, the rx100 outperforms dslrs and Micro 4/3rds with kits lens. ( though those bigger cameras have the advantage with upgraded glass).

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Micro 4/3rds cameras are great, but they are not a substitute for a true pocketable compact. Further, between the sensor and lens quality, IMHO, the rx100 outperforms dslrs and Micro 4/3rds with kits lens. ( though those bigger cameras have the advantage with upgraded glass).

Yes, your opinion.

Not everyone sees it that way.

Got rid of my Sony RX100  will E-PM2 with kit lens address its shortcomings?

 

[havoc315]

Yes, your opinion.

Not everyone sees it that way.

Got rid of my Sony RX100  will E-PM2 with kit lens address its shortcomings?

Not sure your problem. I made it pretty clear it was simply my opinion. And you posted a thread of people considering the advantages of the pm2. Of course-- when you read the thread , most of the posters discuss the advantages of the pm2 IF you upgrade lenses. Which is precisely what I said. The kit lens is significantly slower than the rx100 at its widest.

 

[mikegood2]

Micro 4/3rds cameras are great, but they are not a substitute for a true pocketable compact. Further, between the sensor and lens quality, IMHO, the rx100 outperforms dslrs and Micro 4/3rds with kits lens. ( though those bigger cameras have the advantage with upgraded glass).

Don't disagree with the pocketable compact part. All I was trying to say is that she might want to get her hands one, actually both, and see how she likes the feel. Also seeing that she has a DSLR, but not bringing it due to size, she "might" be more comfortable with a micro 4/3 with the benefits of a smaller footprint. Don't get me wrong from everything I've read the rx100 is a great, possible better quality camera, but more limited in other areas.

 

[photo_chick]

Micro 4/3rds cameras are great, but they are not a substitute for a true pocketable compact. Further, between the sensor and lens quality, IMHO, the rx100 outperforms dslrs and Micro 4/3rds with kits lens. ( though those bigger cameras have the advantage with upgraded glass).

That statement is really going to depend on what you want to do with the camera.

 

[havoc315]

That statement is really going to depend on what you want to do with the camera.

True. If you truly want to fit it into a pocket.. If very low light is a priority.. Those are some advantages of the rx100.
If you're looking for lower noise at high iso, or if you're looking for more nicely blurred backgrounds, the micro 4/3 will have some advantages.
Ad of course -- if you want the ability to expand lenses, then a mirrorless or dSLR is the obvious way to go.

Putting aside budget, To me -- micro 4/3rds are best for people who want the smallest possible camera, that still allows dSLR performance, and lens interchangeability.
The rx100, and comparable compacts, are best for people looking to maximize performance, while minimizing size, without any preference to ever change lenses.

 

[Jonasphill]

Our last trip I lugged around my 5d markII and while I took some great video and photos, I found that this time around I had much more fun using the RX100 and the Sony Hx9v. They both were champs. All our video in the park came from these two cameras and the low light capabilities of the RX 100 shocked me. ( note: get the rx100 guide book " The Photographers Guide Book to the DSC RX100" it helped me solve some operator errors I had!