Non SLR digital cameras

[burt-oh-my!]

Hi, I am thinking of getting a non-slr digital camera. I dont see any big advantage for looking directly through the lens, and I appreciate the smaller size of non slr cameras.

Anyhow, can I get just as good quality with, say, the Olympus Pen camera as a DSLR?

I don't have any other lens from any other cameras.

I would appreciate HD video capability althouh not absolutely necessary

Image stabilization important.

Image quality important.

Durability important (hate th elight weight/plasticy feel of most cameras.

 

[Cinema Face]

If you want a really good non-DSLR camera but still want similar results, then I'd consider the Canon Powershot G11.

It's considered a pro-point n shoot. It's frequently used by journalists. The price is almost the same as an entry level DSLR.

 

[nofrill]

You haven't refined your definition of "good quality", and you did not specify any other requirements eg. low light capability, zoom power, size (eg. coat / pants / shirt pocket / hang around your neck like an SLR). Therefore it is rather difficult to make specific recommendations.

Nothing in the P&S world come close to the quality (optical, sensor etc) of any DSLR.

Most P&S cameras have similar sensor capability in good strong daylight and low ISO setting. In this case, the biggest different in image quality relates to the optical quality - Canon and Panasonic are the two big players here. Panasonic uses Leica (branded) lenses and are revered for the excellent tele-zoom brightness (low f number) and image quality eg. the Lumix FZ and TZ series. The biggest problem with the Pana is poorer high ISO image quality when compared to other many other major brands.

If you need good high ISO to shoot in low light, then Fuji and the new Canon P&S are good candidates.

I have always been a fan of the Fuji F series and the F30 is my casual camera. I have been tempted with the newest F70EXR / F200EXR (yes there is a new F80EXR coming as well). All major reviews out there praise the high ISO low light performance. When I do "pixel peeping" (ie. looking at the pictures at 100% size with no "shrink to fit screen) on the sample pictures, the picture detail and resolution seem to be there, with good noise suppression. However, I just cannot get used to the weird sort of "mosaic" pattern the newer high resolution (eg. 10MP+) SuperCCD make.

The biggest selling point of the Fuji camaera is good value for the PRICE. All series, from basic to advance, are significantly cheaper than brands such as Canon. IMO, the optical quality of the Canon is better than the Fuji, but not too much in everyday outdoor pictures.

Two new Canon non-DSLRs come out recently, equipped with a new high sensitivity 10MP 1/1.7" CCD. If you want small shirt-pocket size, the S90 is good to go. If you want a little bit more tele-zoom power and better optical quality, at the expense of size (shirt -> coat pocket), the G11 that Cinema Face recommended is good for you.

I do not have any of these new model cameras, but from seeing sample pictures on review sites, I prefer the high ISO pictures of the Canons to the Fujis, because the Canons have smoother texture at a slight expense of blurring sharp details. IMHO though, you have to see for yourself to decide.

I don't really care for video modes in digital cameras myself (though it may be useful for short clips in unexpected situations). I would rather get a dedicated digital camcorder for that. Therefore I did not give any consideration to this item in my comments above.

 

[MarkII]

Canon G11. Bit pricier than others but the features more than make up the difference. I carry one as a walk-around camera rather than 1D series camera's I have.

 

[fmahovalich]

test 124

 

[fmahovalich]

160o

 

[shakenbake]

Of ocurse, there is always the Leica M9, but well outside many peoples' pockets.

 

[Damondean]

Of ocurse, there is always the Leica M9, but well outside many peoples' pockets.

No need to spend that kind of money... the Canon G11 is an excellent choice. The smaller Canon s90 also gets excellent reviews. It has no viewfinder, just the LCD screen but quality is said to be extremely high especially in low light.

You might also check out the Lumix line. They have Leica lenses. The GF1 has interchangeable lenses. The LX3 is smaller and also good.



My own choide would be the Canon G11.

I still use a much older Canon G2 on occasions.

Good luck.

 

[burt-oh-my!]

I greatly prefer optical viewfinders. I owuld like the Olympus PEN except for that missing viewfinder and no flash. The Canon and the LUMIX have me seriously interested.

 

[niveamen]

Olympus E-P2 comes with an electronic viewfinder, so it's not that bad. Unless you want to use your flash at the same time.

 

[Rockslinger]

I have always been a fan of the Fuji F series and the F30 is my casual camera.

The FUJI F30 was 5 years ahead of its time. Best low light camera ever made and that is why they discontinued it.

 

[blackrock13]

Of ocurse, there is always the Leica M9, but well outside many peoples' pockets.

Panasonic P&S camera are a good buy and they also use Leica lens. After that it's a matter of how they feel in the hands, the interface to do stuff, and button/wheels to change settings when desired; big fingers and small buttons or levers don't work well. Don't get taken by 'big' image screens, they suck battery life by half and are hard to use in daylight. alway have a viewfinder to fall back on in those situations.

The Canon G series and S series are worth a long look. Their menu interface is very friendly. Having said that you'll find you set you camera for what you want and you'll stay there 90% of the time, getting pleasing pictures, but playing with the settings can be fun.

 

[Cinema Face]

I didn't know about that Canon S90. I was doing a little reading and I think that will influence my next purchasing decision for a P & S camera. I'm looking for a little pocket powerhouse like that.

Speaking of the G11, I find it interesting that Canon chose to put less mega pixels in it than the camera it replaces. The G11 has 10 mp and the G10 has 14.7 mp.

The G11 is a better camera in every way. Hopefully this means the end of the mega pixel race madness.

 

[Damondean]

I didn't know about that Canon S90. I was doing a little reading and I think that will influence my next purchasing decision for a P & S camera. I'm looking for a little pocket powerhouse like that.

Speaking of the G11, I find it interesting that Canon chose to put less mega pixels in it than the camera it replaces. The G11 has 10 mp and the G10 has 14.7 mp.

The G11 is a better camera in every way. Hopefully this means the end of the mega pixel race madness.

Lots of good infor here.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm#pocket

Theguy is quite opinionated but you can make up your own mind.

 

[nofrill]

Speaking of the G11, I find it interesting that Canon chose to put less mega pixels in it than the camera it replaces. The G11 has 10 mp and the G10 has 14.7 mp.

More pixels on the sensor do not always equate better picture quality.

All camera manufacturers are caught in this "megapixel war", because of the general belief (= the majority of potential buyers; who cares about people who know something about cameras ....) that "bigger is better". Everyone ends up stuffing more and more pixels onto the sensor - true the sensor size also increases somehow, but proprotionately far smaller than the number of pixels on it. The pixel "pitch" (physical size of each light sensing element) becomes smaller, and this is associated with "digital noise" in the pictures.

I am not saying increasing pixel count is always a bad thing - the new 1/1.7" sensor in the G11 / S90, and generations of Fuji SuperCCD sensors are good examples of how the technology improves quality (reduces noise) for higher pixel count.

Also remember that in P&S cameras, as the sensor quality improves (ie. high resolution / low noise), the limiting factor will eventually be shifted back onto the optical quality - P&S cameras with tiny elements are usually inferior in quality to DSLR with better (but bigger) lenses. Tiny flaws in these P&S camera lenses will be exaggerated by the high resolution high MP sensors.

 

[Cinema Face]

More pixels on the sensor do not always equate better picture quality.

All camera manufacturers are caught in this "megapixel war", because of the general belief (= the majority of potential buyers; who cares about people who know something about cameras ....) that "bigger is better". Everyone ends up stuffing more and more pixels onto the sensor - true the sensor size also increases somehow, but proprotionately far smaller than the number of pixels on it. The pixel "pitch" (physical size of each light sensing element) becomes smaller, and this is associated with "digital noise" in the pictures.

I am not saying increasing pixel count is always a bad thing - the new 1/1.7" sensor in the G11 / S90, and generations of Fuji SuperCCD sensors are good examples of how the technology improves quality (reduces noise) for higher pixel count.

Also remember that in P&S cameras, as the sensor quality improves (ie. high resolution / low noise), the limiting factor will eventually be shifted back onto the optical quality - P&S cameras with tiny elements are usually inferior in quality to DSLR with better (but bigger) lenses. Tiny flaws in these P&S camera lenses will be exaggerated by the high resolution high MP sensors.

True. I hope that the pixel count madness has ended and common sense prevails. Now that pixel counts are probably where they should be, they can concentrate on making better sensors and better lenses.

I hate when people compare mega-pixels on cameras. I also hate when the manufacturers print the actual pixel count right on the camera body. I noticed that many of the new cameras don’t have that anymore.

 

[DATYdude]

Fuji has a new megazoom P&S camera coming out that I'm interested in (at least after the reviews come out). 30x zoom with a 24mm equivalent wide-angle, tilting screen, high-iso, image stabilization, HD video, tons of features too including one that mimics short depth of field by putting two shots together.

Unfortunately at 1/2.3" the sensor size is smaller than my S6000FS so imge quality may suffer, but there's something to be said for spending $500 and getting that kind of zoom range, esp since I"ll probebly never enlarge a photo beyond 8x10.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/HS10/HS10A.HTM

 

[blackrock13]

Fuji has a new megazoom P&S camera coming out that I'm interested in (at least after the reviews come out). 30x zoom with a 24mm equivalent wide-angle, tilting screen, high-iso, image stabilization, HD video, tons of features too including one that mimics short depth of field by putting two shots together.

Unfortunately at 1/2.3" the sensor size is smaller than my S6000FS so imge quality may suffer, but there's something to be said for spending $500 and getting that kind of zoom range, esp since I"ll probebly never enlarge a photo beyond 8x10.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/HS10/HS10A.HTM

You didn't say if it was optical /digital or a combination zoom, which I doubt, and this leads me to say don't get all caught up in ZOOM numbers, as you won't be able to take full affect of the zoom at the outer limits. The picture will degenerate and you won't be able to hand hold it even lightly support it well enough for a clear picture. Often the zoom numbers are fudged by simply adding a wider angle value and this doesn't get you any closer to your subject.

 

[DATYdude]

That's pure optical, 24mm to 700mm (equivalent). This isn't 1999, we all know about digital zoom.

Also there's image stabilization, if you look at some of the links by googling "Fujifilm HS10 review" (and there are no real reviews yet because the camera hasn't hit the market yet), you'll find one sample from PMA show with a clear pic in moderate light at 700mm.

Image quality at high-ISO, and highlight clipping, will determine whether this camera is a winner or not, but I suspect Fuji will sell a lot of these.

Here's another link with better pics: http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fujifilm/165639-fuji-hs10-wow.html

 

[blackrock13]

That's pure optical, 24mm to 700mm (equivalent). This isn't 1999, we all know about digital zoom.

Also there's image stabilization, if you look at some of the links by googling "Fujifilm HS10 review" (and there are no real reviews yet because the camera hasn't hit the market yet), you'll find one sample from PMA show with a clear pic in moderate light at 700mm.

Image quality at high-ISO, and highlight clipping, will determine whether this camera is a winner or not, but I suspect Fuji will sell a lot of these.

Here's another link with better pics: http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fujifilm/165639-fuji-hs10-wow.html

You wanna bet. I get that comment all the time.

I'm a big fan of Fuji cameras as shown by my first digital and now back up camera is an S3. This definitely worth a look.

IS helps, but its not a total solution. All my pro lens are 4 years old and not IS but I have the skill to push the envelope when hand holding/supporting for difficult shots. When I have gone to ultra zoom lens for a particular project (600mm+) I've used IS and its nice but in the back of my mind is the sturdiness of the mechanism. My equipment takes a lot of crap in the field, mostly from others using it, not me and fancy smancy technology breaking down is a real concern.