When SLR's are just too... big.
This quarter I've got an array of graphics classes ranging from 3D Modeling and CAD to Illustrator and Photoshop.
The instructor in my 3D class told us to grab a sketch pad, or get a camera so we could get ideas ect. (obvious stuff)
Well, I don't sketch.
So now I need a camera. Plus this will allow me to make my own textures for objects and world scenes. (obvious stuff again)
So, I've been researching around for an ultra small point and shoot.
My options are the Canon SD600 or SD630. 6 megapixel cameras that are about the size of a credit card (a very fat credit card that is).
I could also go for the Casio (yeah I know, yech) Exslim 600. It's about the same size as the Canon but much thinner.
And finally the Leica Lux 3. This is the sports car of the group. 10 megapixels RAW image format, HD video, a "genine" Leica lens and body ect. It's also much larger and fits into the 'compact' instead of 'ultra-compact' arena.
The Canon costs $250
Casio costs $280
aaaand
The Leica costs $600
I think Canon is going to win, but I'd love the Leica if I could.
If I've overlooked the best camera ever, let me know!
By the way, -any- ultracompact camera that could shoot in RAW would instantly win.
donian-photo
69 Watchers102 Deviations
24.4K
Pageviews Journals30
Newest
Welcome
1 min read
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
LX2 Part 2
2 min read
This is a mini review I posted on a forum about this camera.
---
I also use a Canon DSLR and needed a small camera recently to carry with me for university.
I was very frustrated by the lack of RAW modes in compact cameras. After looking and almost buying a Canon Elph I ended up being put off by the blurry edges and chromatic issues.
I ended up buying the LX2 and so far I'm *very* happy with it. I bought it understanding that image noise was its main issue, thus I was not surprised when I got it.
This camera is in my opinion, the perfect camera for a person who is:
a) used to shooting DSLRs
b) an advanced shooter
c) not afraid to shoot RAW all the time
I was fine with all three, in fact the main selling point was the RAW ability.
Being completely honest, this camera makes pretty bad jpegs. Even at ISO100 it looks painterly.
RAW is completely different. To my eyes the images have a very film like feel and retain excellent detail with no blurry watercolor effects.
Phil's review frustrated me somewhat, because anyone who buys this camera should be used to raw in the first place, thus the rantings about watercolor don't apply.
If I need low light images, I'll stick to my 20D and IS lenses. I don't expect this camera to live up to that standard.
I have been very impressed with the lens on this camera. Chromatic aberrations just aren't there, even in very harsh scenes and unlike the Canon Elphs, the image is sharp edge to edge.
Optical viewfinders on cameras like these are a joke, as such I don't miss it.
The build quality of this camera is exceptional and it's very sturdy and has excellent weight.
---
I also use a Canon DSLR and needed a small camera recently to carry with me for university.
I was very frustrated by the lack of RAW modes in compact cameras. After looking and almost buying a Canon Elph I ended up being put off by the blurry edges and chromatic issues.
I ended up buying the LX2 and so far I'm *very* happy with it. I bought it understanding that image noise was its main issue, thus I was not surprised when I got it.
This camera is in my opinion, the perfect camera for a person who is:
a) used to shooting DSLRs
b) an advanced shooter
c) not afraid to shoot RAW all the time
I was fine with all three, in fact the main selling point was the RAW ability.
Being completely honest, this camera makes pretty bad jpegs. Even at ISO100 it looks painterly.
RAW is completely different. To my eyes the images have a very film like feel and retain excellent detail with no blurry watercolor effects.
Phil's review frustrated me somewhat, because anyone who buys this camera should be used to raw in the first place, thus the rantings about watercolor don't apply.
If I need low light images, I'll stick to my 20D and IS lenses. I don't expect this camera to live up to that standard.
I have been very impressed with the lens on this camera. Chromatic aberrations just aren't there, even in very harsh scenes and unlike the Canon Elphs, the image is sharp edge to edge.
Optical viewfinders on cameras like these are a joke, as such I don't miss it.
The build quality of this camera is exceptional and it's very sturdy and has excellent weight.
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
New Camera
2 min read
I ended up with the Panasonic / Leica Lumix LX-2.
tinyurl.com/nhewv
# 10.2 effective Megapixel CCD with 16:9 aspect ratio
# F2.8-4.9, 4X optical zoom lens, equivalent to 28 - 112 mm
# Optical image stabilization
# 2.8" widescreen LCD display
# Full manual controls + RAW image format support
# Same Intelligent ISO Control and Venus Engine III processor as the FZ50
# Records widescreen movies at 848 x 480 resolution
# 13MB onboard memory + SD/SDHC card slot
# Comes in silver and black
# 300 shots per charge using proprietary li-ion battery
I ended up going with this camera because of the lens and because it offered RAW image capture, which is something no other camera in this range had. I'm so used to RAW with my SLR that I really didn't want to lose it.
The camera is small and fits in my pocket, it has almost any feature you would need, probably more than most people would ever need in a camera this size.
The camera can shoot in three different aspect ratios, and has 9 autofocus points.
It has a spot meter, something my 20D even lacks.
The only downside to this camera is the ISO range. image noise is visible even at ISO 100 and gets bad above ISO 400, even though the camera can go up to ISO 1600.
It's not an issue for me, since I'll be using the 20D for anything related to low light shooting.
Overall I'm very happy with it and it's great to have with me all the time.
tinyurl.com/nhewv
# 10.2 effective Megapixel CCD with 16:9 aspect ratio
# F2.8-4.9, 4X optical zoom lens, equivalent to 28 - 112 mm
# Optical image stabilization
# 2.8" widescreen LCD display
# Full manual controls + RAW image format support
# Same Intelligent ISO Control and Venus Engine III processor as the FZ50
# Records widescreen movies at 848 x 480 resolution
# 13MB onboard memory + SD/SDHC card slot
# Comes in silver and black
# 300 shots per charge using proprietary li-ion battery
I ended up going with this camera because of the lens and because it offered RAW image capture, which is something no other camera in this range had. I'm so used to RAW with my SLR that I really didn't want to lose it.
The camera is small and fits in my pocket, it has almost any feature you would need, probably more than most people would ever need in a camera this size.
The camera can shoot in three different aspect ratios, and has 9 autofocus points.
It has a spot meter, something my 20D even lacks.
The only downside to this camera is the ISO range. image noise is visible even at ISO 100 and gets bad above ISO 400, even though the camera can go up to ISO 1600.
It's not an issue for me, since I'll be using the 20D for anything related to low light shooting.
Overall I'm very happy with it and it's great to have with me all the time.
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
New Camera
2 min read
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Lenses
1 min read
Okay Brandon has a problem.
I need a new lens.
My options are the following:
Canon 24-70 F2.8 L -- Weather sealed ect. THE gold standard pro lens. Adored by everyone who has touched one.
Canon 24-105 F4.0 IS L -- Weather sealed with IS ect. Slightly slower, actually a little sharper than the 24-70 but with IS. The new standard.
Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS EF-s -- Not weather sealed, EFs only, not L... but it's sharper than the 24-70 and with IS on a 2.8... makes it something like F1.0.
Prices on all these lenses are about the same. I need one of them before Thursday for a trip. But which...
I think I'm going to order the 24-105 tomorrow.
This means I'm not going to get a 1Ds, but lenses hold value better anyway...
/sigh.
It's strange too, I actually subscribe to DA again, since V5 (couple weeks ago). Not thinking I'm going to post anything for now. After looking at other social networking sites, DA actually seems pretty intelligent.
I need a new lens.
My options are the following:
Canon 24-70 F2.8 L -- Weather sealed ect. THE gold standard pro lens. Adored by everyone who has touched one.
Canon 24-105 F4.0 IS L -- Weather sealed with IS ect. Slightly slower, actually a little sharper than the 24-70 but with IS. The new standard.
Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS EF-s -- Not weather sealed, EFs only, not L... but it's sharper than the 24-70 and with IS on a 2.8... makes it something like F1.0.
Prices on all these lenses are about the same. I need one of them before Thursday for a trip. But which...
I think I'm going to order the 24-105 tomorrow.
This means I'm not going to get a 1Ds, but lenses hold value better anyway...
/sigh.
It's strange too, I actually subscribe to DA again, since V5 (couple weeks ago). Not thinking I'm going to post anything for now. After looking at other social networking sites, DA actually seems pretty intelligent.
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In