[ukderebail]

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

Good features, but still not worth 20k, in my humble opinion. Whats the point in buying a bridge camera at 20k when one can get a DSLR at 24-25k ?

What would be your typical usage ? Do you really need a 42x zoom and GPS feature ?

Please have a look at Fujifilm S4500 - it has similar features at a fraction of the cost.

Rohan

Dear Rohan,

I am not a professional, but an amateur. So i am not expert in cleaning lenses, oiling or changing lenses and earning livelihood based on camera.
Secondly the issues concerning warranty needs to be addressed by Nikon service management. Earlier i had pleasant experience with 3 years warranty from Sony and Samsung. In case of Samsung it was camcorder, which i did not use much though.
Sony with 3 years warranty provides the best back up service and they are professional, Nikon claim they are specialists let us see whether they live up to their tall claim.
Regards


Note from Support - Please avoid typing a full post in bold letters as it is difficult to read. You may choose to bold only certain words or a sentence to highlight it's importance. Thanks!

[sups]

I am looking for a very good P&S camera. Requirements are:
a) Very good jpegs
b) Very good low light (cloudy day, inside house with moderate dimming) photography
c) Ofcourse manual controls
d) Fast autofocus
e) Decent video capture

I have shortlisted the following based on dpreview and other feedbacks:
1. Sony RX-100 (~32K)
2. Nikon P7700 (~23K)
3. Canon SX 260 HS (~18K)
4. Lumix DMC-FZ200 (~32K)
5. Canon S110 (~29K)
6. Canon G15 (~33K)

I am quite confused. Out of all these, Nikon P7700 looks be the most VFM to me. But it is least talked about. Please guide.

I am not a professional, but I don't buy camera every year, so want to go for a good one.

[vb-san]

Originally Posted by sups

I have shortlisted the following based on dpreview and other feedbacks:
1. Sony RX-100 (~32K)
2. Nikon P7700 (~23K)
3. Canon SX 260 HS (~18K)
4. Lumix DMC-FZ200 (~32K)
5. Canon S110 (~29K)
6. Canon G15 (~33K)

I am quite confused. Out of all these, Nikon P7700 looks be the most VFM to me. But it is least talked about. Please guide.

I am not a professional, but I don't buy camera every year, so want to go for a good one.

I don’t know much about all the models listed, but can say that the Canon S110 is quite a brilliant number. The G15 is nice as well, but of the two, my choice will be the S110, especially due to the size factor.

[joslicx]

NIkon has announced a $1100 DX-format Coolpix (with a APSC sized 16MP sensor)

http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/04/n...mat-coolpix-a/

Whats the point? You can buy same thing from Sony for half the price (Sony Nex-5) and even have flexibility of changing lenses.


Although the Coolpix P330 looks tasty for $380 (basically almost a Sony RX-100 for about half the price)

http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/04/n...p330-hands-on/

@sups: You could consider the Coolpix P330.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by sups

I am looking for a very good P&S camera. Requirements are:
a) Very good jpegs
b) Very good low light (cloudy day, inside house with moderate dimming) photography
c) Ofcourse manual controls
d) Fast autofocus
e) Decent video capture

I have shortlisted the following based on dpreview and other feedbacks:
1. Sony RX-100 (~32K)
2. Nikon P7700 (~23K)
3. Canon SX 260 HS (~18K)
4. Lumix DMC-FZ200 (~32K)
5. Canon S110 (~29K)
6. Canon G15 (~33K)

I am quite confused. Out of all these, Nikon P7700 looks be the most VFM to me. But it is least talked about. Please guide.

I am not a professional, but I don't buy camera every year, so want to go for a good one.

What S110 gives in terms of small size, it also takes away in terms of lens.
Unless you are content with shooting at wide angle most of the time.

You can find an excel file attached, where there are two sheets.
One sheet (sheet2) gives the lens maximum aperture at various standard focal lengths.
The camera that has lower F stops at a particular focal length will offer better image because it will utilize a lower ISO.

Sheet1 gives the actual expected lens F stop advantage + the sensor ISO advantage. As an example a DSLR with stock lens will have noise free ISO levels of 600, the lens has F/3.5 aperture.

A compact with noise free ISO levels of 150, and lens aperture of F/1.8 will perform the same as the DSLR! (2 stop aperture advantage - 2 stop sensor disadvantage)


Anyway the crux:
1. Sony RX-100 (~32K) : simply great. If you can afford this, then get it. Only disadvantage is the short focal length.
2. Nikon P7700 (~23K): not talked about simply because everyone holds a long held (senseless) opinion that "Canon makes best compacts, and Nikon comes no where close". In general it offers the longest focal length but slightly less brighter lens. Closest to G15 in my opinion but at much better price.
3. Canon SX 260 HS (~18K): not in the same league. The lens is slow, and unless its bright and sunny, you will be loitering in the noisy ISO range. (about 2 stops disadvantage)
4. Lumix DMC-FZ200 (~32K): good one, large form factor though!
5. Canon S110 (~29K): almost the same size as Sony RX100, almost same price. But doesn't offer the same IQ, so shouldn't you look at RX100?
6. Canon G15 (~33K): good one if you can afford.

If you want to make a comparison of how great these would be compared to each other - in terms of noise, check out the (confusing) excel file I have attached.

[sups]

Originally Posted by alpha1

Anyway the crux:
1. Sony RX-100 (~32K) : simply great. If you can afford this, then get it. Only disadvantage is the short focal length.
2. Nikon P7700 (~23K): not talked about simply because everyone holds a long held (senseless) opinion that "Canon makes best compacts, and Nikon comes no where close". In general it offers the longest focal length but slightly less brighter lens. Closest to G15 in my opinion but at much better price.
3. Canon SX 260 HS (~18K): not in the same league. The lens is slow, and unless its bright and sunny, you will be loitering in the noisy ISO range. (about 2 stops disadvantage)
4. Lumix DMC-FZ200 (~32K): good one, large form factor though!
5. Canon S110 (~29K): almost the same size as Sony RX100, almost same price. But doesn't offer the same IQ, so shouldn't you look at RX100?
6. Canon G15 (~33K): good one if you can afford.

Very informative and useful response indeed. Thank you. I am also tilting towards RX-100 or P7700. It is difficult to ignore P7700 as it is almost 9K less than RX-100 and offers a better optical zoom with picture quality close to that of G15. However, RX-100 will give me one year more warranty, more compact size (not a deal breaker though as P7700 is quite compact) and an outstanding panorama.

Lets see what I finally decide.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by joslicx

NIkon has announced a $1100 DX-format Coolpix (with a APSC sized 16MP sensor)

http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/04/n...mat-coolpix-a/

Whats the point? You can buy same thing from Sony for half the price (Sony Nex-5) and even have flexibility of changing lenses.


Although the Coolpix P330 looks tasty for $380 (basically almost a Sony RX-100 for about half the price)

http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/04/n...p330-hands-on/

@sups: You could consider the Coolpix P330.

In that case Olympus XZ-10 is even better. It offers the similar wide aperture across all focal length as does the XZ-1/XZ-2.

Quite frankly the 1/1.7" (nikon p330) vs 1/2.3" (olympus xz-10) sensor doesn't make as much of a usable difference as a fast lens does.

But I am sure both these cams are not gonna hit the Indian shore this month.

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by alpha1

In that case Olympus XZ-10 is even better. It offers the similar wide aperture across all focal length as does the XZ-1/XZ-2.

Quite frankly the 1/1.7" (nikon p330) vs 1/2.3" (olympus xz-10) sensor doesn't make as much of a usable difference as a fast lens does.

But I am sure both these cams are not gonna hit the Indian shore this month.

well alpha1 I'd say for a 30k budget probably a MLC like Sony Nex-5 will make the most sense. Much much larger (APSC sensor), still in a small body and flexibility to change lenses as and when finances permit.

But yea the XZ-10 is good option for sub-20k budget.

How about the Galaxy camera? Is it not so good? Has anybody got that here. It surely looks interesting.

[MindSpeeDs]

Originally Posted by sups

I am looking for a very good P&S camera. Requirements are:
a) Very good jpegs
b) Very good low light (cloudy day, inside house with moderate dimming) photography
c) Ofcourse manual controls
d) Fast autofocus
e) Decent video capture

I have shortlisted the following based on dpreview and other feedbacks:
1. Sony RX-100 (~32K)
2. Nikon P7700 (~23K)
3. Canon SX 260 HS (~18K)
4. Lumix DMC-FZ200 (~32K)
5. Canon S110 (~29K)
6. Canon G15 (~33K)

I am quite confused. Out of all these, Nikon P7700 looks be the most VFM to me. But it is least talked about. Please guide.

I am not a professional, but I don't buy camera every year, so want to go for a good one.

RX100 All the way! I feel it is quite a bit better than the others listed out there..even compared to the G15. It is the best mix of mostly good.

[sups]

Originally Posted by joslicx

well alpha1 I'd say for a 30k budget probably a MLC like Sony Nex-5 will make the most sense. Much much larger (APSC sensor), still in a small body and flexibility to change lenses as and when finances permit.

Are you talking about Nex-5R? It seem to have good review.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by joslicx

well alpha1 I'd say for a 30k budget probably a MLC like Sony Nex-5 will make the most sense. Much much larger (APSC sensor), still in a small body and flexibility to change lenses as and when finances permit.

But yea the XZ-10 is good option for sub-20k budget.

How about the Galaxy camera? Is it not so good? Has anybody got that here. It surely looks interesting.

Small size is an illusion. With lens the NEX achieves pretty gargantuan proportions.
In cameras, I have experienced that thickness/depth matters to the convenience factor the most (not the length and width).

http://camerasize.com/compact/#332,3...9.88,3.36,ha,t

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by sups

Are you talking about Nex-5R? It seem to have good review.

Yes I think its 5R. Its hard to source though

Originally Posted by alpha1

Small size is an illusion. With lens the NEX achieves pretty gargantuan proportions.
In cameras, I have experienced that thickness/depth matters to the convenience factor the most (not the length and width).

http://camerasize.com/compact/#332,3...9.88,3.36,ha,t

Well its relative. Still MLCs are less hefty than DSLRs. Also I think for that kind of money IQ and photography process itself becomes more important (its no longer just about pointing and shooting in Auto mode). One can buy pancakes or other small lenses (like the ones from Sigma) and its pocketable (or can be carried in small pouches).

Still for a P&S, Sony RX-100 is very compelling product. Cameralabs pitted it against the Panasonic LX7 which also looks very good.

[sups]

Originally Posted by joslicx

Yes I think its 5R. Its hard to source though

Yes, 5R is difficult to source. Flipkart has NEX-5 which is good, but not in the same league.

I saw a very good summary in amazon camera reviews for people looking for a camera for around $650, just thought of posting it here for the sake of all of us. The the post is:
"This is hard to answer since it depends on what you are shooting and what you are willing to trade off. But at $650 price point the range can go from DSLR to m43 or APS-C mirrorless to point and shoot and will vary by the individual.
For $650 here is my recommendation:
If you only care to get the best image quality + lens flexibility then get Nikon D3100/D3200 or Canon T3i/T4i. I'd go with Nikon.
If you want best image quality + lens flexibility and great video then Sony A57 or any of the alpha range within this price.
If you want best portability, good image quality & lens flexibility then get Olympus EPL5 or Panasonic G3 or GX1. I'd go with EPL5.
If you want good portability, great image quality & lens flexibility then get Sony NEX5R
(NEX is slightly less portable than M43 because their lens are usually larger/heavier)
If you want great image in most compact form without worrying about lens then RX100
If you want good image, compact and retro form then Fuji X10 or X20(not out yet)
If you only care about focus speed then go DSLR
If you care about focus speed and best portability then I'd go with Olympus EPL5
If you care about out of camera jpg quality then i hear fuji is the way to go.

I've had the NEX6 and currently own the NEX5R + 35mm f1.8"

The link is:
http://www.amazon.com/review/RF53TVL...wasThisHelpful

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by joslicx

Yes I think its 5R. Its hard to source though



Well its relative. Still MLCs are less hefty than DSLRs. Also I think for that kind of money IQ and photography process itself becomes more important (its no longer just about pointing and shooting in Auto mode). One can buy pancakes or other small lenses (like the ones from Sigma) and its pocketable (or can be carried in small pouches).

Still for a P&S, Sony RX-100 is very compelling product. Cameralabs pitted it against the Panasonic LX7 which also looks very good.

Agreed. However, there is a very wrong perception about P&S among the photography enthusiasts.

1. the P&S cams that we are talking about come with all the bells and whistles - full PASM modes, HDR, select-able multiple focus points, AE/AF lock etc

2. most these P&S cams come with MORE physical external controls than the DSLR/MILCs till the double price range. (That means you need to spend till 50-60K on the body just to get these controls at your fingertips)

3. the P&S cams that are being discussed have a bright lens that allow them to remain on the right side of ISO400 most of the time. Of course if someone wants to shoot the night sky with all the stars visible while hand holding - please be my guest and buy the latest Phase 1. ISO80 - ISO 400 performance of these cams is almost indistinguishable from the entry level DSLRs/MILCs

4. shallow depth of field is a way over rated concept. Even during the days of film SLRs - most people preferred shooting at F/8 to F/16. If your aim is to get vividly blurred foreground and background photos - the P&S fail

5. lens changing ability. Most DSLRs (I don't want to give an percentage because that would a statistic pulled out from my behind) are used with stock lens all the time. Yes the 18/3.5-55/5.6 lens. In this config the DSLR doesn't have any advantage over the P&S in terms of IQ (not to speak about the smaller reach - focal length). Most of those who get bored with their stock lens get a high focal length lens. BUT. the F stop of this new lens is not any better than the previous ones. So we are back to square one - only with a longer focal length reach (and a larger bag to carry).

6. P&S sensor size is teeny weeny. Seriously, I don't see the point of "my ___ is bigger than your ___". If it performs great, and in a double blind test no one can really distinguish between the teeny sensor vs APS-C sensor - then what is the point in spending more? Also these cams give you RAW file format. Play your heart out and create magic!

7. Focusing speed is low. This is true. And you cannot take "fast action" photographs with P&S.


Of course I do not question the fact that DSLR/MILC will give a better IQ - but to tweak it and get the benefit of the sensor size, you NEED to put in fast lens. That will make the MILC/DSLR budget easily more than 50K.




SUPS: can you tell how much was the cost for 35/1.8 lens?

[sups]

Originally Posted by alpha1

SUPS: can you tell how much was the cost for 35/1.8 lens?

Sorry if I have confused you. The line "I've had the NEX6 and currently own the NEX5R + 35mm f1.8" was a part of the amazon review.

I am still vacillating between RX100 and P7700.