[amitoj]

Oh I just thought of this. The dSLR vs Phone camera discussion is similar to manual vs automatic transmissions, isn't it? One is for those who enjoy the process of it and the other is for those who are more focused on the end results. I am simplifying but the parallels are uncanny.

[JMaruru]

Originally Posted by tbppjpr

This camera has got just 1 inch sensor which has started appearing in some of the smartphones.

Which smartphones have one inch sensor, right now?

Originally Posted by amitoj

Oh I just thought of this. The dSLR vs Phone camera discussion is similar to manual vs automatic transmissions, isn't it?

Where it differs is form factor. DSLR vs Mobile cameras is more so about ease of carrying and the picture quality for a form factor.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by tbppjpr

Get ILCE camera so that you can keep adding more lenses as per your needs.

And one will never be able to add a 200mm lens to a smart phone. It's surely conceivable that AI might be able to piece together what it thinks the scene would be photographed with a 200mm lens: I'm sure this will come to phones, and will amaze us. But it won't be an actual "photograph."

Originally Posted by amitoj

Oh I just thought of this. The dSLR vs Phone ... One is for those who enjoy the process of it and the other is for those who are more focused on the end results...

True, but, the other day, I wanted to capture a quick smile. I picked up my 2-lakh full-frame camera and pressed the button. It got it. In sharp focus. And I thought, wow, this is actually the most point and shoot camera I have ever had!

Originally Posted by JMaruru

Where it differs is form factor. DSLR vs Mobile cameras is more so about ease of carrying and the picture quality for a form factor.

Ease of carrying is always going to won by the phone, added to which, we carry it anyway.

Almost everything else about the ergonomics of phone photography, to me, is horrible. It would be slightly improved if they had left the lens in the middle of the rectangle, but I suppose that the requirement for bigger battery capacity made that impossible.

[Dr.AD]

Originally Posted by amitoj

Oh I just thought of this. The dSLR vs Phone camera discussion is similar to manual vs automatic transmissions, isn't it? One is for those who enjoy the process of it and the other is for those who are more focused on the end results. I am simplifying but the parallels are uncanny.

I would have to disagree with this. The differences between a phone camera and a proper DSLR or a Mirrorless camera are far greater and fundamental than just the same car with manual or automatic transmission. In case of the car analogy, both types of transmission will achieve the same end result, but just a different method of reaching there. That is not true with the cameras.

I would say a more accurate analogy would be that of a quick and convenient scooter for short city runs (a phone camera) vs a big, fat, cumbersome SUV (a proper camera) that can take you to places a scooter will never take you to. And just like in one garage one could have both vehicles and use them for different purposes, one typically uses a phone camera and a DSLR for different purposes.

For the last 3 years, I have traveled a lot with both a phone camera and a proper camera (APSC DSLR and now a Full-Frame Mirrorless) and I have taken many photographs with both types in a given location. And I still find both of them useful in different ways.

Phone cameras are great for a quick photo of a wide angle scene (or a short telephoto, upto about 75mm focal length equivalent, but with much worse image quality) and with artificially enhanced colors and overprocessed details. On the other hand, a proper camera is great for composing a telephoto shot, choosing your preferred Depth of Focus, and shooting in RAW and doing the full post processing per your own taste.

The end results are dramatically different. Way more different than just the transmission type in a given car. You reach very different places in the end. The whole journey and the destinations are different.

The biggest difference is in the compositions, which is the heart and soul of photography. A DLSR with properly chosen lenses allows great freedom over choosing compositions which a phone camera (even with the telephoto lenses on phone camera) does not allow. In fact, if you see many phone camera photos from many people over time, you will quickly start seeing the same generic compositions (all determined by the typical wide angle lenses or a very limited telephoto lenses on those cameras), and the artistic elements in the composition quickly take a backseat and you have tons of generic images which all look the same. The compositions can get extremely predictable with a phone camera.

For example, in a wildlife safari, I love to use phone camera for quick landscapes or wide-angle shots of the forest. And I will get those predictable jungle photos. Even in the jeep safari which is jumping all over the track, pulling out a phone from your pocket and taking a quick photo is super convenient, and I love that.

But when you see a composition of a lovely path and the trees in the distance, and you want to focus on a few front trees and the path and want to defocus the rest, phone camera is totally useless. That is where you pull out your proper camera and choose the lens and the settings and capture your perfect shot. And then go home and post process it to your taste. Tow very different types of photography experiences.

Besides compositions, the second biggest difference is colors and the details. Even the best of the phone cameras today still do not accurately capture finer shades of color as a proper modern camera would do. And the details, if you look closely enough, are messed up a bit in the processing of images even in the best of the phone cameras. Of course, these are very subtle things and these do not matter in most cases, but when these do matter, the phone camera will fail you. So when you want to capture some fine shades of colors and some fine details accurately, you have to use a proper camera.

An example of the above point is how sky is captured by phone cameras in landscape photography. You can easily see some artifacts of over-processing in sky even by the latest iPhones or the state of the art Android phones. I am very particular about how sky should look in my photos, and I often get frustrated with the way a phone camera captures sky. A proper camera with RAW image is a way better option to capture the colors and the details of the sky accurately.

Next, one could argue that one can shoot in RAW even in phone cameras, and do the processing themselves. I have tried that too. But there, I found that RAW images in phone camera are often so poor and require so much post processing to achieve decent results, that it is best left to the AI magic or the algorithmic magic in the phone to do that. Phone software do amazing amount of work in post processing very ordinary RAW images into a nice final picture, but that still is not close enough to what a good human photographer can do with a nice camera and manual post processing.

I love both types of cameras and in most of my trips, I use both cameras a lot. And based on my experiences over three years, I would say they are very very different. More like a scooter and a Jeep, as I said before.

[shankar.balan]

Originally Posted by Dr.AD

I would have to disagree with this. The differences between a phone camera and a proper DSLR or a Mirrorless camera are far greater and fundamental
I love both types of cameras and in most of my trips, I use both cameras a lot. And based on my experiences over three years, I would say they are very very different. More like a scooter and a Jeep, as I said before.

As a photographer of no mean skill, what is your opinion of the Sony RX100 Mark 7 Compact point and shoot camera- the ‘Traveller’s Companion’?

[Dr.AD]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

As a photographer of no mean skill, what is your opinion of the Sony RX100 Mark 7 Compact point and shoot camera- the ‘Traveller’s Companion’?

It is definitely a great travel camera. I have seen many photos from some very good travel photographers taken using the Sony RX100 series of cameras, and many of those photos are stunning. So no doubt this camera can produce great images.

The main advantages are the light and compact body, the 1" sensor which is much better than any smartphone sensor today, very good and fast AutoFocus, and above all the 24mm to 200mm equivalent focal length. This last feature is a big one in my opinion. This will allow you to focus on subjects from away and create compositions which smartphone can not do. This is a not a very long telephoto range. So do not expect to take bird photos or wildlife photos at 200mm length. But keeping that aside, even for general travel photos, you will get plenty of great compositions at near the 200mm focal length.

In fact, I travel with the same focal range length, although on a full-frame camera. I travel with Nikon Z 24-200mm lens and in my recent trips that proved to be invaluable as I needed to take only that single lens and it allowed me to create all kinds of compositions that I liked. My short review of that lens is here: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadge...vr-review.html (Nikon Z5 with Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR | Review) . You can see the kind of compositions that were possible because I had a 200mm focal length available to me.

If you can not get the right composition that you as an artist are happy with, then the other features of the camera and the image quality are irrelevant!

So in summary, yes it is a great camera as a "travel companion", with a good sensor and a very versatile focal length range for travel photography compositions.

However, there are a few cons that you have to be aware of before jumping into this. The two main shortcomings are: 1. The lens is not interchangeable, so you are always stuck with the 24-200mm length. If you even want a longer or a wider length, you have to take a different camera. 2. The 1" sensor, which is surely better than the typical smartphone sensors, is still much smaller than the next category which is APS-C sensor, leave alone the even bigger full-frame sensors. With such a small sensor, you have very limited control on depth of focus (much harder to get those lovely background defocus shots or the creamy bokeh shots) and also relatively poor low light performance. Do not expect this camera to take great photos in low light.

Further, the Sony APS-C cameras (which have even better autocross in addition to the bigger APS-C sensor) with a small kit lens are in the same price range as this RX 100 VII camera. So that would be something you have to consider carefully. However, a 24-200mm lens on those APS-C camera will be quite expensive, big and heavy. If you consider a 24-200mm lens on the APS-C cameras, that is where this RX 100 VII stands out as much cheaper, lighter and compact in comparison.

So in summary, if you are going to fully exploit the full focal length range on the RX 100 VII and live with the shortcomings I mentioned, then it is a great camera. In fact I would consider this as one of the best travel cameras for general travel photography.

On the other hand, if most of your photos are going to be say in 16-50mm focal length range, then the Sony APS-C cameras with the 16-50mm lens (which is quite compact too) will anyday be a much better choice!

Hope this helps.

[Sedate driver]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

As a photographer of no mean skill, what is your opinion of the Sony RX100 Mark 7 Compact point and shoot camera- the ‘Traveller’s Companion’?

The RX100 is an excellent camera. I have the 1st gen (2012) and it still works like a charm. However if you are serious about photography, the Sony A6100 is still a great choice. I have both the full frame A7R2 and the APSC A6100, the A6100 focussing is little faster, easy to carry and light weight. It is cheaper than the RX100 mark 7, but its APSC sensor is more capable. The size is very compact as that of the RX100 even with the kit lens. And in future, you can add lenses as you wish.

[Dr.AD]

Originally Posted by Sedate driver

The RX100 is an excellent camera. I have the 1st gen (2012) and it still works like a charm. However if you are serious about photography, the Sony A6100 is still a great choice. I have both the full frame A7R2 and the APSC A6100, the A6100 focussing is little faster, easy to carry and light weight. It is cheaper than the RX100 mark 7, but its APSC sensor is more capable. The size is very compact as that of the RX100 even with the kit lens. And in future, you can add lenses as you wish.

Great points. I agree completely. Personally, I would pick A6100 or one of the newer Sony APS-C cameras (A6400 or A6600) over RX100.

However, the main point in favor of RX100 is the compact and light built-in lens that is 24-200mm. That size lens is not compact with APS-C cameras. Therefore, I said that if one wants to use those longer focal lengths a lot in a very compact and portable body, then RX100 is great!

But if one wants to use shorter focal lengths (or use longer focal lengths but with bulkier and heavier lenses), then Sony APS-C cameras beat RX100 any day!

[Sedate driver]

Originally Posted by Dr.AD

Great points. I agree completely. Personally, I would pick A6100 or one of the newer Sony APS-C cameras (A6400 or A6600) over RX100.

However, the main point in favor of RX100 is the compact and light built-in lens that is 24-200mm.

Yes, you are right. The RX100 with 24-200mm is unbeatable in terms of compact size vs image quality and versatility. If one needs a pocket sized all in one camera, then this is the one to choose. On the other hand if longer focal lengths are needed, the APSC camera is the one to go. But for wildlife or bird photography, the 24-200mm itself is a very good range.

[Miyata]

Originally Posted by amitoj

I am simplifying but the parallels are uncanny.

On the new years eve, I might have a heart attack reading that...Any half decent photographer would take a (light hearted) umbrage to that!

I am glad Dr. AD took the time and effort to delve deep. Might I also add to those metaphorical illustrations and the credo we so vehemently adhere to - the DSLR / Mirrorless [big, fat, cumbersome SUV] is also that all terrain vehicle to take to the moon, the mars, and wherever!

[amitoj]

Originally Posted by Miyata

On the new years eve, I might have a heart attack reading that...Any half decent photographer would take a (light hearted) umbrage to that!

Haha yeah I seem to have touched a raw nerve there. Apologies to all the photographers out there holding their own!

I am also glad that DrAD took the time to get into a detailed explanation and give a more appropriate analogy of an e-scooter vs an SUV.

[shankar.balan]

Originally Posted by Sedate driver

Yes, you are right. The RX100 with 24-200mm is unbeatable in terms of compact size vs image quality and versatility. If one needs a pocket sized all in one camera, then this is the one to choose..

Originally Posted by Dr.AD

However, the main point in favor of RX100 is the compact and light built-in lens that is 24-200mm. That size lens is not compact with APS-C cameras. Therefore, I said that if one wants to use those longer focal lengths a lot in a very compact and portable body, then RX100 is great!
!

I took all your inputs. I also watched a lot of videos on youtube. I then analysed my specific need and this has led me back to the RX100 Vii.

I wanted a small compact powerful travel camera with a very high quality lens and sensor and processor and a good zoom and it seems that only the RX100 Vii ticks all these boxes.

I checked online about prices in Dubai too because I spent this whole week there and I actually went to a couple of shops there to check on the options. There was a Canon SX740 point and shoot with 40X Optical
Zoom and this was at a nice price; some 2000 odd AED.

Although tempted, I did not buy it.

From all my research it was very evident that the RX100 Vii was easily the most suitable for my requirements. So I purchased it from an online shop called Gears of the Future based in Bangalore. They are importers and stockists of many things in the optical world and storage technology world.

Their prices are fair (even compared to the prices in Dubai) and their service is prompt and they have a personal touch which I appreciate. The camera was delivered immediately (24 hours) and arrived at home while I was away.

I came back this evening and found it. So now I am the proud owner of the RX100Vii. And I am keen to try it out on my trip to the hills tomorrow.

[thomahawk]

Hey BHP-ians,

Why isn't there a photography guide for taking car pictures? Well there is one for writing but not sure if I saw one for photographs.

Would be lovely if we had a guide from experienced members which covered things like composition, gear, lighting. Perhaps the official review photographers can put together something?

Perhaps I'm asking this in the wrong thread, sorry for that.

[tbppjpr]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

So now I am the proud owner of the RX100Vii. And I am keen to try it out on my trip to the hills tomorrow.

Looks liked you missed reading this reply of mine:

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadge...ml#post5687630 (The Digital Camera Thread: Questions, discussions, etc.)

Anyways congratulations on the new purchase and happy shooting ahead.

[shankar.balan]

Originally Posted by tbppjpr

Looks liked you missed reading this reply of mine:

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadge...ml#post5687630 (The Digital Camera Thread: Questions, discussions, etc.)

Anyways congratulations on the new purchase and happy shooting ahead.

Thanks. Actually I had read your post. I do have an excellent bridge camera with which Ive got some top quality photos.
However, I was looking for absolute convenience and portability. And one top class versatile Zeiss lens which obviates the need to carry multiple things.
So of all the small portable travel cameras out there this was adjudged to be the best in multiple reviews.
I don't generally do videos. I usually only take still photos. I try to compose and take these and my iPhone works perfectly. But I wanted a small camera as well.