Camera Advice

"Party-vi" (party-vi) 10/25/2016 at 10:05 • Filed to: photography, shitposting, advice

0

49

Looking for suggestions on a sub-$300 point-and-shoot camera. I’m looking for the following features:

Recording 1080/60p

Optical zoom at or over 10x

ISO speed appropriate for nighttime shots

I’m currently looking at the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! since that seems to tick all the boxes for me. Any other options I should think about? My only other camera experience has been with an ancient Canon AL-1. Also, anyone want to share this to !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ?

ETA: Around $300 budget. If there’s a camera over $300 that I should look at please by all means make the suggestion. I don’t want to get a $280 camera and find out there was something superior for $330 or so.

The WX350, apparently.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 10:12

1

Personally I don’t have any love for Sony and their products. Compatibility and weird format issues. That said, if you stick with Sony, which exactly why they do weird stuff (to make it hard to switch), you should be happy. I’d go Olympus, Fuji or Canon personally. I found Nikons to be pretty underwhelming, like they were just there to say “look, we have a P&S too” while concentrating on DSLR’s.

Or, if you don’t mind stretching your budget or going used/open box, Lumix. Not a huge fan of the controls, but a damn good camera.

And I just shared for you.

Party-vi > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/25/2016 at 10:14

1

yas smallbear thanks for the share.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 10:15

0

Well, I tried... actually someone beat me by the looks of it.

Party-vi > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/25/2016 at 10:19

1

Thomas Donohue done did it.

Thomas Donohue > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 10:20

1

Shared. Nice small size and awesome low-light capabilities, solid choice. The only drawbacks on the Sony are the lack of GPS, and the rear screen resolution isn’t so hot.

KeedyT > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 10:23

1

They still sell PnS cameras? :-)

My Galaxy S6's camera is so good (I tinker with it in “pro” mode when it matters) that it’s making my old Canon DSLR look sub-par. There are situations like portrait, high-zoom or action shots where the “real” camera shines.... but the old PnS has been relegated to a drawer for years.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 10:28

0

May I ask why you are specifically after a point and shoot?

Party-vi > KeedyT 10/25/2016 at 10:28

0

This would be for general photo taking and some recording - nothing professional. I’ve always wanted a camera, and I can’t see spending the money on anything but a point-and-shoot since I’ll never remember my photography classes.

Xyl0c41n3 > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 10:45

1

No need to share next time. I just sent you an authorship invitation. I’ll give your post another look once I get to my office.

Welcome to Photography! :)

Party-vi > Xyl0c41n3 10/25/2016 at 10:51

1

thankee

Party-vi > macanamera 10/25/2016 at 10:53

0

Quick and easy to use, and I would imagine more able to handle abuse in a bag vs a DSLR. That and less bulk. This is going to serve an all-rounder purpose, family photos/videos, vacation shots, etc. Nothing professional.

KeedyT > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 11:16

1

I was partly being funny, I used to wage debates that a phone’s camera would never replace my actual camera with a close friend (to be fair we were there when phones were in a bag). Now the on-board cameras on our phones are so capable there’s little need for another for the casual photo-bug.

I started like you, though I never took a class, then as my eye and the pictures got better I wanted to do more with it, graduated through a few PnS models till I got my first of a few DSLRs which generally produce next level pictures. I’ve not even touched actual high-end photography equip, but IMHO true artful photography matters less about the equipment and more about how one uses what they have and frame composition.

FWIW and to answer your real question: I prefer the images produced by Canon devices in general, Nikon would be a close second. Sony’s are feature-rich but I’ve never loved the images. There’s subtle tiny differences in all cameras much like sound differences from speaker manufacturers. Camera brands are almost a religion and everyone will preach their own :-) good luck!

Party-vi > KeedyT 10/25/2016 at 11:17

0

Thank you for the insight and advice. It seems like Canon is a consistent suggestion.

Xyl0c41n3 > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 11:20

0

Welcome to the ka-tet.

Textured Soy Protein > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 11:30

0

Good night shots and a big zoom are generally two things that tend to be at odds in cheap p&s cameras. Long zoom means a small 1/2.3" sensor and small maximum lens aperture. Shorter zooms you can get bigger sensors and apertures.

With the long zoom, night shots will be “ok” at best but to get a cheap-ish p&s with good night shots you need to go for less zoom range.

So is the zoom range or nighttime shooting more important?

sonicgabe > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 11:41

0

I’ve been a big fan of the Sony point-and-shoot cameras. I’ve owned several and they always punch above their weight. The WX350 looks to be the current version of the last one I bought (that was back in 2009). Without even trying it out, I would say this is good buy. Along with just pointing and shooting, Sony has always given the user the easy ability to fiddle with a lot of the settings like ISO and shutter speed. This will allow low light photographs to be exposed to your liking, not the camera’s. This also allows you to make shots in very bright light work as well. Sony makes solid cameras. If the need for another point and shoot arises, I’d buy one without hesitation.

These are two shots that I took with mine, possibly the last time I used it. These were in very bright sunlight that was directly behind the band. I can’t post the originals right now, these are saved from facebook, so the resolution might not be as crisp as it should be.

Trevor Slattery, ACTOR > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 11:48

1

See if you can find a Fujifilm X series in your price range. They are good quality.

adamftw > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/25/2016 at 13:26

1

Sony is literally leading the field on camera tech. That being said, I shoot Oly M4/3.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > adamftw 10/25/2016 at 13:33

0

Have seen Sony images, can confirm is good.

Can also confirm I still don’t want one. If I had the money to go out and blow on a good P&S right now, and also wanted a new P&S right now, I’d have an open-box Fuji X-A series. Best colour processing out there is by Fuji. Period. Even my old J12 was incredible. (The XP-10 was kind of garbage, but it was an early, cheap waterproof digital... what did I expect. That said even though it was a turd in so many ways it was average at worst when it came to colour processing)

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > adamftw 10/25/2016 at 13:40

0

Sorry, wrong camera. I meant X(?)T series.

adamftw > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/25/2016 at 13:45

2

I’d 100% buy a Sony RX100 V for a P&S with an unlimited budget. I used the IV for a week in Moab and it is CRAZY what that little camera can do. Also, the Fuji XT is not a point and shoot. Its an APS-C interchangeable lens camera. I really like my Olympus but I would have went to the Fuji XT-2 is my budget allowed... I love their image processing.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > adamftw 10/25/2016 at 13:49

1

XA_’s are interchangable X-type mount, X_T’s are fixed lens. I’m talking about the X100T/X70T, not the X-T2's.

adamftw > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/25/2016 at 13:51

1

Ahhhhh ok. Yea those are pretty sweet too.

Party-vi > Trevor Slattery, ACTOR 10/25/2016 at 16:54

0

Seems like an XQ2 would be the best (read: only) one in my price range. I appreaciate the info.

Party-vi > Textured Soy Protein 10/25/2016 at 16:55

0

Probably night time shots, but I’m surprised that I wouldn’t even get a 10x zoom out of one.

Party-vi > sonicgabe 10/25/2016 at 16:56

0

Good deal - thanks for the sample shots and information.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 17:40

0

Buy this-

https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-LUMIX-DMC-ZS50K-Travel-Viewfinder/dp/B00RBG6GBS%3Fpsc%3D1%26SubscriptionId%3DAKIAICE7LOAJMK3SSLPA%26tag%3Dpcm_rounduptable-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3DB00RBG687A?th=1

Textured Soy Protein > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 17:59

0

Right now most of the good low light p&s cameras are higher end ones with 1" sensors and $500+ price tags.

There used to be more stuff with 1/1.7" sensors and bright, but not super long, lenses but not so much anymore. The 1/1.7" sensors aren’t really out there at all lately. You could try to find a Canon S120 or Nikon P340. They have 1/1.7" sensors, decently bright lenses, and at least 24-120 mm (5x) zoom range.

As for this Sony WX350, it has very limited manual controls, not that you’d necessarily use them but they can come in handy especially in low light, and no touch screen, which is handy for tapping where you want to focus.

I did some looking for stuff with long zooms and manual controls and/or touch screens, in the step-up price bracket you have some options that at least give you manual controls but no touch screen. There are some tilt screens though, and they also have longer zoom range.

Sony WX500 - $348 - 30x zoom, manual controls, tilt screen

Sony HX80 -$369 - basically the WX500 with a pop-up viewfinder

Canon SX720 - $379 - 40x zoom, manual controls

Nikon A900 - $398 - 35x zoom, manual controls, tilt screen, 4k video

Personally I find the tilt screen on my camera (an Olympus E-PL5 mirrorless) pretty handy so that’s something to keep in mind.

I figure the Sony WX500 gets you the manual controls & tilt screen so it’s a pretty good value over the WX350. I’m not a viewfinder fan but if you are the HX80 is only a little more. The SX720 has the crazy zoom range but I don’t know if I’d give up the tilt screen for it, and the A900 is getting up there in price and isn’t quite out yet.

Party-vi > Textured Soy Protein 10/25/2016 at 18:38

0

I think I’ve got this narrowed down to either the Sony WX500 or the Lumix ZS50. I appreciate all the information you gathered for me.

The Compromiser > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 20:03

1

Wife sells cameras and shoots stuff. Says Lumix is excellent compared to anything in that range to meet what your requirements are. She qualifies it by saying they don’t have Sony so she isn’t up on their products.

Textured Soy Protein > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 21:17

0

Between those two it’s basically do you want the tilt screen on the WX500 or the viewfinder on the ZS50. Or get both with the Sony HX80.

sonicgabe > Party-vi 10/25/2016 at 22:16

0

No problem. I’m going to find the originals for you to see.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/26/2016 at 08:42

0

Did you check that link out? I strongly suggest that camera. Checks all of your boxes (and then some) for 330. If you have any questions, just ask.

Party-vi > macanamera 10/26/2016 at 09:13

0

I did. My only question is about shooting in RAW. Does the Lumix come with something like Silkypix for my computer or should I plan on buying that separately? I’m guessing the ZS50 can edit images on the camera to an extent, but I’m not sure.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/26/2016 at 13:00

0

My advice to you would be don’t shoot RAW unless you have to. JPEG is so much more convenient (and useful). That being said, do you use PC or Mac?

Party-vi > macanamera 10/26/2016 at 14:37

0

I’ve got a PC. My wife has a Mac with Final Cut Pro.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/26/2016 at 14:45

0

So are you concerned about being able to edit RAW images? The stock Photos app on macs can do plenty with raw- I’m sure whatever windows uses is the same.

Party-vi > macanamera 10/26/2016 at 14:50

0

I’m concerned with being an idiot that just learned what RAW is a day ago, and have no idea if I need it or not, but I do know that I absolutely must be shooting in it (from what the internet tells me).

Textured Soy Protein > Party-vi 10/26/2016 at 16:00

1

So I did a little more reading. I think I’d lean more towards the ZS50. According to tests, its 12 megapixel sensor has lower noise at higher ISOs than the 18 megapixel Sonys (and also the 18 megapixel Panasonic ZS60). It also has faster autofocus and a control ring around the lens for easier adjusting of manual controls.

Personally though, I tend to use a little pocketable camera like this indoors a lot, so I’d really rather have a brighter lens and bigger sensor. In this price range, you’d have to do a slight bit of work to track down a Canon S120, Nikon P340, or Fuji XQ2. The Fuji has less reach on the long end so maybe focus on the first two. But all 3 are a good bit more useful in low light.

Party-vi > Textured Soy Protein 10/26/2016 at 16:08

0

I had previously looked at the XQ2 but the zoom put me off of it. You’re now the third person in this post to tell me the ZS50 is something worth considering, and I think I’ve got my decision made. I’ll check out the Nikon and Canon as well.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/26/2016 at 21:43

1

Trust me, forget the internet. Buy that LUMIX, shoot jpegs, enjoy your life. I have a multiple thousand dollar DSLR setup and usually shoot jpeg.

mcseanerson > Party-vi 10/27/2016 at 10:28

0

Are you looking more to shoot videos or shoot stills? I’m curious because you are looking for good low light performance and good video performance and you don’t typically get both together cheap.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/27/2016 at 10:29

1

Here’s the thing with RAW and JPEG. JPEG is a processed image, it is smaller than a RAW file, and your camera does a whole bunch of stuff to it. Contrast correction, sharpening, chromatic aberration removal, etc. Essentially, it just gets the shot ready to go. You can still do some stuff in post production if you want to tweak it a bit.

A RAW shot will look worse than a JPEG before you work with it in post production. The RAW shot isn’t processed, so you have maximum post production flexibility. Obviously, RAW retains more information and is more useful to professionals who absolutely work with every shot on their computer before printing or whatever.

For you, JPEG is best. Heck, it’s best for me too. My camera (and that LUMIX I told you to buy) do a great job of processing into JPEG. Do I shoot RAW sometimes? Yeah, for sure, when I know I want to send something to print at massive resolutions...but that’s not very often. Sometimes I just want my shots to look good without spending 20 mins in Photoshop/Lightroom afterwards, and that’s where JPEG shines.

In either case, that LUMIX will shoot RAW or JPEG, which gives you the flexibility to learn and shoot however you want in the future. Seriously though, the kind of buyer looking for a point and shoot isn’t the kind of buyer that wants to shoot RAW...I’d say don’t even worry about it. My advice is to get that LUMIX...it’s a fantastic camera. Don’t be turned off by the lower pixel count- that’s on purpose. A lower pixel density on a given sensor size will give you better performance in low light, which is important to you. Plus, resolution is way overhyped these days. Consider this- a 1080p TV screen still is only 2 megapixels, and a 4k TV is 8 megapixels. 12 megapixels like that LUMIX shoots is wayyyy more than you need, and it will do better in low light than the 20 megapixel point and shoots that are common today.

Party-vi > macanamera 10/27/2016 at 11:12

0

You have assuaged my fears. I will more than likely get the Lumix.

Party-vi > mcseanerson 10/27/2016 at 11:13

0

I’m basically looking for an all-rounder, but I would say low light performance is more important to me since all of my previous low light photos have looked like ass.

macanamera > Party-vi 10/27/2016 at 11:34

0

What can I say, I’m a master asseuse.

mcseanerson > Party-vi 10/27/2016 at 12:02

1

If low light is really important and especially low light with video then I would definitely go bigger than a 1/2.3" sensor as that’s as small as you can get just about in a point and shoot. My wife has a Fuji X10 she loves with a 2/3" sensor and it’s substantially bigger than a 1/2.3" sensor and it’s still kind of a dog in low light. I would say minimum 1" sensor for low light unless you are just shooting stills in low light and if you’re not shooting moving subjects you could just use a slower shutter speed with either Image Stabilization or a tripod.

Personally I don’t even like MFT for low light usage so the smallest sensor I would want would be APS-C but something like that in a point and shoot would be expensive and pretty hard to find with any kind of zoom. I saw you had mentioned not wanting a dslr because of perceived durability compared to a point and shoot. I can tell you it’s pretty much the other way around that a dslr will take a lot of abuse and a point and shoot won’t hold up to much.

Based on everything you’ve said though I’d probably look at the Fuji X10/X20/X30 and Sony RX100 series. They won’t get you the zoom range you’re looking for but they’ll give you a lot better low light performance and also make it possible to attempt shallow depth of field which is pretty much impossible with most point and shoots.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-II-20-2-MP-Digital-Camera-Black-/272415856811?hash=item3f6d4018ab:g:BGAAAOSwV0RXulkP

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Fujifilm-X-Series-X20-12-0-MP-Digital-Camera-Black-7-1-28-4-mm-/162054423005?hash=item25bb3241dd:g:d2kAAOSw9~RXI~In

Here’s some ebay listings for both.

Party-vi > mcseanerson 10/27/2016 at 12:13

0

If I had deeper pockets I would be getting an RX100 IV. The only thing throwing me off about the X20 is the 4x zoom.

MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s > Party-vi 11/03/2016 at 14:37

0

I bought a Sony RX100/B specifically because I wanted a good point and shoot camera with a decently sized sensor (good for low light). I picked ours up refurbished for a bit over $300 last year, you could go the same route or try and find a good sale price.