Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Bez
Posts: 1218
Joined: 10 Feb 2015, 10:41am
Contact:

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Bez »

I'd prefer a slightly wider angle and/or fixed lens, but other than that the specs don't really bother me. The ergonomics, configurability, image quality and the AF and metering performance do, none of which you can list o a spec sheet.

I'm not you, though, so that's a bit irrelevant ;)

May I ask what it is? I occasionally think I could use an out-of-date (ie cheap) waterproof camera…
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Psamathe »

pwa wrote:Don't forget to add good low light image quality to your list. Sometimes when choosing between two cameras a higher pixel model can have poorer low light performance.

I've not focused too much on low light performance as I suspect most of my use would be in daylight. Camera I'm now considering (rugged one Pros/Cons listed above) has a 1" sensor but it was 1st released in 2015 (so current 1" sensors are undoubtedly better). Difficult to "rate" as all the reviews are from when the camera was 1st released (2013) so all review comments are relative to alternatives available at that time.

Ian
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by mercalia »

One reason I like my little camera is it uses readily available AA batteries or rechargeables. Ideal for travel. Not sure if you can buy cameras these days that use AA batteries, but that and and viewfinder would be on my list of requirements.. re pixels. Mine has just 5mp which produces very detailed images with smooth textures on my 1920x1020 ( 2mp )wide screen monitor. You only need lots of mp if you intend to edit down/cropping for eg printing
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Psamathe »

Bez wrote:....
May I ask what it is? I occasionally think I could use an out-of-date (ie cheap) waterproof camera…

Nikon 1 AW1 https://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/slrs/nikon_aw1
(dpreview.com which is all I normally use has not done a proper review of the model)

But as I commented above, all the reviews are from when the camera was 1st released back in 2013 so the "good" or "bad" are relative to other product available at that time.

I've only ever used SLR/DSLR from when I was a child and whilst one can go into a camera store and hold it, etc. in practice you'll be using it very differently in the real world. Plus, new things can take a bit of time to get used to and seeking things that you are already familiar with just limits your choice (I have no objections to learning to get used to something different).

And in reality, most I'll probably ever do is post a few images to my blog - but I always have that nagging feeling of "what happens when I capture that amazing once in a lifetime photo ..." which is daft because I won't so should be looking for things meeting what I'll actually achieve.

Ian
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by mercalia »

Psamathe wrote:
Bez wrote:....
May I ask what it is? I occasionally think I could use an out-of-date (ie cheap) waterproof camera…

Nikon 1 AW1 https://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/slrs/nikon_aw1
(dpreview.com which is all I normally use has not done a proper review of the model)

But as I commented above, all the reviews are from when the camera was 1st released back in 2013 so the "good" or "bad" are relative to other product available at that time.

I've only ever used SLR/DSLR from when I was a child and whilst one can go into a camera store and hold it, etc. in practice you'll be using it very differently in the real world. Plus, new things can take a bit of time to get used to and seeking things that you are already familiar with just limits your choice (I have no objections to learning to get used to something different).

And in reality, most I'll probably ever do is post a few images to my blog - but I always have that nagging feeling of "what happens when I capture that amazing once in a lifetime photo ..." which is daft because I won't so should be looking for things meeting what I'll actually achieve.

Ian



well then an expensive camera is a waste of money - my little Kodak is even over kill for your purpose. 5mp is good enough with some latitude for cropping. do your self a favour and save your self a lot of money. One useful aspect to my kodak is its retro nature means I wont get mugged for it, and if it does go wrong I have 2 more in store I bought from Ebay at similar prices. so take my comments and suggestion seriously. If you want I could email you an image taken with it to see how good it really is. or make do with your phone camera

here is an ebay advert for a similar one to mine but with a smaller rear screen

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/KODAK-EASYSHARE-CX7525-5MP-DIGITAL-CAMERA-MANUAL/192559804604?hash=item2cd57570bc:g:~3cAAOSw2spbAqJ-
Bez
Posts: 1218
Joined: 10 Feb 2015, 10:41am
Contact:

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Bez »

Photos for a blog with GPS? That's the job of a phone: you've got all that functionality with adequate image quality plus easy upload, easy editing and all sorts else, seamlessly integrated. Not to mention a screen that's bigger and sharper than any compact camera. It takes a little effort to hunt down the best performing phone cameras out there, but there are plenty which are well up to this task, including some in waterproof phones.

Phone shots that went on a blog: (Lumia 1020, which is a little obsolete but still worth considering as a connected camera; I sold two of these last year and they fetched £100 or less each, so if you can find one it should be fairly cheap.)

Image
Image
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Psamathe »

Bez wrote:Photos for a blog with GPS? That's the job of a phone: you've got all that functionality with adequate image quality plus easy upload, easy editing and all sorts else, seamlessly integrated.....

I do also save and over time have made a lot of other use of photos so looking for better quality that achievable with phone (I've not been particularly impressed with my own phone cameras). Upload is easy from any of the cameras, editing I use Lightroom though need a bigger screen than the phone to do much with that. So for myself, my uses I'd definitely looking for a camera.

Ian
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? Thoughts/Experiences

Post by Cyril Haearn »

fausto copy wrote:I can heartily recommend Lumix compacts and I've recently bought a TZ70 travel zoom compact camera which cost just over £200.
Its got a viewfinder which I use all the time.
There's an option on it to use: either screen on the back, or the viewfinder, or screen normal and viewfinder functions as you move your eye to it.
It's compact enough to carry with you virtually all the time and the extended zoom is amazing.
My expensive Lumix GX80 with separate lenses now sulks in the drawer. :roll:

You could sell the GX80 ("a significant sum in used notes was quietly handed over" :wink: ) or will you keep it a while just in case? Does the TZ70 take black and white too?

I love photography but I wish it was not so complicated to choose a camera
What might be the photographic equivalent of Upgrading to Fixie?

A rollfilm SLR with many features had to be big and heavy back then, but can a top camera be small now?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Flinders »

I've had Lumix and Fuji compacts in the past, and they have been okay for their time, but in the end both failed. These days I have a Cybershot, the HX90. The HX90 has an electronic (wysiwyg type) viewfinder, and it's not a bad one. In strong light, or if trying to frame a shot properly, it's darn near impossible to manage without a VF.
As a camera, the HX90 is seriously brilliant (and I say this as someone whose job involves using a top-end DSLR).

Even if you are just posting to a blog, that doesn't mean a really good compact isn't going to give you any advantages. I got the HX90 for its powerful zoom. No cheap compact or phone camera will give you the quality that has on the zoom, and sometimes if you can't zoom, you can't get the shot at all. It's a very good zoom indeed.
The sensor runs two of my older DSLRs close on colour accuracy if you have the right settings, which is saying a lot as they were top of the test lists on that in their day, and in low light, it actually is better- its high ISO (low light) performance is stellar compared to my other compacts. Indoors it's amazing, I've never needed to use a flash for anything. Only my newest DSLR knocks it clean out of the water on everything, and that's 3 grand's worth of body.

I'd never only have a compact, because I do high-speed, high res. work and compacts can't even begin to do that stuff, but since I got this one I tend not to haul my DSLRs on hiking trips any more, because the compact does pretty much as good a job for landscapes for a teeny fraction of the weight.

two caveats- it doesn't do RAW files, and I'd stick to Sony batteries even it they are ridiculous in price - I got weird behavior from another brand of battery. A battery lasts a very long time on one charge anyway.
There is also version of the HX90 that has the capacity to record GPS on the image EXIF data, but it's more expensive. And it's worth getting the Sony leather case, it's great. Like having an old fashioned camera, and very protective.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Do you take pictures of distant stars? What sort of camera is suitable for that?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by pwa »

Psamathe wrote:
pwa wrote:Don't forget to add good low light image quality to your list. Sometimes when choosing between two cameras a higher pixel model can have poorer low light performance.

I've not focused too much on low light performance as I suspect most of my use would be in daylight. Camera I'm now considering (rugged one Pros/Cons listed above) has a 1" sensor but it was 1st released in 2015 (so current 1" sensors are undoubtedly better). Difficult to "rate" as all the reviews are from when the camera was 1st released (2013) so all review comments are relative to alternatives available at that time.

Ian


I found that whatever camera I picked, the reviews were lacking in enthusiasm. Try it. Pick a £3500 Leica and you will still find a reviewer saying this or that is not the best. I opted for a camera that was rated very good in low light because I like early evening shots to be without flash. And by opting for the right setting I can get detail rich shots in twilight, with a proper feeling of fading light. My choice. But the most important feature of any camera is the person holding it. As you will know.
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Cunobelin »

mercalia wrote:One reason I like my little camera is it uses readily available AA batteries or rechargeables. Ideal for travel. Not sure if you can buy cameras these days that use AA batteries, but that and and viewfinder would be on my list of requirements.. re pixels. Mine has just 5mp which produces very detailed images with smooth textures on my 1920x1020 ( 2mp )wide screen monitor. You only need lots of mp if you intend to edit down/cropping for eg printing


One of my DSLRs is a Pentax K50

It can run off a standard camera battery, or 4 x AA batteries

Image
francovendee
Posts: 3148
Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? Thoughts/Experiences

Post by francovendee »

fausto copy wrote:I can heartily recommend Lumix compacts and I've recently bought a TZ70 travel zoom compact camera which cost just over £200.
Its got a viewfinder which I use all the time.
There's an option on it to use: either screen on the back, or the viewfinder, or screen normal and viewfinder functions as you move your eye to it.
It's compact enough to carry with you virtually all the time and the extended zoom is amazing.
My expensive Lumix GX80 with separate lenses now sulks in the drawer. :roll:

I'd second your recommendation for Lumix compacts. I bought the TZ70 partly because of the viewfinder.
I've since found it's a very good camera which has lots of features, more than i can see me using to be honest.
I got mine fore a one off price of £159.
The only thing I can't get to work is the wifi. I'm not bothered but there seems to be a problem with the software.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Flinders »

Cyril Haearn wrote:Do you take pictures of distant stars? What sort of camera is suitable for that?

If that's for me, no, apart from the landscape stuff, horseracing and other horse sports, and falconry is what I do. Often I need a long lens, and am working in poor light and need very high shutter speeds to stop movement- faster than 1/2500 of a sec for preference, at a high number of frames per second. I often have to enlarge them to A2 or more as well, so I need large file sizes. And RAW files when the light is difficult, as you can do more to rescue parts of images that are underexposed. That means a DSLR, with all the weight and bulk that involves.

Modern compacts are amazing, though very complicated, and if you stick them on auto they do a pretty good job most of the time. I can remember the days of cassette films and cameras with two settings- 'sunny' and 'cloudy'. And it never got sunny enough here for sunny. My newest DSLR came with a manual that is genuinely an inch thick (I just measured it), and I needed to buy a 600-page book to be able to understand it.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Camera - Without Viewfinder? And Other Related Questions

Post by Cyril Haearn »

My camera has a thick manual in a dozen languages, a manual in one language would be a slim volume indeed
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Post Reply