Lightweight camera?

[fluffywuffy]

Hi, I'm spending a few days in New York in April. I have a Canon 5d mark11 and several L series lens which I always find bulky carrying around a city. Can anyone recommend a camera which will be lighter and less bulky and that will still pass QC ? Thanks in advance

[Jill Morgan]

I think one of the mirrorless cameras is what you are looking for. Sony and Fuji both have them. Search for mirrorless on this forum and you will find a number of threads discussing them. Not cheap though.

 

Jill

[Ed Rooney]

Fluffy, if you plan to keep working with your DSLR Canon but want to add a very small, pocketable camera as an additional tool, I suggest you consider one of the Sony RX100 models. I have the RX100/3 (the 3 and 4 have a popup viewfinder). Unless I screw up in some way, I never have any problems with Alamy QC using the RX100. 

 

Good luck.

[Broad Norfolk]

I drive an original Canon 5D and, like yourself, also have L series lenses. My personal choice for a smaller lighter camera was to acquire a Canon EOS 300M. There is no problem with QC with this camera and you can also use your heavy lenses if need be.

 

Jim.

 

PS: Forgot to mention you'll need an EF adaptor for the big lenses. I use an EF-M 18-55mm with my 300M for City work and most other stuff and in the couple of years I've used it, I've had no reason to change it.

[Simon Evans]

Mirrorless is definitely the way to go for a lightweight and compact body. I changed all of my gear to Micro Four thirds and would recommend any of the current Micro Four Thirds Olympus or Panasonic bodies.

[Martin P Wilson]

I have been grappling with it for a while and have just gone "All in" on Fuji X. My latest post on that decision is on my website, along with the journey to that point.

[John Mitchell]

I've been using Sony NEX cameras since 2012 and am happy with them. QC has been happy as well. Had a couple of failures at the beginning, but they were my fault.

 

The current Sony a6000 (NEX replacement) sounds like a good bet. You get a lot for your money with these cameras.

[Betty LaRue]

+1 for Fuji mirrorless and Sony RX100s all 3 versions. Although the 11 and 111 have the pop up viewfinder which I love in my 3. But I also like the bit of extra reach in the 1. I have the 1 and 3.

I have images from both on Alamy.

I have a seldom used Nikon D800 since going Fuji X-T1. When on vacation a couple of months ago, while traveling about the island, I used the RX the most, for just what you are asking. It fit in a tiny 4"x6" purse along with comb, lipstick, money, etc. will fit in a shirt or pants pocket.

The Fuji is larger, but ever so much smaller than your Canon rig. A wide fast prime and a zoom, either the 18/55, 18/135 or the wow factor 50-140. The latter is way heavier of the 3, but also way less weight of the Nikon/canons. If you have experience with any 70-80/200 for FF, the 50/140 gives about the same coverage. Constant aperture, VR, and fast. Great bokeh and separation. Do I love this lens? Yeah.

The 18-55 is small and light. The 18-135 I think is lightweight, too, comparing with any similar Nikon lenses. The longer reach comes in handy.

Sorry...edited to change Sony 2 to a 3, which the 1 and 3 is what I own.

[Martin P Wilson]

+1 for Fuji mirrorless and Sony RX100s all 3 versions. Although the 11 and 111 have the pop up viewfinder which I love in my 3. But I also like the bit of extra reach in the 1. I have the 1 and 2.

I have images from both on Alamy.

I have a seldom used Nikon D800 since going Fuji X-T1. When on vacation a couple of months ago, while traveling about the island, I used the RX the most, for just what you are asking. It fit in a tiny 4"x6" purse along with comb, lipstick, money, etc. will fit in a shirt or pants pocket.

The Fuji is larger, but ever so much smaller than your Canon rig. A wide fast prime and a zoom, either the 18/55, 18/135 or the wow factor 50-140. The latter is way heavier of the 3, but also way less weight of the Nikon/canons. If you have experience with any 70-80/200 for FF, the 50/140 gives about the same coverage. Constant aperture, VR, and fast. Great bokeh and separation. Do I love this lens? Yeah.

The 18-55 is small and light. The 18-135 I think is lightweight, too, comparing with any similar Nikon lenses. The longer reach comes in handy.

I totally agree. I use my Fuji X-T1 with a 18-135mm as my holiday/travel/social camera. It fits in a small and inexpensive canvas (man) shoulder bag (nondescript, doesn't look like a camera bag) with a pen and notebook and even a lightweight waterproof if I need it. I can carry it all day without any problem, couldn't do that with a Canon (1Ds3) and the 24-105mm.

[John Walker]

All my images are taken on a Sony RX100 camera.  QC seem happy with the results and I get regular sales so customers must be happy too.

[Martin Carlsson]

WARNING: Of course the mirrorless cameras are coming on in leaps and bounds, so the below is from a grumpy old fogey still firmly in the (D-)SLR camp.

 

I use a Sony NEX-5N with a 18-55mm (kit) lens for those times when using my Canon 5D Mk III (with vertical grip and usually a f/2.8 24-70mm or 70-200mm) is not appropriate for whatever reason or those times when I'm just lazy. I'm not in the mirrorless camp yet, the weight doesn't bother me, the size doesn't bother me - find those things to be "normal" and positives compared to the smaller Sony.

 

Weight: Increased stability both handheld and on tripod/monopod.

Size: I hold it with my hands, offers perfect grip and feeling of purpose. The buttons and dials are big enough to be used even with gloves. Smaller Sony is fiddly. 

Viewfinder: What can I say? A traditional, non-electronic one is to me vital, connects me rather than the feeling of disconnect I can sometimes feel looking at a live view screen or through an EVF.

 

The images coming out of the Sony are absolutely fine, can't fault them in any way. But I always have some regret that I didn't use/bring the Canon. But yes, admittedly the Sony has on occasion allowed me to use a camera where otherwise I would not been able to, and the Sony NEX-5N has done a tremendous job in a very small package. No problems getting images through QC with it either.

 

Note: Thumbs up to the Colorchecker Passport and to create "dual illuminant profile" to be used within LR. I get both correct colour representation and very little difference between the two cameras if used at the "same time". Well worth the money.

[Bryan]

Double post - my apologies

[Bryan]

I have a Canon 5DII kit and a Sony NEX 6. The Canon hardly sees any use (too heavy bulky) and I have never failed QC here with the Sony.

 

Be aware that Sony lenses are a bit of a problem, tending to be either indifferent or expensive ( or both). You can pass QC with the kit lenses without a problem, but you will get better results using alternative glass. I use old film camera lenses, and the results are excellent, but most normal folk would not be bothered with the inconvenience.

 

The a6000 is rumoured due for imminent replacement so is now being offered at a bargain price. 

 

The ideal companion should be the Zeiss 16-70 (equivalent to Canon's 24-105 on FF) but the reviews are mixed and it's not cheap.

[DHill]

I was in a similar position a year ago.  and these were my conclusions: 

• I wanted something with better image quality than my wife's Sony RX100 mk I - I wasn't happy with it in anything other than reasonably strong daylight, etc. Maybe I'm a perfectionist. Incidentally, the best thing about the RX100, IMHO, is the lens - it's hard to fault it. 
• MIrrorless was the obvious choice
• I eliminated Sony mirrorless due to lens reviews - the options available, especially the ones that would fit in a laptop bag for use before or after business meetings, didn't review well
• Micro two thirds has the widest lens choices amongst mirrorless - but the sensors were beaten by Sony and Fuji - probably due to their extra size
• I went with a Fuji (the X-M1 - not sure it's still available). That has an excellent sensor - same as high end Fujis such as the X-T1 and on a par with Nikon APS-C such as the D7000 - but the weakest link is the kit lens - great in the centre but you have to be careful with the edges. If you don't mind the extra size of the better lenses, then Fuji is an excellent choice - possibly the best amongst mirrorless but I believe heavier and more expensive than the M4/3 and Sony systems.  

Now, I appreciate the ability of the X-M1 to be carried everywhere and the fact that it blows aways even quite recent APC-C cameras, but also miss my D800 when I use the Fuji - you just can't beat full-frame tonality, flexibility, lack of compromises and so on. For this reason, if I have a choice, I still use the D800 every time. 

 

Just my opinions - hope they help ;-)

 

PS agree with what Martin about using the ColorChecker Passport to get the colour the same in both cameras. More useful than i expected! 

[DHill]

Whoops! Double post ... Sorry! 

[Doc]

Hi Fluffywuffy

 

I have a Canon 5D2 and 7D2 with assorted L lenses - I recently wanted exactly what you do, and got (with excellent advice from my colleagues here) the Sony RX100 Mk2 - no pop-up viewfinder, but has the adjustable rear screen which is invaluable. Plenty of images from it on Alamy, never had a fail from QC with it.

 

Kumar

[Keith Douglas]

I have the Sony RX100 Mk 1 and I love it. I've been using it for nearly 3 years and I haven't had any QC failures (touch wood). I  downsize my images to a maximum dimension of 3600px. One thing I don't need to worry about with it is dust spots (one of my 2 failures using a DSLR in the early days). I do still use my DSLR for some work, such as sports action, but the RX100 is the preferred choice for the "camera I have with me".

[Bill Brooks]

I use a Canon DSLR mostly. My Sony RX100-1 comes in handy when I am at a romantic dinner with “she who must be obeyed”, who has taken an extreme dislike to my use of large cameras under certain circumstances.

[TABan]

I use the RX100 I as well, although I've read the new Canon G7X handles better and has the same sensor as the RX100 III. If you want an EVF, the G5X has one and has the same lens and is just slightly bulkier. I actually tend to take my Canon Rebel SL1 (100D) when I want to go light. Put the 24mm EF-S pancake on it and it's pretty tiny. The kit 18-55 STM lens is as sharp on a crop and better in the corners than the 24-105L is on full-frame. Even with the zoom, the SL1 is light and unobtrusive Too bad Canon seems to have decided not to continue this line, probably because they want people to move to the M3. I'm still an optical finder kind of guy, so it works for me. The good thing about being phased out is they're cheap, even with the kit zoom it's less than a newer RX100, if you're interested in buying. 

[Martin P Wilson]

I looked at the RX-100 3 (I don't like cameras without VF) but I found the pop-up, pop-out EVF popped back in when I held it to my eye(glasses). Am I missing something because I would have found it a useful pocket camera. As a Fuji user I quite like the X-30 but the sensor is too small for stock purposes.

[John Mitchell]

I have a Canon 5DII kit and a Sony NEX 6. The Canon hardly sees any use (too heavy bulky) and I have never failed QC here with the Sony.

 

Be aware that Sony lenses are a bit of a problem, tending to be either indifferent or expensive ( or both). You can pass QC with the kit lenses without a problem, but you will get better results using alternative glass. I use old film camera lenses, and the results are excellent, but most normal folk would not be bothered with the inconvenience.

 

The a6000 is rumoured due for imminent replacement so is now being offered at a bargain price. 

 

The ideal companion should be the Zeiss 16-70 (equivalent to Canon's 24-105 on FF) but the reviews are mixed and it's not cheap.

 

I know I sound like a broken record, but my copy the original Sony SEL 18-55 lens performs really well on the 16MP NEX-6 -- sharp across the frame at mid focal lengths, very little distortion and CA, effective stabilization, etc. Don't know why this lens got some indifferent reviews. It is at least as good as any regular DSLR lens in this focal range that I've owned. I skipped getting the more compact 16-50 with my NEX-6, mainly because I don't like power zooms, plus the heavy distortion at 16mm turned me off (even if it is easy to correct). Not sure how well the 18-55 would do on the 24 MP a6000, though. Sony probably needs to design a new kit lens for its higher resolution offerings, assuming that it keeps producing these small, interchangeable lens cameras.

[Richard Coombs]

Original Fuji X100, not the X trans versions!

Fixed lens, but doesn't get any better.

[John Walker]

I looked at the RX-100 3 (I don't like cameras without VF) but I found the pop-up, pop-out EVF popped back in when I held it to my eye(glasses). Am I missing something because I would have found it a useful pocket camera. As a Fuji user I quite like the X-30 but the sensor is too small for stock purposes.

Hi Martin,

 

I just checked the EVF on my RX100 M3 and it doesn't pop in easily. Never had that particular problem and I wear glasses too.

 

Just wondering if it wasn't pulled fully out or there may have been a problem with the one you tried.

 

UPDATE: Since writing the above, I have experienced times when my new glasses have pushed against the EVF and pushed it in.

 

John

[Martin P Wilson]

 

I looked at the RX-100 3 (I don't like cameras without VF) but I found the pop-up, pop-out EVF popped back in when I held it to my eye(glasses). Am I missing something because I would have found it a useful pocket camera. As a Fuji user I quite like the X-30 but the sensor is too small for stock purposes.

Hi Martin,

 

I just checked the EVF on my RX100 M3 and it doesn't pop in easily.  Never had that particular problem and I wear glasses too.

 

Just wondering if it wasn't pulled fully out or there may have been a problem with the one you tried.

 

John

 

I will take another look, it was one on display at a local camera store so could well have been faulty or damaged.

[fluffywuffy]

Thank you all so much for your comments. I have printed them off to read properly. I knew this was the best place to go for first hand, unbiased advice and all the pros and cons. You all seem to recommend the same few cameras so that narrows it down which is a great help.

Thanks Wendy