Looking for a New Camera

[KellyC]

I am looking for a new camera and was hoping for some advice. I currently shoot with a Canon 7D and two L series zooms. They have worked well for me for years but they are heavy (and I've been a little frustrated with the 7D in low light, which happens a lot in the PNW). I have always been a bit on the clumsy and awkward side, but now I am getting older and have neck issues, sciatica, and a bad shoulder from being too dumb to let go of the lunge line when the 18-hand horse on the other end decided to bolt. I recently got back from a trip which I was hoping would rekindle my interest in shooting again and realized that the opposite happened, in fact I think I would have had much more fun if I had just left all my gear at home.

 

I would love to find something small and light that would make photography enjoyable again. But I would also like something that could produce images good enough to submit to Alamy. I doubt I would do a lot of shooting for stock going forward but would like to have the option. I don't have much to spend so that really limits me. The Fuji X100V looks great and I am hoping the prices drop on them when the new version comes out, but they seem very hard to find and the price would have to drop quite a bit for me. If I sold all my current gear I could probably manage about $1300. 

 

Does anyone have any suggestions?  Thank you!!!

[Harry Harrison]

The prices for a used Fuji X100V or even X100F aren't dropping yet, they might once you can buy an X100VI off the shelf, but I suppose that might not be for a while, if ever. If you've been used to a couple of quality zooms on your APS-C Canon then you might find just a single angle of view a bit limiting though, much as I love those cameras. You will I imagine be looking to get a mirrorless camera and APS-C bodies and lenses are generally smaller and lighter than their full frame equivalents. I think it's fair to say that any current APS-C camera body will be more than suitable for stock photography and better in low light than your 7D. You will want to acclimatise yourself with an electronic viewfinder since you are used to a DSLR so best to pop into a camera shop and try one if you can, they are very good now and seeing exactly what you will get in the viewfinder in terms of exposure and focus is very addictive.

[Gervais Montacute]

1 hour ago, KellyC said:

I am looking for a new camera and was hoping for some advice. I currently shoot with a Canon 7D and two L series zooms. They have worked well for me for years but they are heavy (and I've been a little frustrated with the 7D in low light, which happens a lot in the PNW). I have always been a bit on the clumsy and awkward side, but now I am getting older and have neck issues, sciatica, and a bad shoulder from being too dumb to let go of the lunge line when the 18-hand horse on the other end decided to bolt. I recently got back from a trip which I was hoping would rekindle my interest in shooting again and realized that the opposite happened, in fact I think I would have had much more fun if I had just left all my gear at home.

 

I would love to find something small and light that would make photography enjoyable again. But I would also like something that could produce images good enough to submit to Alamy. I doubt I would do a lot of shooting for stock going forward but would like to have the option. I don't have much to spend so that really limits me. The Fuji X100V looks great and I am hoping the prices drop on them when the new version comes out, but they seem very hard to find and the price would have to drop quite a bit for me. If I sold all my current gear I could probably manage about $1300. 

 

Does anyone have any suggestions?  Thank you!!!

Harry is right about the prices not dropping on the Fuji X100V at the moment. I am surprised; I thought they might even tank and thus far that is wrong. Looking at some of your photos KellyC it looks like a 35mm lens might be OK for you. Providing you don’t need to zoom in and out a lot, I would just go the whole hog and get a Fuji X100VI simply because it’s a 40 MP camera and this will allow you to crop pretty fearlessly. The V is around 26MP I think. These Fuji cameras are definitely in the fun bracket to me. I ordered a VI a few weeks ago. No sign of it yet and I’m looking forward to seeing it although I won’t be using it myself hardly at all. Cropped frame cameras are usually great when they’re Fuji class.

If Fuji make this the last iteration of the X100 series (big if), it will hold its price quite well imo. Not that any of that should make a difference to buying decisions.

[AlexH]

Hi Kelly

 

If you really want to go lighter and smaller while retaining quality and versatility I'd suggest you look at M43 kit from Olympus/OM and Panasonic. The benefit with M43 is not only small body sizes (other mirror less systems have similar small bodies) but the tiny/light lenses that are possible.

 

I have a Lumix gx80 and gx9, both of which are more than enough for stock despite what look like modest specs. Stick a pancake lense on one of these and you've got a similar sort of camera to the Fuji x100 variants with with much more versatility. 

 

M43 kit makes for a great basis for a small/light travel kit. However you do mention low light....the stabilisation is excellent, I've shot happily in low evening light with a fast prime, but you may find the smaller sensor isn't up to your needs if low light work is a loy of you what you do.

 

 

[Harry Harrison]

I've never had a Micro 4/3 camera but that might well be the answer, certainly fine for Alamy though I suppose higher iso might be a problem. The photojournalist Peter Dench and the wildlife photographer Andrew Fusek-Peters both use that format to very good effect, in their case Olympus.

[KellyC]

Thank you all for the help and advice! I will certainly check out Olympus (I started with Olympus in high school a very long time ago!). The new Fuji looks great but a stretch financially and I am not sure my ancient computer can handle the file size (one more thing to replace). 

[M.Chapman]

1 hour ago, AlexH said:

If you really want to go lighter and smaller while retaining quality and versatility I'd suggest you look at M43 kit from Olympus/OM and Panasonic. The benefit with M43 is not only small body sizes (other mirror less systems have similar small bodies) but the tiny/light lenses that are possible.

+1

Panasonic M43 Lumix G100 + 14-140mm lens does the job for me. Not the best electronic viewfinder, but it's relatively small and light and the lens is good with 35mm equivalent range of 28-280mm. https://camerastuffreview.com/en/review-panasonic-lumix-14-140mm-f-3-5-5-6-ii-asph-power-ois/

It can reliably produce images for Alamy although I do downsize sometimes.

 

Mark

 

[John Richmond]

I'll agree with the M43 recommendation, especially if you choose used gear.  I'm currently getting excellent results with second hand Olympus EM1 Mkii, 40-150mm f2.8 Pro, 12-40mm f2.8 Pro and a 60 mm macro.  Fully weatherproofed and great to 800ISO, acceptable to 1600ISO and above with some noise reduction.  That combination might be a bit heavy at around 4 pounds and too much for your budget but there are plenty of lighter, cheaper options including the weatherproof f4 combo of 12-45 Pro and 40-150 Pro perhaps paired with an also weatherproof EM5 Mkiii body.  Image quality would be very similar if not the same and more than acceptable for Alamy.  I've only ever had one QC fail with M43 gear and that was my own fault.

 

Here's a couple of 800ISO shots with the 40-150mm f2.8 Pro:

 

 

 

 

[Harry Harrison]

On 12/03/2024 at 19:40, KellyC said:

I will certainly check out Olympus (I started with Olympus in high school a very long time ago!). The new Fuji looks great but a stretch financially and I am not sure my ancient computer can handle the file size (one more thing to replace). 

I should have said that Olympus cameras are now OM-Systems, but if you're buying used then it will still probably be Olympus. I stopped myself from recommending Fuji but my 'walkaround' camera is a Fuji X-T2 with their 18-55 f2.8/4 Zoom, a kit lens but very good. An X-T3 or X-T4 would be worth considering if you don't want to go as far back as the X-T2, an X-T5 would use up all your budget and more I would think, as well as your processing power and hard drive. I wish Fuji were like Sony and carried on selling their previous models alongside the new ones.

Edited March 15 by Harry Harrison
f2.8/4 not f4/5.6

[Betty LaRue]

Don’t forget the small Sony RX100 cameras. I recently bought the RX100 V11 (RX100M7) & it’s great. 20-200 zoom, 20.1mp.
I shoot with a Fuji XT-4 which is small & great. If I’m out doing other things than a planned shoot, the RX fits in my purse & comes in very handy. Can be bought new for about $1300.

 

Ed Rooney, on this forum, shoots pretty much exclusively with it & takes great images. Good for indoor food shots, too. You just need to be mindful of noise at higher ISOs, but if you use the Adobe pkg, or other good noise reduction programs, no problem.

Incidentally, I have a lot of the same decrepit personal body issues you have & both of these cameras are great after shooting with a honking Nikon camera.
 

The Fuji required the purchase of lenses & I have a bunch of them. One could get by with much less, for sure. The Sony is what it is…all you need. I think I bought an extra battery for it & can’t remember if I bought a charger or already had one for it. I never have hooked the camera up to charge (which you can) but always use an external.

This with the RX100 V11.

 

Edited March 13 by Betty LaRue

[Mark Scheuern]

I'll second the opinion for a Fuji X-T3 or X-T4. I love my X-T5 but, like Betty said, that's a little out of your price range. KEH currently has an X-T3 for $902 and an X-T4 for $1035. 

 

If you want really small and light, and are okay with a fixed lens (which I assume you are since you were looking at the X100V), consider the Ricoh GRIII or GRIIIx. 

Edited March 13 by Mark Scheuern
It's better to spell "Ricoh" with one "o".

[Allan Bell]

3 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Don’t forget the small Sony RX100 cameras. I recently bought the RX100 V11 (RX100M7) & it’s great. 20-200 zoom, 20.1mp.
I shoot with a Fuji XT-4 which is small & great. If I’m out doing other things than a planned shoot, the RX fits in my purse & comes in very handy. Can be bought new for about $1300.

 

Ed Rooney, on this forum, shoots pretty much exclusively with it & takes great images. Good for indoor food shots, too. You just need to be mindful of noise at higher ISOs, but if you use the Adobe pkg, or other good noise reduction programs, no problem.

Incidentally, I have a lot of the same decrepit personal body issues you have & both of these cameras are great after shooting with a honking Nikon camera.
 

The Fuji required the purchase of lenses & I have a bunch of them. One could get by with much less, for sure. The Sony is what it is…all you need. I think I bought an extra battery for it & can’t remember if I bought a charger or already had one for it. I never have hooked the camera up to charge (which you can) but always use an external.

This with the RX100 V11.

 

 

 

Second Sony RX100 range. I have had a few, 3 to be exact, started with the original RX100 then moved to the mark 3 then to the mark 7, the latest in the line up.

 

I have many images on Alamy taken with these cameras.

 

Allan

 

PS:  Edo is my friend.

 

ITMA

 

 

Edited March 13 by Allan Bell

[KellyC]

Thank you so much for all the responses!! Your feedback is tremendously helpful. Some big decisions to make, especially the fixed lens issue. It seems both terrifying and liberating at the same time. I remember long ago Art Wolfe saying on his TV show that the best camera is the one you have with you. I think at this point in my life, the easier the better. 

[MDM]

3 minutes ago, KellyC said:

 I remember long ago Art Wolfe saying on his TV show that the best camera is the one you have with you. 

 

This is one of these gross over-simplifications that people love to quote. What if you don't have a camera with you because it's too heavy to carry? 

 

I would also recommend one of the Sony RX100 series if you want quality that is definitely acceptable to Alamy QC. These are very small and light but image quality is excellent. I actually sold mine because I just wasn't using it but if I ever get to the point where I can't comfortably carry a Nikon mirrorless camera with a standard zoom (just over 1 kg), I would probably seek one out again. 

 

 

[Betty LaRue]

33 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

 

Second Sony RX100 range. I have had a few, 3 to be exact, started with the original RX100 then moved to the mark 3 then to the mark 7, the latest in the line up.

 

I have many images on Alamy taken with these cameras.

 

Allan

 

PS:  Edo is my friend.

 

ITMA

 

 

Same 3 Sony RXs I still have. We have similar good taste, don’t we Allan? Your only humongous failure (😂) is not making a go of it with Fuji. You let it whip you, while I persevered. 😉

🎶 Here she is…Mrs. Fuji Photographerrrr…🎶

[KellyC]

26 minutes ago, MDM said:

This is one of these gross over-simplifications that people love to quote. What if you don't have a camera with you because it's too heavy to carry? 

Yes, you are probably right and I must admit I almost didn't quote him as there is no context with a single quote. I actually thought in the show that he meant what you are saying (and what I am trying to remedy)--if you have a camera but don't use it because it isn't comfortable or convenient or whatever, it doesn't matter how good it is. You need a camera you will take with you.

 

I do appreciate the advice re the Sony from you, Betty and Allen. I actually just found one close enough to at least check it out in person (unfortunately most of the others are proving very difficult to find nearby). 

[MDM]

21 minutes ago, KellyC said:

Yes, you are probably right and I must admit I almost didn't quote him as there is no context with a single quote. I actually thought in the show that he meant what you are saying (and what I am trying to remedy)--if you have a camera but don't use it because it isn't comfortable or convenient or whatever, it doesn't matter how good it is. You need a camera you will take with you.

 

I do appreciate the advice re the Sony from you, Betty and Allen. I actually just found one close enough to at least check it out in person (unfortunately most of the others are proving very difficult to find nearby). 

 

I've always thought the axiom of the best camera being the one you have in your hand was from the days of film and was basically saying you don't need anything more than what you've got to get the picture - a lens, a box and a roll of film is all you need. Some of the old timers here love that quote. It might well have been true in the age of film but is not true in the age of digital cameras where there are very significant differences between different cameras. 

 

There was a shortage of some of the RX100s a while back and I don't know of it's been resolved yet. The Mark VIIs seem to be available here. My only issue with them is they are very small and fiddly in my hands - I like to able to grip a camera - but that comes with the territory. They do feel really sturdy for such tiny cameras. 

 

 

Edited March 13 by MDM

[spacecadet]

15 minutes ago, MDM said:

I've always thought the axiom of the best camera being the one you have in your hand was from the days of film and was basically saying you don't need anything more than what you've got to get the picture - a lens, a box and a roll of film is all you need. Some of the old timers here love that quote. It might well have been true in the age of film but is not true in the age of digital cameras where there are very significant differences between different cameras. 

I've always taken it to mean that it's the one that's convenient to carry anywhere. OP specifically says that their existing cameras are heavy and convenient. So, they want something lighter and handier. Mirrorless is undoubtedly handier than DSLR but not everyone can afford to change every few years. I still have an SLT ("A" or "an"? Never worked that out) and will have it until it breaks but fortunately the Sony As are a bit lighter anyway.

 

Edited March 13 by spacecadet

[MDM]

27 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I've always taken it to mean that it's the one that's convenient to carry anywhere. OP specifically says that their existing cameras are heavy and convenient. So, they want something lighter and handier. Mirrorless is undoubtedly handier than DSLR but not everyone can afford to change every few years. I still have an SLT ("A" or "an"? Never worked that out) and will have it until it breaks but fortunately the Sony As are a bit lighter anyway.

 

 

That would be an SLT - the indefinite article follows how you would pronounce it as an abbreviation so an S L T. I had to look up the meaning of SLT. 

 

 

 

[Steve F]

1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

I still have an SLT ("A" or "an"?

 

I used to have one, but I broke it so I had to get a mirrorless 😇

[DDoug]

For my walk-around kit, I have two Fujifilm X-E3 bodies with XF14mm and 18-55mm lenses. (I neither change lenses in the field nor fuss around with sensor dust.) If I particularly want to avoid weight, I take just the kit zoom and carry the camera in a top-loading holster bag on my belt. It’s a lot of bang for the kilogram as well as the buck.

Edited March 14 by DDoug
clarity

[spacecadet]

16 hours ago, MDM said:

 

That would be an SLT - the indefinite article follows how you would pronounce it as an abbreviation so an S L T. I had to look up the meaning of SLT. 

 

 

 

Bit of a joke. That would be my choice but it could follow the unabbreviated word.

Yes it needed the pellicle light loss to become irrelevant for the Pellix idea finally to earn its place in the sun. For a bit.

I've always used SLTs but  replacing the 58 will be tricky.

 

Edited March 14 by spacecadet

[MDM]

1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

Bit of a joke. That would be my choice but it could follow the unabbreviated word.

Yes it needed the pellicle light loss to become irrelevant for the Pellix idea finally to earn its place in the sun. For a bit.

I've always used SLTs but  replacing the 58 will be tricky.

 

 

I went straight from the SLR to the DSLR so I seem to have missed out on the SLT. 

 

I've never heard the word "pellicle" before either. I'm learning from you. So I look up "pellicle" and find the following on Wikipedia: "A pellicle is a skin or coating of proteins or cellulose on the surface of meat or fermented beverages." In fact there is a magazine called Pellicle which seems to have a strong emphasis on alcohol. Well I don't drink alcohol and I've been vegetarian almost for ever so that can be my excuse for my ignorance. I will start to incorporate these wonderful new words into my everyday speech. Pellicle skips off the end of the tongue. I can't wait to say it out loud 🤣. 

Edited March 14 by MDM

[spacecadet]

Well the DSLR did come before Sony tried the SLT. I think the A33 was the first, mine as well, so I have been pellicular for 15 years now.

The Pellix was Canon's 60s version which didn't catch on but I see that they did try again in the 80s. I didn't know it had anything to do with biology either.

[William Caram]

Lots of great suggestions here, but i love the M43 format and am now using the OM- Systems OM-1 and Olympus lenses.I used Canon full frame Bigger 5D series right through to the R5 at 45MP...The Olympus cameras mostly use the 20MP sensor and the quality is great and certainly enough for editorial stock photography..As already mentioned here you don't need to buy the most recent cameras in the lineup, as there are very good earlier cameras that will be more affordable and still provide great quality and performance.

Sure Sony RX series cameras offer great quality and performance, but have a fixed lens..( of course these cameras also have wide to semi tele lenses) If you want to use other lenses, then cameras with interchangeable lenses offer more options for a variety of photography uses.

Yes it also comes down to what you're prepared to spend on a camera system..a compact fixed lens camera with a wide to short tele zoom lens is more portable and like as has been said...a camera that is close to hand...gets the picture..

[Harry Harrison]

On 12/03/2024 at 22:08, Harry Harrison said:

Fuji but my 'walkaround' camera is a Fuji X-T2 with their 18-55 f4/5.6 Zoom

Got to correct myself here, it is of course an f2.8/4 lens, not f4/5.6.  It was launched at the end of 2012 along with the X-E1, their first zoom lens for the 'X' system and with AIS, in fact mine came with an X-E1 as a 'kit' lens. Fuji have recently announced that it is being discontinued after 12 years or so and will be replaced by an XF 16-50 f2.8/4.8. For me that is a disappointment, I'd have liked a fixed aperture f4 mid-range zoom with a physical aperture ring, an 18-55 f4 would be fine. Both the 16-55 f2.8 and the 18-120 f4 are larger than I would like to walk around with though of course they do have aperture rings.