Jump to content

Forgive me for asking but what is the best P&S for stock


Recommended Posts

This has probably been asked a hundred times but, given all the new cameras out there, what is the best P&S under $500, under $1000, over $1000.  Keep in mind that I have a grudge against Sony but I'm not the only one that will read this.  I'm getting tired of carrying around a bag full of gear: lenses, filters, batteries, rocket blower, ...  Sometimes I just want to go for a walk or grab a shot at Walmart.  I don't even want a 4/3 or mirrorless if they have a bunch of lenses to deal with.  If I need all the kit, I'll just take the 5D mark II to begin with. 

 

Thanks in advance 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you just want a point and shoot, why not just take the 5D and one good walk about lens, say a 18-135? Same as having a point and shoot, and I don't think Alamy accepts point and shoots on their accepted camera list. Better check that first before purchasing. Outside of the mirrorless ones, I don't think you will find any small P&S that make the cut for Alamy.

 

Here is a link to their unsuitable list:  http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/unsuitable-cameras.asp

 

I think the mirrorless are the best bet for small, good quality and acceptable by Alamy.

 

Jill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately for you, the Sony RX100 (Mk. I,II, and III) cameras seem to be the best options for Alamy. I haven't used one, but most contributors sound happy with them for casual shooting. I might get one myself when/if finances permit. Otherwise, you could always check the Alamy "recommended" list to see if there are any other P&S-like cameras on there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you just want a point and shoot, why not just take the 5D and one good walk about lens, say a 18-135? Same as having a point and shoot, and I don't think Alamy accepts point and shoots on their accepted camera list. Better check that first before purchasing. Outside of the mirrorless ones, I don't think you will find any small P&S that make the cut for Alamy.

 

Here is a link to their unsuitable list:  http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/unsuitable-cameras.asp

 

I think the mirrorless are the best bet for small, good quality and acceptable by Alamy.

 

Jill

 

Hi Jill, A DSLR is more obvious and attracts a lot more attention than a P&S.  It's also subject to dirt on the sensor and lots of other downs that I don't need unless I'm going for something special like Long Exposure or special filters. The Canon Powershot G16 is on the list.  I think That Olympus, Fuji, Leica, and Sony may have P&S cameras on the acceptable list.  I didn't see any Nikons but perhaps I missed them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very happy with my Sony RX100 mk3 and Alamy does accept images from that camera. About the only draw back is the short zoom. The zoom is a 24-70 (35mm equivalent). The files are large, noise low and images are sharp. Maximum aperture is 1.8 ~ 2.8, so it is great in low light as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very happy with my Sony RX100 mk3 and Alamy does accept images from that camera. About the only draw back is the short zoom. The zoom is a 24-70 (35mm equivalent). The files are large, noise low and images are sharp. Maximum aperture is 1.8 ~ 2.8, so it is great in low light as well.

 

I believe that the earlier models -- mk I and II -- have a slightly longer zoom (up to 100 or 105, 35mm equiv.) but no EVF. There have been some good deals out there on the mk 1 recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am very happy with my Sony RX100 mk3 and Alamy does accept images from that camera. About the only draw back is the short zoom. The zoom is a 24-70 (35mm equivalent). The files are large, noise low and images are sharp. Maximum aperture is 1.8 ~ 2.8, so it is great in low light as well.

 

I believe that the earlier models -- mk I and II -- have a slightly longer zoom (up to 100 or 105, 35mm equiv.) but no EVF. There have been some good deals out there on the mk 1 recently.

The EVF (electronic view finder) is nice but I would definitely consider the mk II, it is $200 less and the zoom does go to 100mm equiv. and also has a hot shoe (mk III does not) and both have a moveable LCD screen, so making photos while looking down or up high or even selfies, if so inclined, is possible.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I am very happy with my Sony RX100 mk3 and Alamy does accept images from that camera. About the only draw back is the short zoom. The zoom is a 24-70 (35mm equivalent). The files are large, noise low and images are sharp. Maximum aperture is 1.8 ~ 2.8, so it is great in low light as well.

I believe that the earlier models -- mk I and II -- have a slightly longer zoom (up to 100 or 105, 35mm equiv.) but no EVF. There have been some good deals out there on the mk 1 recently.

The EVF (electronic view finder) is nice but I would definitely consider the mk II, it is $200 less and the zoom does go to 100mm equiv. and also has a hot shoe (mk III does not) and both have a moveable LCD screen, so making photos while looking down or up high or even selfies, if so inclined, is possible.

 

 

Yes, I'd prefer the mk II with its tilt-able screen. It's amazing how well you can get along without a viewfinder in most situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that last thought, John . . . although I do not have any of those great RX100s myself, I do have the Sony NEX-3 and was happy most of the time using the screen. Sure, I like the NEX-6 better. 

 

I've been trying sometime now to get a food writer friend to buy a RX100, but she just won't pull the trigger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I am very happy with my Sony RX100 mk3 and Alamy does accept images from that camera. About the only draw back is the short zoom. The zoom is a 24-70 (35mm equivalent). The files are large, noise low and images are sharp. Maximum aperture is 1.8 ~ 2.8, so it is great in low light as well.

 

I believe that the earlier models -- mk I and II -- have a slightly longer zoom (up to 100 or 105, 35mm equiv.) but no EVF. There have been some good deals out there on the mk 1 recently.

The EVF (electronic view finder) is nice but I would definitely consider the mk II, it is $200 less and the zoom does go to 100mm equiv. and also has a hot shoe (mk III does not) and both have a moveable LCD screen, so making photos while looking down or up high or even selfies, if so inclined, is possible.

 

Yes, I'd prefer the mk II with its tilt-able screen. It's amazing how well you can get along without a viewfinder in most situations.

Both the mk II and III have the tilt-able screen! I don't think the mk I does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that last thought, John . . . although I do not have any of those great RX100s myself, I do have the Sony NEX-3 and was happy most of the time using the screen. Sure, I like the NEX-6 better. 

 

I've been trying sometime now to get a food writer friend to buy a RX100, but she just won't pull the trigger.

 

Funny, I have a food writer friend and I just talked her into getting the 100 mk III tho now I think she would have been fine with the two. She travels a lot and often has to shoot her own pics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charles, I was in a similar position a few months ago and spent a lot of time assessing all the alternatives. After a lot of consideration, and one false start (an RX100), I finally settled on a Sony NEX6. I wrote this blog post at the time which explains my reasoning:

 

http://www.thevitalvegan.org.uk/cgi-bin/tvv/blog.cgi

 

Although it's not exactly a P&S, it's pretty damn close. The 16-50 lens is so small it fits easily into a large trouser pocket and is not a great deal bigger than many genuine P&S's.

 

I should add that after several months I'm delighted with the NEX6 and it has enabled me to get many photographs that I would otherwise have missed.

 

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charles, I was in a similar position a few months ago and spent a lot of time assessing all the alternatives. After a lot of consideration, and one false start (an RX100), I finally settled on a Sony NEX6. I wrote this blog post at the time which explains my reasoning:

 

http://www.thevitalvegan.org.uk/cgi-bin/tvv/blog.cgi

 

Although it's not exactly a P&S, it's pretty damn close. The 16-50 lens is so small it fits easily into a large trouser pocket and is not a great deal bigger than many genuine P&S's.

 

I should add that after several months I'm delighted with the NEX6 and it has enabled me to get many photographs that I would otherwise have missed.

 

Alan

 

The NEX-6 is now my "big" camera. I only bought a body because I already had e-mount lenses that I had been using with the NEX-3 (which is even more compact). Now I'm wishing I had got the very compact 16-50 as well. Might try to find a used one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jill, A DSLR is more obvious and attracts a lot more attention than a P&S.  It's also subject to dirt on the sensor and lots of other downs that I don't need unless I'm going for something special like Long Exposure or special filters.

 

The Canon Powershot G16 is on the list.

 

 

To avoid lugging my Nikon D3 and bag of lenses around everywhere, I use a Canon Powershot G1x. It's not on the approved list, but I've never had problems with my submissions. It shoots RAW at 4352x3264 pixels and has a large sensor for a P&S.

 

I'm guessing that Alamy can't keep up with the constant stream of new models coming out.

 

The G1x has its limitations - appalling close focus abilities and shutter lag are the ones that bug me. But the huge unexpected bonus that I've found is that I'm far less conspicuous when shooting on the hoof. A significant advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting an 18-135 EF-S on a 5D would be a neat trick.

 

I've produced selling images with the RX100. The main negative is, it's a pain to use. These days I mostly use a Canon SL1 with the kit 18-55 STM lens. It's small, light, innocuous, has a viewfinder and makes better images than the RX100. You look like any other tourist with one. And, it seems Canon is having trouble selling them, so you can find them pretty cheap, less than the current iterations of the RX100. Add the very sharp 55-250 STM and you've got almost everything covered, unless you're an ultra-wide maven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for around 500 or less:

 

Nikon coolpix A (superb sharp lens,small, light, APS-C sensor same as D7000, and fast focus)

 

Fuji X100 (always have this in my coat pocket (APS-C sensor, tough, reliable, sharp)

 

I wouldn't want to spend any more on a P&S

 

 

Parm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only use a Sony RX100 MK1 for my stock images - if you look at my recent nine hundred or so images they are all taken with this camera.  As far as I can remember they were all taken in the full auto setting as RAW images and processed in Elements 11.  All in all a low cost system with very acceptable results and regular, although not spectacular sales.

 

Unless you can guarantee high sales returns then spending more on a camera is not profitable.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only use a Sony RX100 MK1 for my stock images - if you look at my recent nine hundred or so images they are all taken with this camera.  As far as I can remember they were all taken in the full auto setting as RAW images and processed in Elements 11.  All in all a low cost system with very acceptable results and regular, although not spectacular sales.

 

Unless you can guarantee high sales returns then spending more on a camera is not profitable.

 

John

Brilliant images, John. I have the mk1 and the 3. Both have excellent IQ. Why do I have two? Because I thought I lost the 1, bought the MK3, then found the MK1. I'm keeping both, that's how much I like them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't mind the lack of VF but with a tilting screen the Fuji X-M1 is often overlooked and cheap. Same IQ as the E-E1 and X Pro 1. 18-55 "kit" is excellent and reasonably fast. There is a smaller & lighter 16-50 which I have never used. The X-M1 is overlooked and can still be bought new or cheap cheap on ebay. It's with me all the time. I would add a link to some images on Alamy but have never made this work yet....

Good luck

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.