Which compact camera is considered DSLR-like by Alamy ?

[P_LION]

According to what I found on old discussion Alamy no longer has a list of recommended cameras and I could not find any information about a clear criteria for identifying what is DSLR-like.
 

Aanyone can help ?

Thanks in advance.

[Allan Bell]

You need a camera with a 4/3rds sensor at least. Better still one with a 1" sensor like the Sony RX100.

 

Others on the forum will have their own thoughts.

 

Allan

[Niels Quist]

I agree with Allan about the Sony RX100, I'd say, don't go below this type. I have an RX100-3 as a second camera I wear if I do not bring my dSLR (which I still prefer). But the RX100 deals with low light situaitons and night shots better than my dSLRs.

 

But it depends on what you mean by dSLR-like camera. The RX100 is a good point-and-shoot camera. If you want a camera with interchangeable lenses this is not the one.

[Bryan]

The compact system mirrorless cameras by Sony and Fuji (and Olympus?) fit the bill, and feature interchangeable lenses. Not as small as the RX100, which, in its original form, would fit into a shirt pocket, but smaller and lighter than a DSLR while providing equal IQ. The Sony models use the same sensors as several equivalent format DSLRs.

[wiskerke]

You need a camera with a 4/3rds sensor at least. Better still one with a 1" sensor like the Sony RX100.

 

Others on the forum will have their own thoughts.

 

Allan

 

I do:

 

Type     Width    Height Size

         mm       mm     mm²

1"       12.8     9.6    123

4/3"     18.0     13.5   243

 

;-)

 

wim

 

edit: all smoke and mirrors these designations.

edit 2: have a look at the images for smoke and mirrors. Plenty room for some good ones. OTOH nobody ever looks for these.

[DDoug]

DPReview has posted a comparison of cameras in this class here: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2016-roundup-compact-enthusiast-zoom-cameras

If I were picking a pocketable zoom camera from this group*, it would probably be the Panasonic LX100 for its sensor size, lens speed, AF capability and EVF.

 

*edit: I'm not because the Fuji X cameras are sufficiently compact for my needs.

[Chuck Nacke]

I am not a fan of SONY, even though I use D800's 95% of the time.

For decades My pocket camera or skiing camera have been Canon G's

I am about to upgrade to the G15 from my trusty G9.  Great little cameras.

 

PS  I've had it with FUJI,  will not be purchasing anything produced by

them again and I was a huge FUJI fan for a decade....

[Phil Crean]

 

 

PS  I've had it with FUJI,  will not be purchasing anything produced by

them again and I was a huge FUJI fan for a decade....

 

Why?

 

Phil

[John Walker]

All my 4000+ Alamy images were taken with Sony RX100 M1  and for the last year or so the Sony RX100 M3 .

 

Sales every month and no QC failures.  It suits my type of stock photography but would probably not suit specialist areas.

 

Click on my image total on the left to see what the camera will do.

 

John

[Martin P Wilson]

I keep looking at the RX100 but I can't get past the fact that the EVF pops in and goes out of focus when it touches my spectacles as soon I hold it up to my eye. I hate cameras without viewfinders because it reduces stability and the problems when it is sunny.

 

Has anyone solved it, short of using RX100 without glasses? I don't want to be constantly messing with my glasses. I have tried several of each generation

[Allan Bell]

I keep looking at the RX100 but I can't get past the fact that the EVF pops in and goes out of focus when it touches my spectacles as soon I hold it up to my eye. I hate cameras without viewfinders because it reduces stability and the problems when it is sunny.

 

Has anyone solved it, short of using RX100 without glasses? I don't want to be constantly messing with my glasses. I have tried several of each generation

 

 

I believe it is the RX100 MkIII that has the EVF. The original RX100 does not have the EVF.

 

Allan

[Martin P Wilson]

 

I keep looking at the RX100 but I can't get past the fact that the EVF pops in and goes out of focus when it touches my spectacles as soon I hold it up to my eye. I hate cameras without viewfinders because it reduces stability and the problems when it is sunny.

 

Has anyone solved it, short of using RX100 without glasses? I don't want to be constantly messing with my glasses. I have tried several of each generation

 

I don't wear glasses (although I should!) but agree that using a camera without a viewfinder is troublesome. When I use my DSLR in live view mode, I find it impossible to keep it steady or even point it where I want and frame photos correctly. My very first digital camera (it wasn't a DSLR) had an EVF, and the resolution was so low that it was barely any help. I haven't yet tried one of the modern mirrorless cameras with a better EVF, but I'm wondering how close they are in usability compared to an optical viewfinder. Maybe I need to visit a camera shop and give them a go.

 

Geoff.

 

 

I have switched to Fuji X-Tx system and have no regrets. I sold my Canon 1Dxx bodies and L lenses outfit earlier this year as I had hardly used it in two years. The EVF,on the X-T2 especially, is more than usable, even for action. The big advantage is in low light as the EVF acts as a night scope and enables proper composition when using flash in very dark conditions. One of the last times I used the Canon was in the dark and I couldn't see to compose.

 

My RX100 issue with the EVF is a mechanical one (it needs to be pulled out to use and glasses push it back in) rather than the use of an EVF per se.

[Martin P Wilson]

 

 

I have switched to Fuji X-Tx system and have no regrets. I sold my Canon 1Dxx bodies and L lenses outfit earlier this year as I had hardly used it in two years. The EVF,on the X-T2 especially, is more than usable, even for action. The big advantage is in low light as the EVF acts as a night scope and enables proper composition when using flash in very dark conditions. One of the last times I used the Canon was in the dark and I couldn't see to compose.

 

My RX100 issue with the EVF is a mechanical one (it needs to be pulled out to use and glasses push it back in) rather than the use of an EVF per se.

 

 

Thanks for the info Martin. Being able to see to compose at night would certainly be an advantage. I know the Fuji range are well liked so I'll investigate those as well as the Sony options.

 

Geoff.

 

 

The story of my transition from Canon to Fuji X is on my blog My aim was that it should be about practicalities, I do not believe in evangelising about equipment, at the end of the day it is just a tool!

[Ed Rooney]

I'll leave you to your range of millimeters, Geoff, but be aware that the RX100 has a span of 28-100 and the RX100M3 and on have a span of 24-70. These are 35mm views. I own the M3 and would not be happy with a wide end of 28mm or having to use only the back screen to view with. I use the EVF most of the time but use the great twisting screen for some subjects, like food in a restaurant.

 

I own and work with three small Sony systems now: NEX, RX10, and RX100M3. The RX10 is most like a "real" camera, but smaller and lighter. The f/2.8 Zeiss zoom goes from 24mm to 200mm. When I carry this camera I feel like a photographer again. The RX100's have great IQ. They mean relearning your hand-holding ways, but they are the most amazing and useful small cameras to date . . . except of course for those smartphone cameras.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I own a 10-18 zoom (15-27 view) for my NEX cameras (NEX6 and 7), so I keep them for that. 

[Ed Rooney]

Geoff, the RX100M3 is one of the older models now and priced accordingly. 

 

I still have some of my Nikons too, been dragging my feet on selling them. If I were still doing assignments, I would show up with a couple of those DSLR's so I would "look like a photographer."  I have no such need for shooting stock in my retirement years. 

 

The image below was taken with the M3 at 24mm, at f/2.8, I think. Take note of the corner to corner sharpness and detail -- no fall-off on the edges. The shoes on the far right are sharp, as are the windows on the far left. 

 

[Niels Quist]

- deleted

[ChrisC]

DPReview has posted a comparison of cameras in this class here: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2016-roundup-compact-enthusiast-zoom-cameras

If I were picking a pocketable zoom camera from this group*, it would probably be the Panasonic LX100 for its sensor size, lens speed, AF capability and EVF.

 

*edit: I'm not because the Fuji X cameras are sufficiently compact for my needs.

I used to have a small Panasonic that was great, but wouldn't pass on Alamy when they had the list, however I was looking at the LX100 in John Lewis, that looks and feels like a nice camera and seems to behave like an SLR, so think I'll have to try that or the RX100

 

As a Nikon DSLR user, I did wonder if anyone uses any of the Nikon 1 range and if they pass Alamy's criteria?

[Paul Thompson Images]

All my 4000+ Alamy images were taken with Sony RX100 M1  and for the last year or so the Sony RX100 M3 .

 

Sales every month and no QC failures.  It suits my type of stock photography but would probably not suit specialist areas.

 

Click on my image total on the left to see what the camera will do.

 

John

John,

Do you submit the full size image or do you ever feel the need to downsize for QC?

[Chuck Nacke]

Phill,

 

My displeasure with FUJI goes back about five years.  For decades I used FUJIChrome all over the world.

For DSLR's I started with a used S2 and went through three of them before they released the S-5.  For its

day the S2 was an amazing DSLR and the S5 is still a good piece of equipment, most of the digital images

that I have on Alamy were shot with either S2's or S5's. 

 

Then FUJI laid off most of their professional service reps and their custom service went way down, sort of

like Kodak....

[Betty LaRue]

I shoot with the Fuji X-T1 &2, and have the Sony RX 100 and the Mark3. When I go out on a shoot, I take the Fuji. Mainly since I'm lazy and can park sideways in a parking lot and use my 18-135 for storefronts. Close, and wide angle. If I didn't have the Fuji, I'd just have to get from 70 or 100 to the 135 range with my feet. Truth be I seldom shoot the 18-135 at 135, so I have a feeling that the Sony would serve just fine.

I do always have the Sony with me. I have a repeat seller and oft zoomed image taken with it.

Edited for typos

[Phil Crean]

Phill,

 

My displeasure with FUJI goes back about five years.  For decades I used FUJIChrome all over the world.

For DSLR's I started with a used S2 and went through three of them before they released the S-5.  For its

day the S2 was an amazing DSLR and the S5 is still a good piece of equipment, most of the digital images

that I have on Alamy were shot with either S2's or S5's. 

 

Then FUJI laid off most of their professional service reps and their custom service went way down, sort of

like Kodak....

 

OK Chuck...Thanks for your reply.

 

I too used lots of Fujichrome in the 80's & 90's, loved it!

 

Am now using a XT1, which is pretty good for travel and to always have a camera with me, but now after 2 years use it's showing a lot more wear & tear than I would expect.

Am considering sending it in for an overhaul, and to have the outer rubber/plastic bits replaced as they are peeling and coming loose.

Hope their European service is better than your experience in the USA.

 

Phil

[Allan Bell]

Thank you Ed, that's very helpful information.

 

I'm not looking for a replacement to my DSLR, just something else for times that I don't want to lug my heavy bag around. So the fact it's small and wouldn't feel like a "real" camera is ok with me, as I can always go back to my DSLR to feel like a photographer again. 

 

The zoom range isn't much of a problem for me as long as it does the fairly "standard" 24-70mm equivalent. For anything else, I'll still have my Nikon. Maybe I should look more at one of the older RX100's for now, just to start with, and see how I get on with that type of camera, before going for the MkIV or MkV.

 

Geoff.

 

 

Geoff I was looking for a small(ish) lightweight camera with a lens with a reach of 14mm to 105mm earlier this year. Not finding anything suitable for Alamy I bought two Sony A6000 bodies and put a Sony 10-18mm lens (15-27mm equiv) on one body and a 16-70mm lens (24-105mm equiv) on the other body. The lenses remain on the bodies. I carry both setups in one bag which weigh less than my Nikon D750 with two lenses of similar range.

 

These are my day to day lightweight carry about cameras now and are eminently suitable for Alamy. I only use the Nikon kit for special images.

 

Yes I know about Fuji and had bad experiences with their kit and QC problems too so left them a while ago.

 

Allan

[DHill]

Might I suggest another alternative - the Fuji X-M1. You can probably only get it second hand now, but with the kit 16-50 lens - which is surprisingly sharp - it's not a lot bigger than the Sony RX100, but with much better image quality due to its much bigger sensor - in fact, the same as the one in the Fuji X-T1. I bought mine new for less than any of the RX100 series. And of course you can also change lenses - I often carry the X-M1, 16-50 and 50-230 lenses in a laptop bag with laptop inside. This camera replaced my RX100. No viewfinder - you have to use the screen on the back - but I quickly got used to that, and the fact that it rotates is very useful - I often find myself composing in the same way as an old film medium format camera with waist-level finder. 

 

Alternatively the X-A2 or X-A3 have the same form factor as the X-M1 but with a bayer sensor, which some feel makes processing easier. 

[DHill]

 

Might I suggest another alternative - the Fuji X-M1. You can probably only get it second hand now, but with the kit 16-50 lens - which is surprisingly sharp - it's not a lot bigger than the Sony RX100, but with much better image quality due to its much bigger sensor - in fact, the same as the one in the Fuji X-T1. I bought mine new for less than any of the RX100 series. And of course you can also change lenses - I often carry the X-M1, 16-50 and 50-230 lenses in a laptop bag with laptop inside. This camera replaced my RX100. No viewfinder - you have to use the screen on the back - but I quickly got used to that, and the fact that it rotates is very useful - I often find myself composing in the same way as an old film medium format camera with waist-level finder. 

 

Alternatively the X-A2 or X-A3 have the same form factor as the X-M1 but with a bayer sensor, which some feel makes processing easier. 

 

I couldn't live without a viewfinder myself. ....

That's what I thought, originally. I then bought an original RX100 not long after it first came out as something my wife could use as her main camera (the size was important to her) and which I could use as a briefcase camera, and found it awkward but kind of a fair trade-off for the fact it was the camera with decent image quality that could fit in a laptop bag. Somehow, though, using the X-M1 with the back screen is so much better than the RX100 - it just feels more natural. And I've just bought a cheap second-hand X-E2, which does have an EVF, and find myself using the back screen just as much as the EVF. 

 

So, these things can change ... :-) 

 

Oh, and just a personal thing, but after seeing the difference in image quality between the little RX100 sensor (I think the GX5 is the same size) and the APS-C sensor in the Fujis (probably better than my old Nikon D7000), I wouldn't want to go back to a little 1 inch sensor. But that might just be me ;-)

[Howza]

Not about to get rid of my Canon DSLR for my wildlife work, but I have been considering the Canon M5 as I could adapt and use the glass I have presently.  

Quality seems to be reviewed as quite good.