Jump to content

Smaller Camera to carry around


Recommended Posts

Is a samsung wb35F  good enough to contribute with?  I have a better camera that I take pictures if I plan on taking them but its harder to carry around all the time... so was curious about the samsung as I can carry it in my pocket if need be allowing me to take pictures even when I wasn't expecting to take any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is a samsung wb35F  good enough to contribute with?  I have a better camera that I take pictures if I plan on taking them but its harder to carry around all the time... so was curious about the samsung as I can carry it in my pocket if need be allowing me to take pictures even when I wasn't expecting to take any.

 

Highly unlikely, tiny sensor, high megapixel, wide range zoom; personaly I would not even try to pass QC with such a camera evewn though my wife uses something similar for web blog pictures - very occasionally if I have nothing better. There are not many pocketable cameras that will reliably pass QC even with sound technique. Anyhing with smaller than a 1" sensor (Canon GX5/7, RX100 etc) is unlikely to be suitable, the Samsung sensor is tiny!. This week I bought a a lightly used Fuji X100T (APS-C) for just that purpose (instead of Canon GX5), high quality if limited flexibility (no zoom). I use a comprehensive X-T2/X-T1 outfit for most other stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I was guessing that was the answer but as I got it for free from a family member so I figured Id ask  :) just would be nice to have something affordable that could easily be brought with you anywhere... a camera case everywhere you go is just  not always practical

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use the Sony RX 100 mark three. It passes QC just fine. There are many here that shoot the various RX100s as a second camera, some as their only camera.

Although I would suspect Martin's new Fuji will be even better since its mirrorless. I have the Fuji X-T1 and 2 also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll have to take a look at those cameras, thanks... ofc this assumes I finally decide to submit my pictures lol   I always worry that what I take wont be good enough, I need to get around to just submitting em and let the world decide I guess :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll have to take a look at those cameras, thanks... ofc this assumes I finally decide to submit my pictures lol   I always worry that what I take wont be good enough, I need to get around to just submitting em and let the world decide I guess :)

By all means give it a go, but be aware that success here is generally bought with a large investment in time and effort. Taking the shots is the easy part, image processing, and keywording, if done effectively, involve a great deal of thought and time.

 

You might get lucky with a handful of uploads, but there is a pretty clear correlation between portfolio size and income. The relationship varies between individuals, some successful contributors have a relatively small port (a few thousand) of highly refined images, while others, myself included, just pile em high. Either way, it involves considerable graft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a bunch of photos, especially of foxes but also of birds, bugs, and flowers.... I do nature a lot if I cant find an animal I'll look to flowers for bumblebees or whatever.

 

I'll try to branch out eventually but I just love nature photos.  it started when a couple of foxes decided to live in my back yard in a burn pile full of branches and whatnot... when I started seeing pups running around I started taking pictures and found the joy in photography.

 

so now I go on walks and whatnot and take pictures where I find things that catch my eye.  I still take pictures of the family of foxes that still resides here, not sure if they are the same foxes over the years or the kids but every year we have a batch of babies running around here  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree with Martin that the minimum sensor size to aim for is 1". A Sony RX100 2 is with me most of the time, although my keeper rate is not as high with this camera as with my DSLRs. If Sony would bring out a decent compact fastish zoom with a range of around 16-80 then I would certainly go for an alpha series camera. The lower end alphas can be picked up quite cheaply and may be worth a look, otherwise I would look at a basic DSLR with the best glass you can justify. My nature stuff does sell, but not on Alamy and I rarely place it here anymore, although others may have more luck, especially the specialists like Philippe whose work is excellent and may be worth a look to see what you will be competing with. Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit more expensive than the RX100 but in my experience better quality images: I carry around a Sony NEX6. With a 16-50mm it's small enough to go in a large pocket.

 

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Panasonic Lumix TZ 100 is currently on my wish list, though my propensity for not spending money keeps the camera out of my pocket, and the £550.00 cost safely tucked away...

 

 
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.