Niko - the S95 is stickier now, would that sway you?
Brox - the LX5 viewfinder is $200!!
Are $500 Dollar Point & Shoots Still Relevant?
(76 posts) (20 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
shivaswrath said:
Niko - the S95 is stickier now, would that sway you?
Brox - the LX5 viewfinder is $200!!So what's it gonna be?
I nearly bought either one when my dad was in Hong Kong, we were comparing prices over the phone and it just wasn't worth it. I was hoping it would be somewhat cheaper there, but it wasn't.
Posted 2 years ago # -
well i didn't like the S95. . .but still think it's stupid to pa $420 for the LX-5, so I await. . .I might just order both from amazon and do a comparo, but I hate doing shady shit like that and returning one (taking advantage of Amazon.com generous return policy), because then someone ends up with a cheap refurby. . .
Posted 2 years ago # -
Why not consider the LX3 shivaswrath ?... http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/
Posted 2 years ago # -
I notice everyone here blows off the Nikon p7000. I am going to try the P7000, the G12 Canon and the D3100 Nikon once more to see if I can feature the P&S high end cameras or if I again to conclude......not just not worth the money. I have heard why some don't like the Nikon p7000 and it SEEMED to be just in the lack of zoom at the long end. My tests with P&S was way worse at the long zoom end however some would quickly debate that at least they would pull in a subject. My reaction when I saw eagle shots with both optical zoom and digital zoom maxed out is that the photos were worthless. So I am trying the P&Ss again. But $500 for a camera with very great disappointments is I think money wasted??
Posted 2 years ago # -
DaveyJ said:
I notice everyone here blows off the Nikon p7000. I am going to try the P7000, the G12 Canon and the D3100 Nikon once more to see if I can feature the P&S high end cameras or if I again to conclude......not just not worth the money. I have heard why some don't like the Nikon p7000 and it SEEMED to be just in the lack of zoom at the long end. My tests with P&S was way worse at the long zoom end however some would quickly debate that at least they would pull in a subject. My reaction when I saw eagle shots with both optical zoom and digital zoom maxed out is that the photos were worthless. So I am trying the P&Ss again. But $500 for a camera with very great disappointments is I think money wasted??I think it's the lack of speed. I don't care about superzooms, I want something fast. If you weren't going to capture it with a DSLR and a large, long lens (which some people have but don't carry all the time), what makes you think you'd be able to capture it with a slow lens and a point and shoot?
Granted I haven't tried any of the recent batches, Canon G12, etc, but I'd rather have something small, pocketable and fast, like the Lumix LX5 and the Canon S90, which Nikon does not have an equivalent of.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@NSXType-R: I will also check out the two you mention. The P&S is something a friend seems set on buying. I myself always lean towards doing it right or just bring a set of binoculars. The S90 is one I have had recommended to me before for someone set on P&S and i think the place i am going has that too. The reason i keep throwing the D3100 into my P&S tests is that is about a minimal camera as I can tolerate. Compared to a Nikon D3 the D3100 is pretty compact. So I will try these P&S again. My most convincing comparisons have been in the field where everything form large pro rigs are in use all the way thru to P&S. This store also has the LX5. I do admit I for one will often take the lightest camera that really produces results for me. Usually that has been a D90. But I also concede a D3100 is NOT pocketable. Often when I show up to photograph we are bringing at least a pickup truck full of gear for other parts of the project so that is where my reaction to the P&S compactness comes in. Not like I am out in a suit and have not even a briefcase.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Be sure to check the Sony nex and the upcoming Panasonic gf2.. seems the gf2 will be my dream replacement camera (kicking gf1 to second place :))
Posted 2 years ago # -
Anyone notice the price on the Canon G1X and think, what the hell were they thinking?
Sure the zoom range is there, has relatively fast lens and the sensor size is nice, but $800? Are you serious?
That's exactly the wrong direction to head in. Anything over $500 for a point and shoot is preposterous in my opinion.
Even if they don't sell at MSRP and cut $200 off the price, I can't imagine the G1X flying off the shelves.
Posted 1 year ago # -
The G1X (gosh that is close to GX1 from Panny) looks like a fail. $799 for a point and shoot with a slightly bigger sensor than m4/3s? Canon must be loosing sales of G12s to mirrorless cameras, so this is likely a stop gap measure, otherwise this would not have seen the light of day.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Baloney. If you think this or a Fuji x100/x10, LX5, or other like it are point and shoots, you need reevaluate your perception by spending a lot more time with that league of camera.
Just because you can't change lenses doesn't make it garbage. Those can do 90% of a DSLR and 500% of what the average Joe needs.
One will spend $1000+ on a dslr to match this camera. Believe it or not, more people do not want a bunch of lenses or exotic options. They want a good camera that doesn't weigh a ton and can fit in a coat pocket.
The images from my G11 were better than the first 4/3rds in most and even in low light situations - G1X will be nuts. If this does match or exceeds the M4/3rds systems, this could replace many of them if the market catches on. For me, it is all about IQ and what gets me there - not a perception of what category they fall in.
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared said:
Baloney.;-)
Only problem is that it will cost three times (or more) the $500 that this thread is talking about...
Looking over my glasses into the crystal ball...
It's the sub $120 P&S that is the most threatened beast today (Jan 2012).
The sub $200 P&S is next in line.
The entry level dSLR will be the victim of compacts such as the Fuji X10 and $800ish Canon, or they will push the entire dSLR market price points UP so they sit above this price level.
I'd say that the safest part of the market is the $500 compact.
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared said:
Baloney....Believe it or not, more people do not want a bunch of lenses or exotic options. They want a good camera that doesn't weigh a ton and can fit in a coat pocket.
I have used the P7000 and the G12, so i know what these cameras are like. They have an appeal, but there is nothing "pocketable" about them! They are already big and guess what the G1X is bigger than either one of those cameras! The Panny GX1 with power zoom has similar zoom range and is smaller than the G1X. There is no getting around it, the G1X is a big, overpriced camera. In my mind that = fail. Think whatever you like.
Also, as other noted, don't put this in the same league as the G12 and P7100, the price is nearly double. For that the controls should be laid out better. Canon took the G12, made the body bigger, stuffed a sensor slightly larger than M4/3s in it (its not APS-C), and actually made the camera less appealing because you need to dive into the menu to change ISO, unlike the G12 which has a dial!
Posted 1 year ago # -
bjrichus - Lost me on that post except you liked my Baloney! eh er wait... whatever.
I believe the question of the thread is more of "should there be $500 p/s cameras."
I believe you were referring to how prices are rising and removing the cheaper lines. I think that is what you were touching on.Prices are rising for sure - about 5-10% higher for tech stuff over the last couple of years.
The M4/3 market really caused prices to rise IMO since they are equal or higher than the DSLR low end.
If you think like a corporate peon like me it works like this.
To get the equivilant in a G1x:
M4/3rds:
Body: $500
Lens 1: 14-140mm f/4.0-5.8 ASPH./MEGA O.I.S. $649
-----------------
Total: $1,149Gx1 Body and 28-112mm F2.8-5.8 Lens
Smaller
Larger sensor
Faster lens
Higher ISO
-----------------
Total $799The Gx1 will save you $350!
I would bet my entire camera collection this is what their thought process went through.
Consumers always tend to compare products to the cheaper models, not the more expensive models like manufactures do.
It is just like a car salesman who sees you glancing at a Mercedes on your way to buy a Kia - He then shows you everything the Kia has in common with the Mercedes. "Mercedes is the only other manufacture that includes this as standard." Sounds good at the time, but when your friend's wife comes home and says that to her husband all you hear is, "A Kia?"
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared-
Out of the box in my opinion the G1X is not worth it for your money, even if you're considering the zoom range.
The sensor may be large, but in a couple years it'll be old stuff.
If you bought a D3100 kit with the 18-55 lens at $596 and a Nikkor 18-105 lens at $350, you'd be slightly above budget but I think it's far better value. If you were able to buy the D3100 body only and dump the kit lens, you'd probably be right on budget, if you count in the approximate price of the $100 kit lens.
Yes, size wise you'd be disadvantaged, but I'd so rather be using a DSLR than a very large advanced compact.
If I were really buying an advanced compact, I'd make sure it's fairly small- Canon S100 or Panasonic LX5 sized. Even then none of those cameras are over $500.
Now that Fuji has come out with the X1, I wouldn't even consider the X100 anymore, especially when it has a larger sensor and the option of lenses.
I guess your opinion is different, but when a point and shoot costs the same as a fairly high quality lens (70-300 VR), I start thinking about the purchase differently.
Posted 1 year ago # -
PB PM said:
I have used the P7000 and the G12, so i know what these cameras are like. They have an appeal, but there is nothing "pocketable" about them! They are already big and guess what the G1X is bigger than either one of those cameras! The Panny GX1 with power zoom has similar zoom range and is smaller than the G1X. There is no getting around it, the G1X is a big, overpriced camera. In my mind that = fail. Think whatever you like.Also, as other noted, don't put this in the same league as the G12 and P7100, the price is nearly double. For that the controls should be laid out better. Canon took the G12, made the body bigger, stuffed a sensor slightly larger than M4/3s in it (its not APS-C), and actually made the camera less appealing because you need to dive into the menu to change ISO, unlike the G12 which has a dial!
So it is not a point and shoot then? ;)
Now we are getting somewhere.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I will agree the price is high, but it sure is not a $500 camera either. It is the same price as an E-P3 (14-42) kit but with a longer range and faster lens. Looking at B&H, the 3100 with a kit lens was $750, D5100 $1000.
If a person views "swapping lenses" as a hassle, and you have no need or like the IQ from the super zoom class, this is a very attractive option. Old in a couple of years? Hogwash! This will be good for 4-5 years easy for family stuff. Hell my 6yr old 7mp Panasonic pocket cam does great with flash and daylight. No one is going to buy this to shoot rock concerts or document the mating habits of nocturnal animals.
I think it is fair to question if it is right for you. I do not think it is fair to write it off or call it a fail when it doesn't fit your desire or needs.
Objectively (outside of price being $100-200 high, which will drop) it looks like a winner to me. I won't run out and get it, but I sure would suggest it to many friends who want the best IQ without the hassle of lenses.
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared said:
bjrichus - Lost me on that post except you liked my Baloney! eh er wait... whatever.;-)
TaoTeJared said:
I believe the question of the thread is more of "should there be $500 p/s cameras."I'd love to get either the new Fuji or Canon for that kind of price, but that ain't gonna happen.
TaoTeJared said:
I believe you were referring to how prices are rising and removing the cheaper lines. I think that is what you were touching on.That we have people buying bodies and lens combos that do not deliver better image quality than a D3000 but cost 50% more than the D3000 kit is a testament to how much the manufacturers can get away with.
We are conditioned to pay less for more with each product iteration, so what's up with cameras?
Posted 1 year ago # -
From what I've read about the G1X, it seems like it will be a terrific P&S and offer picture quality that very few if any other PS camera's can match. I have many friends who think I'm nuts for wanting to carry a complicated DSLR around. They think DSLR's are too heavy, they're cumbersome and there are times when I agree. While my houselhold already has a good DSLR and a good ILC, I may have to take a serious look at the G1X for a smaller, but really easy and nicely put together option for times when I want something simpler/smaller.....
Posted 1 year ago # -
-
PB PM said:
Does size define a point and shoot? From my point of view a point and shoot = camera with fixed lens. I would even consider the X100 a point and shoot, although it is very good one.Size has nothing to do with it. To me when manual controls are an "oh and we added this" or an afterthought, that is a point and shoot. When the intention of the design is a set-it and forget-it, it is a point and shoot. When the design includes functionality that intends/assumes a user will will monkey with exposure (set shutter, aperture, etc.) it is no longer a point and shoot and moves into it's own category of Advanced compact.
To me the Olympus xz-1 is a point and shoot - manual controls are embedded in the menus. I see the E-PL3 & E-PM1 as point and shoots as well. They have interchangeable lenses, but are intended as a "set-it and forget it" camera. The many "super zooms" are point and shoots as they are a "set-it and forget-it" but are quite large.
DSLRs have the auto modes (consumer oriented more than just Program mode) but they are not point and shoots even though most people use them as such.
The X100 is so far from a point and shoot. That is why so many people hated it - they didn't know how to use it or understand what it was designed for and try to use it as a point and shoot. A lot of the same people call a Leica M9 a point and shoot. If you get it - you understand, if you don't - then you won't.
Point and shoots are designed for just that, point at something and push A button.
Posted 1 year ago # -
My iPhone 4s is the best "set-it and forget it" a.k.a Point-and-shoot camera I own. Moreover, it's size is just right, has lots of storage, built in WiFi 802.11n, 3G, GPS, can GEO tag my photo's, 1080 video....etc...etc. And it costs me far less than $500 to buy. In fact, it does more for me on a daily basis than all my cameras combined. :P
Cheers...
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared said:
I will agree the price is high, but it sure is not a $500 camera either. It is the same price as an E-P3 (14-42) kit but with a longer range and faster lens. Looking at B&H, the 3100 with a kit lens was $750, D5100 $1000.If a person views "swapping lenses" as a hassle, and you have no need or like the IQ from the super zoom class, this is a very attractive option. Old in a couple of years? Hogwash! This will be good for 4-5 years easy for family stuff. Hell my 6yr old 7mp Panasonic pocket cam does great with flash and daylight. No one is going to buy this to shoot rock concerts or document the mating habits of nocturnal animals.
I think it is fair to question if it is right for you. I do not think it is fair to write it off or call it a fail when it doesn't fit your desire or needs.
Objectively (outside of price being $100-200 high, which will drop) it looks like a winner to me. I won't run out and get it, but I sure would suggest it to many friends who want the best IQ without the hassle of lenses.
You picked one of the more expensive B and H kits with their accessory packs that includes some lens cloth and filters to compare.
This is what I got-
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/730210-REG/Nikon_25472_D3100_Digital_SLR_Camera.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/582443-USA/Nikon_2179_18_105mm_f_3_5_5_6G_ED_VR.html
Definitely over budget, but relatively speaking, I feel that there's greater value to be had.
And if Nikon made the D3100 available body only (stupid decision in my opinion- what happens if I really didn't want a kit lens?), you might be able to squeak by with an $800 budget.
You're correct about the Canon GX1- good for what it does, but it is not a $800 camera.
The Canon G12 is around $400 but at $800 the GX1 is certainly not twice as good a camera as the G12.
You do bring up a good point- it's a great point and shoot for those who may not know what they're doing at a manageable size.
Another more interesting thing to compare- a Nikon V1/J1 combination with the same amount of reach would easily go past $1000 too.
How stupid that the DSLR combo is more cost efficient.
By the way, my definition of a point and shoot is a semi-disposable sub $300 camera. I love how we all define it differently. :D
I could use a camera for 6 years plus- I've had my Coolpix E3700 since 2003. But I feel that if you don't want the zoom range, you get more features performance if you buy cheaply every couple of years- sensor sensitivity, size, and speed increases every so often.
But once again, that's just my opinion. :D
Posted 1 year ago # -
"DSLR combo is more cost efficient."
I love this line of thinking and in reality it never works and why I believe the m4/3 segment has driven prices up. (Not to throw you in this category or most on here either.)
Quintessential story: 2 pairs of friends asked me "what should I buy?" for their girls who are in cheerleading (8yr olds) and their point'n shoots were dated. They both had budgets of $500. I suggested a couple of new super zooms.
One listened got the P500 (just came out) with a 8gb 15mb/sec card, extra battery bag and tripod kit for about $525.
The other bought a Rebel T1i with a 18-55is on clearance for $475 thinking he can use the lens later. (This is where the low-end and m4/3rds bleed you to death - along with every other DSLR but why anything with interchangeable lenses is infinitely more expensive.)
First match - oops 55mm stinks. Goes cheap and buys a 55-200mm IS for $170. Sees the friends close up pictures of the girls from the stands - now frustrated. Returns the 55-200, goes cheap again 70-300mm this time non IS. Next week, photos blurry. Goes back, kid tells him he needs a flash - Buys some Sunpak cheap flash for $150. Flash doesn't reach and girls are way underexposed. Meanwhile our other friend is just firing away and posting to Facebook and the images look great and is shooting 1080p video to boot. The P500 is a bit nosier but I gave her my old copy of noise ninja, set it to batch, and bam - better than the out of camera DSLR of the other friends.He finely calls me back which I laugh my A$$ off and get him straightened out with a 75-300is and give him a lesson on his camera. End cost Camera kit $475, $450 70-300IS Lens, card, 2 bags (holster won't fit second lens), cheap flash $150, tripod $100 + case of beer = $1400. $900 more and his images look no better than the other friend's. And he still complains about not being able to zoom enough. And now he's playing with settings and his images look like C@&*. 8 phone calls later I gave up and drove an hour to reset his camera and put it on auto.
In my friends rather normal world, the $500 P&S super zoom is 10x better than the whole $1,400 spent on a DSLR that in his mind, still doesn't match the P&S. It just is. That's why his wife went out and bought a P500 also. Now her's look better than the DSLR's as well.
Point being - compacts, (advanced/super zoom/pocket) cost just what they are and do what they do very well. Entry level Dslrs & m4/3rds pull people in and then the rat race starts to match what a good p&s can do.
Companies see this, and realize a very good Advanced compact/super zoom is a very good deal vs the rat race of any interchangeable system. $800 sounds like a lot, but when is the last time you added up what you spent (with accessories, filters, etc.) on your DSLR?
Posted 1 year ago # -
I would not recommend a DSLR to most people either, cell phone cams are good enough for 90% of people.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
