Help Me Choose a Compact, please!

[ThomHaig]

Hey everyone,

I was hoping for any advice / recommendations on a compact camera for casual use. I know this forum is focused on a lot of pro video discussion, but I value the opinions the discerning crowd here!

Some context: I own an Xt-3 and love the image quality and handling (manual dials). I'm looking for something that is as small and lightweight as possible that will fit into a jacket pocket that I can take everywhere for pics for the family album, and will be significantly better than smartphones images and video. I've got a little kid who's getting faster and faster, so good autofocus is important. So far I'm deciding between: The Fujifilm X70, the Sony RX100 V, and the Fujifilm X100F as an outlier. Here are my thoughts on them at present:

 

X70 - like that it has the manual dials and colour profiles I like from using Fujifilm. Nice and small. But video is so-so, and apparently autofocus (stills and video) is unimpressive.

RX100 V - Seems to have very good autofocus, and video quality looks great for the size of camera. Very small. But suffers from the Sony colour science of yesteryear. High ISO isn't so great (stills), and would rather a larger sensor than 1". Might not be that much better than a good smartphones in quality. Fiddly looking handling.

X100F - Again, Love the image quality and potentially the Fujifilm handling. Big sensor and fast lens. Video not so impressive though. And it's larger size and weight means I may be less inclined to throw it in a jacket pocket.

 

I know these 3 cameras all have quite different intended purposes, but they all seem to be the closest for what I'm after, and within budget.

Would love to get any opinions, and if anyone has first hand experience with any of the above. Or if anyone has any recommendations, I'd love to hear them. 

Thanks for taking the time to read this!

[noone]

7 hours ago, ThomHaig said:

Hey everyone,

I was hoping for any advice / recommendations on a compact camera for casual use. I know this forum is focused on a lot of pro video discussion, but I value the opinions the discerning crowd here!

Some context: I own an Xt-3 and love the image quality and handling (manual dials). I'm looking for something that is as small and lightweight as possible that will fit into a jacket pocket that I can take everywhere for pics for the family album, and will be significantly better than smartphones images and video. I've got a little kid who's getting faster and faster, so good autofocus is important. So far I'm deciding between: The Fujifilm X70, the Sony RX100 V, and the Fujifilm X100F as an outlier. Here are my thoughts on them at present:

 

X70 - like that it has the manual dials and colour profiles I like from using Fujifilm. Nice and small. But video is so-so, and apparently autofocus (stills and video) is unimpressive.

RX100 V - Seems to have very good autofocus, and video quality looks great for the size of camera. Very small. But suffers from the Sony colour science of yesteryear. High ISO isn't so great (stills), and would rather a larger sensor than 1". Might not be that much better than a good smartphones in quality. Fiddly looking handling.

X100F - Again, Love the image quality and potentially the Fujifilm handling. Big sensor and fast lens. Video not so impressive though. And it's larger size and weight means I may be less inclined to throw it in a jacket pocket.

 

I know these 3 cameras all have quite different intended purposes, but they all seem to be the closest for what I'm after, and within budget.

Would love to get any opinions, and if anyone has first hand experience with any of the above. Or if anyone has any recommendations, I'd love to hear them. 

Thanks for taking the time to read this!

I would go with the RX100 V.

I got an RX100 iv very cheap and it is a little wonder.    Very similar to the v except the v adds PDAF (the iv is actually very good for a CDAF camera) a few other improvements too of course and if I could have afforded a v I would have got one but am now very happy with the iv and no need to upgrade now for me..

It is a lot better in low light that you would think (it is not up to my A7s but then, not much else is).

If you use a kit lens on your XT3 the little Sony would actually do very well against it in low light and only if you add faster lenses would it make a difference.

I very briefly had a Fuji X100F (and a X100S) they were both my late Dads and I gave them to relatives.    The X100F was a very nice camera but fixed prime lens cameras are not for me.

The RX100 cameras are tiny but a bit thick and I would not call them shirt pocketable but are ok in coats and jeans in a pinch.    

Can be a bit "slippery" (I use a wrist strap and make sure it is on my wrist before using the camera.

RX100 V (and iv) Built in pop up EVF, and flash work well and built in ND is great as is the flip screen 1/32000 shutter (like the X100F though the Sony just goes from mechanical to electronic seemlessly).

 

They are all good choices and ideally you should try them all yourself.

 

 

[Snowfun]

Rx100 is a great genuinely pocketable camera. Mine takes a lot of abuse but survives. 

[MrSMW]

X100V

[ThomHaig]

Hey, thanks for chiming in @noone @Snowfun @MrSMW - unanimous votes for the RX100 V so far! And great to it's low-light isn't so bad against the other APS-C ones. I'd miss those top dials, for sure, but if the Fujifilm AF can't keep up on these older cameras, they'd be no good to me!

 

[kye]

1 hour ago, ThomHaig said:

Hey, thanks for chiming in @noone @Snowfun @MrSMW - unanimous votes for the RX100 V so far! And great to it's low-light isn't so bad against the other APS-C ones. I'd miss those top dials, for sure, but if the Fujifilm AF can't keep up on these older cameras, they'd be no good to me!

See if you can borrow one (or buy it with a return option) and do a bit of a stress test.

I say this because I have a friend who is into stills and has an old DSLR that he hates lugging around, but he's repeatedly tried going on trips with only the latest iPhone and has kept going back to the DSLR.  His reason....  none of the iPhone photos are good enough for him to print and put on the wall.

The moral of the story is that the best of the convenient options may still not be good enough, and you might be better off trading some of the convenience in order to get something that will work for you.

In the end we only remember the footage, not the camera gear, so as long as the equipment is as minimal as it can be for the required results, and as long as it's minimal enough that you actually take it and use it, then that's the way to go.

You haven't talked about what focal lengths you're interested in using, and how you actually shoot.  A MILC and pancake prime isn't a bad option and I've done that as a (barely) pocketable option in the past to great results.

[Trek of Joy]

I've gone back and forth on a RX100 or a X100 for something more compact and I always wind up just carrying my a7's with a single lens - usually a 24mm or 35mm, but sometimes a small zoom. I had one of the x100's and the a7III with a small prime was much better so I got rid of it. If you have the XT3, maybe something like the tiny xa7 with a pancake? Though I don't carry anything including my phone in my pocket since its too warm where I live to wear a jacket most of the year, and I don't find "pocketable" cameras comfortable to carry in pants/shorts pockets. So I always have at least a small sling or shoulder bag or I just walk around with the camera around my neck. I've tinkered with the RX100's dozens of times over the years in Best Buy but can't seem to actually get one because of the IQ compromises and the fact for me - they won't live in a pocket. But that's just me.

Chris

[MrSMW]

3 hours ago, ThomHaig said:

unanimous votes for the RX100 V so far!

Well actually, my list would be:

1: Leica Q2

2: Leica QP

3: Fuji X100V

But none are really that 'compact'.

A compact for me would need to fit in my pocket and that's exactly what the Sony RX100V I had did.

I used it for B roll at weddings and it was good for that, just not great above 800 iso.

My last 'personal' camera was the Fuji X100f but that was dual purpose as I also used it as a 35mm lens at weddings, but for the last 2 years my personal camera has been my iphone.

That is now changing and my new personal camera (again dual purpose as I will be using it at weddings for both stills & video) will be the Sigma FP with 45mm f2.8 lens and that is relatively 'compact', but only pocketable for jackets.

[ThomHaig]

@Trek of Joy @kye - thanks guys. You both make good points about whether or not the smaller, pocketable gear is 'good enough'.

 

It was actually @Mattias Burling's videos on youtube that turned me on to the idea of tiny cameras. One of his vids compelled me to pick up a Nikon Coolpix A. The size is great, really small, despite it having an APS-C sensor. I'd be happy with it, but the autofocus and video are really bad. (The high ISO isn't the best either, but given the cost and age of the thing, that's nit-picking) After coming back from a family holiday, the pictures selected to share were determined by the (relatively few) ones in focus.

 

Regarding focal length, really anything around the 28-35mm range if a prime / fixed lens camera is the way to go.

 

'Thankfully' it's pretty cold were I live 😉 - so I'll be wearing a jacket with decent-sized pockets for the next few months!

[kye]

The fundamental challenge you have is the one that we all have - there's no perfect camera.

The second, very unfortunate, challenge you have is that the 'simple' task of having a small, light-weight camera that can keep up with your kid and how you live your life.

What this translates to, and why I put 'simple' in quotes, is that you want a camera that can:

• be small and pocketable, likely implying a smaller sensor
• have autofocus that can keep up with a small child (otherwise known as 'world-class' - watch some AF tests if you're unsure of this)
• can do that AF in the lighting that you find yourself in, which after the sun goes down, will be extreme low light
• has the kind of IQ that you deem acceptable

Basically, the above is a very difficult set of requirements, unlikely to be met by anything, so you'll have to choose which things you are willing to compromise on.

Parents getting a camera for pics of their kids running around think it seems like a reasonable request, but in reality it's kind of like saying you want continuous eye-AF at f1.4 in pitch-black.  Cameras are getting way better than they used to be, but we're not there yet.

[ThomHaig]

@kye yes, for sure! I totally appreciate that asking for 'just' solid AF in low-light is a huge ask, in reality.

Maybe the best, most cost-effective option is to stick with the Coolpix A and introduce sedatives into my kid's diet! 😅

I'll see if I can find anywhere with a good returns policy to try them out. The X100F is totally the one I love in terms of stills IQ, how I expect it to handle, and the look of the thing. Been trying to convince myself it's the one, but looking at the dimensions, it's likely juuuuust too big for what I'd really like.

Damn, when will manufacturer's wake up to my needs and make a credit card sized full-frame fixed lens f1.8 camera with lightning fast AF?!? 😤

[Gandulf]

Honestly, why don't you get a RX100 VII, sure it will hurt the bank, but you'll have the best compact and the best AF in a small body available. From the cameras you suggest, personally, I'd go for the RX100 V, as it's still the best performing one out of the 3. 

[MrSMW]

41 minutes ago, Gandulf said:

I'd go for the RX100 V

Yup. It’s one of those cameras you can’t judge ultimate quality on based on rear screen or EVF but in editing on a larger pc/laptop/Mac screen.

I shot an entire project of stills and video on one in the Faroe Islands over 3 days and I was impressed with the quality it could produce.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

Just as a reminder about compact cameras for people researching, but for @ThomHaig it probably would not fulfill it's AF needs: LX100 and LX100 II.

I'm offloading a lot of my m43 stuff, but my LX100 will never go. It's a VERY good lens that comes with a camera for free. 🙂 My 2nd camera in all my trips (generally in hands of my wife), amazing versatility, very small, I simply love it.

Ditching my X100S as my everyday bag camera and the LX100 will get the job (when I could go out again because Corona).

[noone]

I am happy using up to ISO 6400 with my RX100 iv (goes to 12800, the v goes to 25600 I believe so might be a bit better at 6400/12800).

Low light is about the same as an M43 camera with a zoom (against a good fast m43 zoom, a bit better at the wide end and a bit worse at the long end to me).  The best  M43 cameras will do slightly better at higher ISOs but you may not have to use really high ISOs because of the fast lens.

M43 or APSC with a fast prime will be much better though (So that means  the f2 fixed lens Fuji)   HOW much better and does the fixed focal length matter is the question and the RX100 is good enough for ME to overcome the fixed focal length).

The focus assist lamp is annoyingly blinding (like on my A7s) so I turn it off.

It also can be fun with video as it can do slow motion up to 1000fps (1000, 500 and 250fps) and are all taken at smaller sizes with 1000 being smallest and upsized in camera to 1080.    1000 is not great but can be fun 250 is not too bad.   Only short clips but you can set it to be recording and it will record the previous few seconds (you can change the length and so quality too).    You need very good light to do 1000fps though.

Just went out for a couple of early morning snaps (a but cold so I did not go far)

[noone]

Forgot to add I would skip the longer lens RX100s as while they might be better cameras daytime but because the lens is slower as well as longer they are not as good once it gets dark.

The Sonys also have clearzoom as well as digital zoom which is variable and so clearzoom extends the usable range out to 140mm equivalent (clearzoom is variable to 2x with little image quality loss , digital zoom is variable  to 4x but it gets  very noticeable so i would skip that    Both only work for jpeg stills and video, not RAW.

[ntblowz]

I m probably on the other hand of spectrum, going from LX100 to G1X III to G5X to RX100 VI then now to Note 20 Ultra, the main sensor on the Ultra definitely give RX100VI a run for the money on the wide end (more bokeh than 1" sensor at f2.8), but on telephoto the small compact is better cause phone sensor on telephoto end is still quite small. Smartphone win default on UW as no other compact offer this solution except the canned NIkon DL 18-50.   

I take photos of my niece and nephews and the parent usually ask me to send those photos and videos.. smartphone so much faster and easier than cameras especially transferring video footage.

 

The AF on X70 is still quite bad, dont get it.