FWIW I've been purdy impressed with the camera on my iPhone 6s.
Untitled by rileysonex, on Flickr

My LG G3 has a pretty decent camera for a cell phone, too. It's nowhere near capable of the stuff other guys get on their nicer cameras but it does good enough to amaze me how fast technology has come so far

RKTX wrote:FWIW I've been purdy impressed with the camera on my iPhone 6s.

You may also like...

IXPand SanDisc

Great news for iPAD & iPhones, a "grab and go" "Lighting connection" to USB (has sub-CPU for decoding).

Copies IOS photographs, videos, PDFs etc to a flash drive and FAT file system for Other OS devices. Works great!

.
Just a quickie update re some of the discussion re the Nikon AW130. Here is a link to a great review of a bunch of “ruggedized cameras” including the Nikon.

http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-waterproof-camera/

All cameras have a somewhat small 1 / 2.3 “ sized sensor. All are offered in a variety of colors and feature image stabilization. The review identifies two big winners:

#1 Olympus Stylus TOUGH TG-4
Review:http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/compacts/oly_tg4

Olympus Tough TG4; Price about $ 380



# 2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS6
Review: http://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/compacts/panasonic_dmcts6

Lumix DMC-TS6; Price about $ 235


The Nikon AW130 is also mentioned. The article discusses some “issues” which kept it out of the top two spots.

# Other: Nikon Coolpix AW130
Review: http://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/compacts/nikon_cpaw130

CoolpixAW130; Price about $ 279



Some of the differences of the Olympus TG4 over the Nikon AW130 include:

TG4 shoots RAW files, AW130 No
TG4 lens is F2.0 to F4.9 from 25-105mm, AW130 lens is vs F2.8 to F4.9 from 24-120mm
TG4 offers aperture priority mode and manual exposure mode, AW130 does not.
Neither the TG4, nor the AW130 has Shutter Priority Mode.
TG4 offers Wi-Fi and GPS, and the camera also captures air pressure, altitude, and water depth; The AW130 offers built-in GPS, Maps, POI technology, and electronic Compass.

( I have no clue what POI or Point of Interest Technology is re a camera. I’m too old school.
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_of_interest )

The Nikon has a longer range zoom lens. The fast F 2.0 Olympus lens is 1 full F stop faster at wide angle (25mm) compared to the Nikon. Top shutter speed on the TG4 is 1/2000 and for AW130 it is 1/4000 second. If your float plane sinks to 100 feet below the water surface, the Nikon will still be ok, whereas the Olympus gives it up at 50 feet. At that point you’ll probably have other priorities anyway.

IMHO, any of these camera are good enough. For me, I like a faster F2.0 lens, and the ability to shoot RAW files is huge as it enables much better post editing if needed. Given a choice, for my mission, in November 2015, I’d choose the Olympus Stylus TG4. YMMV.

Great run-down of the waterproof cameras!

I have the Olympus TG-3, and while it does some things very well, it's really a big step down in image quality compared to my old Lumix LX5, which is the same size and price, but not waterproof. The TG-3 does well in good light, but in poor light you really see the difference. Whether that's do to the lens or the processor I don't know, and how much better (if any) the TG-4 is I haven't heard. The -4's ability to shoot RAW would undoubtably help for those folks who have the talent and time to manipulate images after the fact, but it won't make up for a inferior lens.

Ergonomically the TG-3 is hard for me to use. My thumb constantly bumps the mode select dial and I get a burst of 15 small images when I just wanted to take one normal image. Because of how I normally use the camera (shooting with one hand from my kayak) I just leave it on IAuto, but when I want to fine tune the exposure the ergonomics get in the way again. It's not an easy camera to adjust things on.

The zoom is electronic and slow, but they all are on these small cameras. You have to turn off the GPS and WiFi if you want any sort of battery life. I seem to recall that the GPS draws battery power even when the camera is shut down.

It's not a bad camera, and it's a great camera if you're going to use it in the water, but I be hesitant to recommend it for someone who knows good imaging and just wanted an extra level of ruggedness or rain proofing. Again I'm talking the TG-3, but the ergonomics and controls look identical on the TG-4.

I looked long and hard at the Olympus OM-D series of 4/3rds cameras. Olympus advertises the weatherproofness of their cameras and lenses much more aggressively than other companies, but I couldn't determine if they really were any more weatherproof than the other weatherproofed cameras out there. An OM-D with a short wide angle would be a quantum leap up in image quality and performance compared to any of the waterproof cameras, but with all the inherent trade offs of size and price.

Here are some sample images from the TG-3





Shot through the aircraft windshield


Shot through the side bubble window.


Shot through the side window.

A quick illustration of how sensor size can make a difference:

Here's a hand-held jpeg taken under crappy light with my Sony A7r, which has a 35mm sensor. The subject matter is just whatever was lying on the kitchen table...in this case my wife's watch.



Here's a 100% zoom of the same image:



Not bad detail for a pretty marginal photo. I don't know how the A7r works for cockpit photography since I'm still waiting on my starter motor, but if nothing else the detail will be good.

Been studying the Fuji X series a little more closely. I think they're doing themselves a disservice by not using more distinctive model designations like "Eagle Claw" or "Tactical Ranger". Everything is a combination of X and some alphanumeric and it gets a little confusing.

I like the smaller form factor, which it seems the X-E2 and its newer brother the X-T10 have. The X-T1 is closer to a small SLR form factor from the sounds of it.

I really want to replace my Panasonic Lumix LX-3, but what could have been a promising advanced compact, the X-100T, has a fixed prime, not a zoom. Actually it seems to be more of a modern rangefinder incarnation.

I'm current thinking X-T10 body for its more diminutive size and picking up a nicer Fujinon wide zoom that meets my personal all-around requirements.

Is anyone making third party X-mount lenses?

Zzz wrote:Been studying the Fuji X series a little more closely. I think they're doing themselves a disservice by not using more distinctive model designations like "Eagle Claw" or "Tactical Ranger". Everything is a combination of X and some alphanumeric and it gets a little confusing.

I like the smaller form factor, which it seems the X-E2 and its newer brother the X-T10 have. The X-T1 is closer to a small SLR form factor from the sounds of it.

I really want to replace my Panasonic Lumix LX-3, but what could have been a promising advanced compact, the X-100T, has a fixed prime, not a zoom. Actually it seems to be more of a modern rangefinder incarnation.

I'm current thinking X-T10 body for its more diminutive size and picking up a nicer Fujinon wide zoom that meets my personal all-around requirements.

Is anyone making third party X-mount lenses?

There is a Fuji X-Pro1 that is basically a rangefinder with interchangeable lenses, but I've heard it's going to be upgraded soon, so I'd wait to consider it.

The Lumix LX 100 looks smoking hot if you don't want to invest in interchangeable lenses. All the other P&S Lumix cameras I'm familiar with have been excellent.

The X-T10 is a really appealing body. I especially like that there's a plethora of manual controls. I'd have gone with that system if I didn't want to use my legacy glass that requires a 35mm sensor.

I don't know if there are third-party lenses for the X-T10, but Fuji makes a lot of lenses and they look good to me. I've NEVER seen a bargain in lenses...you always get what you pay for.

I was actually enroute to buy the Fujifilm X-T10 when I opened my safe to get the check book and saw my many Nikkor lenses sitting there. It just bugged the shit out of me to think of buying more lenses when I already have so much pinnacle glass. So I grabbed a couple of my prime lenses and took them to the camera store and said "what can I use these on?" That's how I found the Sony A7r.

It's not perfect... there are only a few dedicate lenses and they're expensive, and the conversion tube that lets me use my Nikkor glass on the Sony body is somewhat long...has to be to get the element-to-sensor length correct. But I'm soooo happy to be able to use the lenses I already have, and the 35mm sensor is super nice.

Incidentally the Sony A7r is being replaced by the A7r2, so they can be found at good prices. It was only a couple hundred bucks more than the Fujifilm X-T10, and about the same size, though the lenses end up being larger than the 4/3rds system.

Incidentally, I don't know anything about the less advanced Sony cameras, but they seem to sweep the semi-pro market. Some of the working pros who use the Sony A7rxxx bodies also use the lesser Sony bodies. I'd look at them if I was in the market for a camera. Check out these links: Troy Ratcliff has a definite look...one I can't decide how much I like, but he's very upfront and readable.

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/sony-a6000-review/
http://stuckincustoms.smugmug.com/

.
zzz wrote

I really want to replace my Panasonic Lumix LX-3,

I have a similar LX5, and when I came across a super deal on the Panasonic Electronic ViewFinder for it on local Craigslist, I bought it. Wow. It makes for an entirely different experience. Don't dump that LX3, it's a jewel, and that Leica optic is nothing to sneeze at. Find a viewfinder used and keep that LX3 as a super backup after you score on your Fuji.

Panasonic LX5 with Electronic ViewFinder

RKTX wrote:FWIW I've been purdy impressed with the camera on my iPhone 6s.
Untitled by rileysonex, on Flickr

The iPhone 6 camera can produce amazing results when the light intensity is just right-- it has a definitely optimal range. Your shot is super crisp but as the light starts to dim it gets really noisy.

I've been looking at the Lumix stuff because of its native Micro Four Thirds lens mount, which would allow me to swap glass with my Black Magic. I uncovered the GX8 and the GM5:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... m/alsVwDtl

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... micro.html

Both are interchangeable lens, and the GX8 adds 4K video, it's a slightly larger body though at 5.2" wide and 481g. The GM5 is significantly smaller though than even the Fuji X-T10, only 4" wide and 180g, and has the m43 mount.

Zzz wrote:I've been looking at the Lumix stuff because of its native Micro Four Thirds lens mount, which would allow me to swap glass with my Black Magic. I uncovered the GX8 and the GM5:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... m/alsVwDtl

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... micro.html

Both are interchangeable lens, and the GX8 adds 4K video, it's a slightly larger body though at 5.2" wide and 481g. The GM5 is significantly smaller though than even the Fuji X-T10, only 4" wide and 180g, and has the m43 mount.

Hard to go wrong with either. Sometimes the larger cameras are worth it because they're easier to handle and manipulate. If you already own decent lenses it's hard to justify going to a different system like the Fujifilm. If I recall correctly the Lumix bodies will also accept Olympus lenses, and they make some nice ones.

That baby you worked so hard to make isn't getting any smaller...can you really afford not to have a new camera?

Hammer wrote:That baby you worked so hard to make isn't getting any smaller...can you really afford not to have a new camera?

Now you're just pushing my buttons. You're a real manipulator, Hammer. Keep going. This is for the baby.

Zzz wrote:

Hammer wrote:That baby you worked so hard to make isn't getting any smaller...can you really afford not to have a new camera?

Now you're just pushing my buttons. You're a real manipulator, Hammer. Keep going. This is for the baby.

Can you really explain to your wife and baby daughter why there are no photos? "Oh...I saved a few hundred dollars, so that makes up for a lost chapter, well, more like a gaping hole in the precious chronology of our lives...right?" "I mean, I did the right thing didn't I...like, I saved a few hundred dollars back in 2016, and that's worth a lot, isn't it?"

Just try and explain why you didn't buy a new camera. Go ahead...try. I can't wait to hear how that goes over.

You know B&H is closed all day Saturday don't you? If you haven't placed an order by noon tomorrow I'm calling Social Services. There are people in this world who appreciate babies enough to own proper cameras, and some of them can't have children of their own.

Hammer wrote:

Zzz wrote:

Hammer wrote:That baby you worked so hard to make isn't getting any smaller...can you really afford not to have a new camera?

...... Keep going. This is for the baby.

Can you really explain to your wife and baby daughter why there are no photos? "Oh...I saved a few hundred dollars, so that makes up for a lost chapter, well, more like a gaping hole in the precious chronology of our lives...right?" "I mean, I did the right thing didn't I...like, I saved a few hundred dollars back in 2016, and that's worth a lot, isn't it?"

Just try and explain why you didn't buy a new camera. Go ahead...try. I can't wait to hear how that goes over.

You know B&H is closed all day Saturday don't you? If you haven't placed an order by noon tomorrow I'm calling Social Services. There are people in this world who appreciate babies enough to own proper cameras, and some of them can't have children of their own.

I'm beginning to understand the logic behind your username!!

.
That Panasonic GX8 sure looks sweet. I was wondering how it stacked up against the Panasonic flagship the GH4. Here is an interesting article comparing the two.
http://naturalexposures.com/lumix-for-second-body-gx8-or-gh4-question-from-meggi-raeder/




For folks following the Micro Four Thirds camera scene, I think my favorite site is

http://www.43rumors.com/

I have sort of tried to avoid camera sites, and gun sites as well for that matter. I keep buying stuff I so do not need. It has also been rumored that the GH5 is going to be introduced soon. That means the GH4 will drop waaay down in price.

Personally, for now I am soldiering on with my ancient Panasonic GH2 and Olympus EP3 gear + M43 lenses. My Canon lenses sit in a bag awaiting the price of the Canon 6D to drop to nothing. Oh the glory of a full frame sensor and fast f 2.8 wide angle Canon glass The fact of the matter is, I really shoot mainly with my Canon SD880 and Canon S110 because they are always with me. Olympus cameras basically achieve stabilization via in camera body methods, whereas the Panasonics use optical stabilization of the Panasonic lenses. If you are using a Canon, Nikon, or other third party lens on a Micro Four Thirds body via an adapter, image stabilization may not be possible using the Panasonic body. On an Olympus body you are good. For photography from the cockpit, image stabilization may be important.

I am enjoying reading what folks are using for photography. Too much camera porn however is not good for my weak heart

My wife and I are planning an adventure this summer and I'd like to buy a camera to take along that is capable of taking high quality images. I'm a working guy but realize there is no free lunch in optics or cameras, or much else in life for that matter. That said, the $6K+ Leicas are out for me. I have an older (old) Nikon FE film camera but no stockpile of lenses that will factor in my choice. I also have a Panasonic Lumix waterproof pocket camera that's a few years old and takes nice pictures and has done fine for what it is.

After reading this thread a couple times and seeing some of the images that are posted here and throughout the site, I'm consistently impressed. I'd like a high quality camera that is of convenient size for traveling. I'm leaning heavily toward a mirrorless four thirds camera body that is capable of interchangeable lenses. The pictures I see from Alex's Fujifilm X-E2 appear stunning as do many of Hammer's and others. I realize that much goes to the operator, but I'd like a camera capable of producing professional or near professional quality images. Given a budget that does not exceed $1500 for a camera and one lens, what would be you top 3 choices of what's available now or anticipated in the next few months? What single lens size would you buy to photograph an aviation adventure? I'd like a camera that I can use in manual mode that doesn't have that option "buried in the GUI" as Z said. A little scary that I know what that means. I fly with steam gages and would choose to do so regardless of cost, so I'm fine with knobs.

Thanks.

Frank

hotrod180 wrote:Been doing some googling and I think I'm gonna buy a Canon SX400. Kind of a newer version of my friend's SX170 which has been discontinued. Best Buy has them online, bundled with a case, 32 GB memory card, card-reader, tripod, hand-strap, & some misc doodads for $170. Not much of a camera compared to Zane's howitzer but I think it'll suit my needs.

I ended up buying this one a couple months ago.
The lens nozzle on the front isn't all that flat so not really a pocket carry, but plenty compact enough to carry in the glove box of the airplane. I haven't used it all that much so far. Like anything new & electronic, I need to sit down and just get familiar with how it works and the various features, which I haven't done yet. I did shoot a video from the run-up area of a friend's (horrible) landing, and managed to edit it down in length which was a major technological victory for me.

Good Luck Frank!!

There are a lot of cameras out there and many of them are excellent. Trying to narrow it down to a single one is a daunting task. Things to concentrate on are: physical size, sensor size, usability of controls, and of course, cost.

While I never actually used it, when I was looking at camera bodies the Fuji X-T10 was my pick for reasonable size and having the most manual controls. It has a micro 4/3rds sensor, which is at the small end of professional quality. They can work great, but suffer in low light situations. It’s decently priced at $800 for the body, or $900 with a kit lens: 16-50mm f3.5~5.6.

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digita ... ilm_x_t10/

I don’t know anything about the quality of that lens. It’s slow, but has a ok optical zoom range, with the 35mm equivalent of 24~76mm. Not super exciting, but a decent range for general photography. Faster zoom lenses are available for significantly more money. The 16-55 f2.8 lens is $1,200. (More on "kit" lenses below.)

With a larger sensor and better low light capability, the Sony a6000 is a hot-rod camera at a super good price: $650 with a 24-70 f3.5-5.6 (35mm equivalent) zoom lens. There’s a review of it here:

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/sony-a6000-review/

Because it has a larger sensor it lets in more light and creates a larger digital image. The micro 4/3rds sensor in the Fuji captures a 16 mega-pixel image, and the larger sensor in the Sony captures a 24.3 mega-pixel image. A larger sensor also allows for wider angle lenses, if that’s important to you.

The only issue with the Sony cameras is they are VERY dependent on electronic menus…everything is done via button pushing. I bought a book specific to the functions of my Sony camera and learned it pretty well in a week or so, but it’s not very intuitive. I’m quite happy with it now, but more manual controls would have been nice. Like you I prefer steam gages, but if you take the time to learn glass panel it’s ok, too.

Regarding lenses: There are a couple schools of thought on lenses…use a zoom so you can accommodate various situations by changing the focal length, or use a prime (fixed focal length) lens so you start seeing things in that format. There are merits to both, and most people go with a zoom. I prefer prime lenses because they’re generally faster and sharper, but I don’t recommend them to everyone. It’s rare (almost impossible) to find a zoom lens that’s as sharp as a prime lens, but you really have to pixel-peep to see the difference.

Personally I like focal lengths (35mm equivalent) from 15mm up to 24mm, then from 85mm up, though I occasionally use a 50mm lens. A wide-angle zoom is very handy for shooting out the plane window…trying to use a telephoto in the airplane isn’t going to work well due to camera shake.

Fast lenses (small f-stop) are more expensive than slow lenses…sometimes MUCH more expensive. Fast lenses do two things: they let in more light, allowing a faster shutter speed or lower ISO setting for hand-held shooting, and they provide more control over depth of field, or what’s in and out of focus. A f-1.4 lens can have a much shallower depth of field than a f-4 lens can. Just one more creative option.

The “kit” lenses that come bundled with cameras are generally mid-range zooms and very slow. They bundle them with the bodies at low prices to make the bodies more inviting to amateur users. Because they are so inexpensive when purchased with the body it’s hard to pass them up, but they’re not the sort of lens you’d buy as a stand-alone. Quality can be fine if you don’t mind the slow speed.

My personal set up right now is a 16~35mm f4 zoom, and then usually a 85mm f1.4 or 180mm f2.8 lens. The 180mm lens only gets used on a tripod, and speaking of which:

Regardless of which camera you choose, if you really want to get the most out of it, PUT IT ON A TRIPOD.

Yes, tripods are a huge pain in the ass and not feasible all of the time. You don’t need a tripod to get a snapshot of your wife sitting at a restaurant table or for pure memorabilia photos. But whenever it’s possible to use one, DO! I was a professional photographer for about twelve years, and there is a very distinct line that runs through the chronology of my images and separates the good from the excellent. I call it the T-line, and it’s when I started using a tripod religiously. Even at fast shutter speeds a tripod is the single most effective thing you can use to get sharp images, and the only thing that will allow you to use low ISO settings with a slow lens and still have tack-sharp images.

Using a tripod is a skill like everything else. The more you use one the easier it gets.

My wife has an older E-PL1 (e-pen, I think they call them) that's a 4/3 and takes pretty good photos for our standards. I second the motion to get a tripod.

For some cool low-light photos, set your camera on the tripod and use the timer to keep from getting blurry night pics. Took me a few blurry shots of the aurora to figure that out.