Time for a new camera

Richard, might be worth a look at Sony NEX range such as Nex 5.

They are very well made, feel good and high qualitty.

Usually high pixel rate. Good technical otions when wanted and simple when Not ussed at the gadget bits.

Lens are good quality so nice standard of pics.

What's your budget Richard? 

Tony is right about the iPhone 5's picture quality. Far better than the 4 and very versatile. Being an SLR user I've found it very handy to have when I don't have the camera to hand.

The iphone is a 4S and the camera seems quite a bit better than my last iphone.  The contract still has a while to run so it's staying for the moment.

Paul, I tried a few of the Sony CSCs and didn't like the feel of them.  The Fuji felt by far the best, with the Canon G15 and Nikon 7700 tied and coming in a fairly distant second.

Steve, looking to spend around £3-400.

Richard,

I'd give the Lumix GX-1 another look.  Consider skipping the new power zoom and look at their other zoom options.  I love my GF-1 with the 14-140.  The OEM zoom I got is also excellent -- better than a  typical "kit lens" -- and is nice when I want to carry a lighter camera.

Nick

The GX-1 would be in your price range and there is a new model coming soon so you may get a good deal.

Richard

FYI, nobody makes a digital rangefinder, except Leica, which of course be a bit out of your price range

For a decent range of features, combined with robustness and ease of use the Pannys are hard to beat and the GX1 is a great little camera also. The Fujis are pretty good and look great. I would suggest you take a closer look at the Olympuses, they're really very good.

Finally, I had a go on a Sony RX100 today - it seems very good and squeezes a big sensor into a small body. Feels really nice and substantial in one's hands. You should really try and audition it.

I had the same problem a few months back, tried various cameras (Olympus OMD, Nikon D600, GIX) which I borrowed from a local dealer, and finally settled for the Fuji XE-1. It felt just right in the hand - I've had a number of Nikon film cameras  (FM, FE) and the Fuji was the only one that made me feel I was holding a "real" camera. The X10 (X20 now) was rather appealing too, but I wanted a larger sensor. As with hifi, it is something which is rather personal: you feel at home with a camera or you don't.

IMO there are two worth considering; the Fuji X100S and the Sony RX-1. Both are superb fixed lense cameras. The Sony has a full size sensor( but is expensive), the Fuji is the better deal and is beautiful to look at. You will love either one and will not look back at DSLR's. Do a Google search. 

I'd go for the X20, fuji are very good at producing this type of camera. Fujinon Super EBC lenses are top notch, they produce vivid colours with plenty of contrast. As in hifi, generally the front end is all important.

I use a 10 year old f601Z, friends and relatives have purchased more modern digial compacts from nikon, canon and sony but none of them produce an image that comes close to the old fuji.

I'd also say the fuji set on auto quite often produces better photos than my 40D set on auto, although I put this down to the poor image processing software in the canon.

Richard, there are a few Leica D-Lux 5 up for grabs. Just check their exif data and  you could  find a bargain. Leica cameras are renowned for being well looked after by their owners. I sold my faithful M6 a while ago and bought a D-Lux for the occasional  shot. Excellent optics and features. If you don't mind something, let's say run in, give them a go.

Thanks Clay.  Sadly both (Particularly the RX1) are way over my budget. 

Franchnaim, yes, I loved my Nikon FM - everything flet just right and it was a joy to use.  It really came into its own when I went to Everest.  The other Nikon I took died because the batteries couldn't take the cold but the FM just kept on clicking away without any issues.

Kevin, yup a Leica would be nice.  I used an M3 in NY and it was fun to go out and about taking pics on the streets.  I did look at a modern Leica (I think it was an X1) and it felt awful in comparison.  The lens housing felt really plasticky. An M9 is way out of reach. 

I'l take another look at the GX-1, but a Fuji X10 or X20 is looking more and more like it could be the right one for me here.

p.s. Tony, thanks I'll check out the D-lux.  Hopefully it'll feel nicer than that X-1...

Richard - maybe try the Pentax MX1. I got one just before I went on holiday to England and am very impressed with the results both photo and video. Not too many dials and a logical menu system. I usually shoot in RAW and this little camera doesn't disappoint.

By the way I ought to mention that I am a Pentax enthusiast and have lenses that are older than I am that still work on the latest K5 II s. By the way why not try a K5, they are very light without the battery pack and the lenses seem to be of good quality, especially the older manual type.

Tim

S/H Leica Digilux 1. Superb image quality because of meter/sensor/lens integration. G

Hi Richard, it sounds to me like you've already made up your mind for the X20...You know the image quality will be good because you've read it is but it also feels right in the hand. Clearly you want something quality and a little 'chunkier' than the pocket cameras, but not as big as a DSLR and around a certain budget. The X20 will, I think, make you happy.

For my own 2p's worth, I have an X100s which I've just received, to replace my X100.

From that you can deduce I like the Fuji X range! (By way of comparison I also use a 5D mark iii, an S95 and an LX3. Oh and a Leica Digilux 2. Did I mention the FM3a..? But thats' just me being greedy)

I liken the X series a bit to Naim and Alfas, they're very, very good at what they do and lovely to own and use if you 'get' it. Some people just prefer Meridian and BMWs however. Although a Fuji X... is a lot more reliable than an Alfa I think!

Honestly, when I got my X100 I thought it looked and felt very nice to use but wasn't sure what the fuss was about. After using it just a few times though, I wouldn't give it up and thought it was great. The X100s came out to play with me properly for the first time yesterday and with it's new sensor, the same type of sensor (albeit a different size) as used in the X20, it is even better. The images are great and Fuji have ironed out a lot of bugs in these Mk ii versions of both cameras.

The X10 was loved by many but the X20 is apparently a big improvement, especially through the viewfinder.

And if you don't like it, you'll get close to what you paid on ebay...

+1

I still have an FM2 Julian, which I occasionally use. Wonderful camera. My bro' has an FM, which is also great.

I had an X10 for a few months. A lovely camera, feels superb in the hand and is just very nice to use. I thought it looked great too and the build quality was top notch. It was replaced by a Sony RX100 as I wanted something small that would go with me everywhere (and when I didn't want to take my DSLR). The X20 looks to have addressed some minor niggles in the X10, which in certain modes with its EXR sensor worked better as a 6MP camera and the new viewfinder looks to be better too. If you can live with a fixed focal length then the bigger X100 is an absolute peach. 

My mind is not yet made up on the Fuji.  While I love the look and feel of it, the small sensor and fixed lens are concerns - in particular the detail from 4/3 or APS-C appears markedly better. Also, while I liked the idea of a viewfinder on the X10, in practice it was a bit rubbish so doubt I'd ever bother using it.    So I'm going to try out a GF-1 to see whether i can live with it before committing further.  I do still like the idea of interchangeable lenses and this one has a 14-45mm zoom fitted which it seems may be rather more solid than the horrible mini-zoom I tried out in the shop, even if it is rather larger too.  I liked the Lumix GX-1 but not the lens so if I enjoy the GF-1 with this different lens, it could well be a strong contender.

Richard,

I recall that I went for the 14-45mm over the newer 14-42 because the reviews on a British review site said the former was better, and worth looking for after it was superseded.  I concur, and love it.

Nick

The guy in the shop recommended the original 14-45mm over the later 14-42mm.  He said that most owners tended to hang on the 14-45mm when upgrading bodies.  If I get a GX-1 then if I like the 14-45mm lens then I'll probably keep it.  Who knows, if I really like it I may even keep the GF-1 and put the rest of the budget towards something else...

Having switched from a DSLR to micro four thirds a few months ago, I can also say its worth finding a 14-45 rather than the inferior 14-42 which comes with most models. Richard, have you considered the Panny G5 or G6? The quality of the electronic viewfinder has come on in leaps and bounds, to the point where you may not miss an optical viewfinder at all. Having said that, for a compact solution, I agree that the Fuji X10 and 20 have a lot to offer, though ultimately the M43s can get much closer to DSLR standard.

Goon525,

   can you explain for the uninitiated of us, what is micro 4/3?

Paul, this does it pretty well:

Micro Four-thirds