c/photography is a community centered on the practice of amateur and professional photography. You can come here to discuss the gear, the technique and the culture related to the art of photography. You can also share your work, appreciate the others' and constructively critique each others work.
Please, be sure to read the rules before posting.
THE RULES
This Lemmy Community is open to civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, photography. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted.
All discussion threads must be photography related such as latest gear or art news, gear acquisition advices, photography related questions, etc...
This Lemmy Community is about photography and discussion around photography, not religion or politics.
All is in the title. This is a casual discussion community.
One post, one photo in the limit of 3 pictures in a 24 hours timespan. Do not flood the community with your pictures. Be patient, select your best work, and enjoy.
If you want contructive critiques, use [Critique Wanted] in your title.
Flair NSFW posts (nudity, gore, ...)
Do not share your portfolio (instagram, flickr, or else...)
The aim of this community is to invite everyone to discuss around your photography. If you drop everything with one link, this become pointless. Portfolio posts will be deleted. You can however share your portfolio link in the comment section if another member wants to see more of your work.
fixed lens cameras are a relatively niche thing nowerdays, despite the hype around thr fuji x100vi and the rico gr3.
i'd look for a micro-four-thirds camera like the om system om5/olympus e5. The micro-four-thirds sensors are very good, despite being smaller, the system offers a ton of good glass that tends to be lighter and smaller than aps-c or fullframe equivalents, so very backpackable.
I know the M4/3rds are pretty good, I'm just worried about low light performance as I do lots of sunset, blue hour, and night photography. Do you have knowledge on that? Maybe they're better now than I realize. I haven't heard of the Rico either, I'll check that out.
well, i don't own one currently, but pics i saw from the om5 looked good to me this article has some low light examples for the om5 and i cant remember it being a point of critic when i was reading up on reviews when i was looking for a camera, so i'd guess you'll be fine.
i actually bought a lumix s5ii, a full frame camera, and regret it sometimes a little bit due to the weight, bulk and price of some lenses and i'd probably buy a om1 in retrospect.
Three ideas.
First, are you taking photos of static or dynamic subjects? In other words, can you push your shutter speed down to make up for lost light? If yes, it doesn't really matter which sensor format you go with. As an added bonus, M43 stabilization is stupid good so you might even be able to skip the tripod.
Second, there's no beating a fast FF lens on a FF body but those are going to be big and expensive. Here's a quick comparison. The Sony lens is 1.7 pounds and costs $2,000 new vs the Oly's 0.9 pounds and $1,200 price tag. There are super fast third party E-mount options that will save some $$, but no weight (hi Sigma), and slower first and third party options that will save $$ and weight, but will also start to eat into the two stop advantage FF sensors enjoy in low light. For example, Sigma's 50mm f/2 lens, which weighs 0.75 pounds and costs $640, will leave you with around 2/3 stop advantage in low light. It's still an advantage, and it even costs and weighs less than the Oly, but it's not a large advantage in terms of dynamic range.
Finally, with a fast FF lens you're going to be facing a fairly narrow depth of field wide open. That 50mm f/1.2 FF lens will give you a 0.11m depth of field wide open with a subject that's 2m away. If you want the extreme background of your image sharp, everything closer than 35m will be out of focus. Conversely, that 25mm f/1.2 MFT lens will give you a 0.23m depth of field with a subject that's 2m away and with infinity acceptably sharp you'll have a sharp foreground subjects 17.5m and further away from the camera. Stopping down the FF lens will increase its depth of field, but will again eat into the inherent advantage a FF body has over a M43 body.
There aren't many DSLR like fixed lens cameras out on the market today as that segment has basically evaporated.
The remaining players are:
What are you looking for that the G1X mkIII doesn't offer? Buying a used copy might be the way to go, especially since it sounds like what you're looking for.
As far as currently in production options, in addition to the three above, you could also look at mirrorless. Both their bodies and lenses are more compact than their DSLR counterparts. As far as sensor size goes, Micro Four Thirds (micro four thirds) can offer the most compact glass, followed by APS-C and then FF. That said a compact FF body, with a slower (read: smaller) lens will generally be close in size to a MFT camera with a fast lens. For outdoor and sunny, there will be no image quality tradeoff and when it gets dark the FF camera with a slower lens and a MFT sensor with a faster lens will be more or less on par thanks to the FF sensor's two stop improvement in low light. For example (scroll down if you don't see the two cameras and lenses). This does start to fall apart at longer focal lengths though - there's no substitute for the crop factor advantage beyond say 100mm of FF EQ focal length.
So... What are you looking for?
It's not that the G1X III doesn't offer something. I'm just looking to see if there are more recent examples with potentially better glass, sensors, or any other benefits because of progress with time since it's been out for some time now. I haven't found (including the wonderful suggestions in the comments) any other camera that fits what I'm looking for and will probably get a used G1XIII. Mirrorless cameras are relatively small now but the form factor of many of these cameras just take up too much volume in a hiking pack. The G1XIII has such an awesome form factor with great professional features. Ultimately I care about volume over weight, plus generally a high quality camera
If volume is your sole consideration, the G1X III will be hard to beat. if you didn't already try it, here it is dropped into the comparison.
As for advances in IQ, IMO the gains haven't been that large. The big changes are:
Other than that, everything else is largely quality of life. Easier AF, faster sensor readout that enabled me to keep my A9 in electronics shutter mode basically all the time, overall speed (focus fast and take a ton of photos), computational photography (like high resolution shots, etc).
I have a 3k digital picture frame and when photos from my old D40 show up on it, I'm always surprised by how well they hold up. Great colors, good dynamic range, etc.
That's a really neat website, thanks. My camera is massive in comparison. Yeah I don't need or want such high resolution which also can hurt low light performance and shutter speed has never been a concern to me. I'll have to look in detail at the features of the G1XIII but I'm pretty convinced that that's what I'll be getting.
Glad you found the site useful! Good luck in your quest.
Dpreview has a camera feature search which is how I came across the G1XIII. There isn't anything else quite like it, and a good used one is well worth it. Even over most of the other premium compacts it has a huge advantage for backpacking by being weather sealed.
Is there something else you wanted from it, or just looking for new?
I was curious if anything with newer technology or improved features was around since the G1XIII is a tad bit older now. I might end up getting a used one as I'm not finding anything else quite like it. Do you know if there is a filter adapter for it? I found one for the MkII but not III (I haven't looked much into it however).
I don't think anyone has done an update, no. Honestly, the feature I never expected to want until I got a Ricoh GRIIIx a few months earlier is highlight weighted exposure meeting. Since it's not an SLR however you can obviously see the histo anyway.
It has a wee filter ring already for the lens cap to clip into. Apparently some folks just stick a UV filter on and do away with the lens cap.