Switching from G3 to ? (RX100, Fuji X10)

[jayhawk92]

So I know most people say that given the choice, they will always take a ILC over a fixed lens compact if it was an only camera. Here's the deal though, I want to take pictures of my kids that will likely be viewed 90% on the computer, and the other 9.5% printed 4X6, 5X7, and .5% 8x10. So I don't need poster printing quality here. I bought a G3 with Kit Lens a couple of months ago, and I'll say that the thing without a flash indoors is just useless for my 5 month old niece, I can't imagine when she's actually crawling/walking. So I went on the search for a better faster lens, and with AF issues on the 20mm, and narrow FOV of the 45mm, I settled on the 25mm. Then it hit me, I'm about to be into a system for over $1000 and still be limited to one focal length if I want to have a decent lens on my camera. When you start talking other lenses and a flash I start sweating pretty good. So here's my question, which camera would you choose and why. Lots of indoor pics of baby/toddler, candids of family, and reasonably portable for out and about. While I want to love the Fuji x10, sounds like it's not quite there yet. The RX100 sounds like the best option, but will it even meet my needs, (i.e. low light pics of kids, flash used as little as possible). Open to other cameras too! And if I have a wonderful camera in my G3 and I won't be wanting anything more than the Kit plus 25mm I'm open to that too!!

 

[994]

IMO the RX100 is a much better camera than the Fuji, and fantastic for portability. These small sensor compacts, though, won't get you those "portrait" shots that you might want with little kids.

If you are able to manual focus, I would recommend a cheap legacy 50mm, specifically a canon fd 50mm 1.4, to use with the g3 for portraits, and get the RX100 for just about everything else. Until she starts playing soccer out on the fields, lol. Then you'll need something like an OMD + 100-300 or even a DSLR.

 

[Bhupinder2002]

Just buy PL25 for ur G3 and be happy . This combo will be miles ahead of RX100. If size is the issues then swap G3 for GX1 and add PL25 .
Cheers
Bhupinder

 

[994]

Btw -- if, like, me, you are chasing dream pictures of your kids to last a lifetime, then $1,000 is just getting started

 

[jayhawk92]

IMO the RX100 is a much better camera than the Fuji, and fantastic for portability. These small sensor compacts, though, won't get you those "portrait" shots that you might want with little kids.

If you are able to manual focus, I would recommend a cheap legacy 50mm, specifically a canon fd 50mm 1.4, to use with the g3 for portraits, and get the RX100 for just about everything else. Until she starts playing soccer out on the fields, lol. Then you'll need something like an OMD + 100-300 or even a DSLR.

Not much experience with manual focus, although I guess if I was reserving it for portraits it wouldn't take as much skill compared with trying to do it for quick moving candids. You bring up a point with the soccer thing that I've already thought about! And that's part of my dilemma. I feel like investing in glass right now will allow me to have a great camera for a long time to come, if she did play soccer and I needed a 100-300, will then I'd already have a nice 25mm to slap on that :43: body. ahh decisions decisions!

 

[jayhawk92]

Just buy PL25 for ur G3 and be happy . This combo will be miles ahead of RX100. If size is the issues then swap G3 for GX1 and add PL25 .
Cheers
Bhupinder

You make it sound so easy :tongue: I guess it really can be that simple. I guess before I invested like this, I wanted to make sure that the RX100 wouldn't produce comparable shots for MY needs. Like I mentioned above, not doing giant prints here.

 

[Bhupinder2002]

You make it sound so easy :tongue: I guess it really can be that simple. I guess before I invested like this, I wanted to make sure that the RX100 wouldn't produce comparable shots for MY needs. Like I mentioned above, not doing giant prints here.

Then why dont u pick up Nikon series 1 camera like J1 or V1.. they track kids well.
Cheers
Bhupinder

 

[994]

Not much experience with manual focus, although I guess if I was reserving it for portraits it wouldn't take as much skill compared with trying to do it for quick moving candids. You bring up a point with the soccer thing that I've already thought about! And that's part of my dilemma. I feel like investing in glass right now will allow me to have a great camera for a long time to come, if she did play soccer and I needed a 100-300, will then I'd already have a nice 25mm to slap on that :43: body. ahh decisions decisions!

Soccer is still a way off, so don't think about that yet. I was just making a joke. Concentrate on your immediate needs, and see if you can work the G3 into the equation. If you are OK with it as a camera, it's value on the used market is pretty low, so you won't make much on selling it. A used 50mm nFD lens from Keh is probably $75-120 (get the highest quality you can) and cheaper from forum users. You could also look at Pentax Takumar or OM 50mms. Adapters from Amazon (like from Rainbow Imaging) are like $20-40, so it's very short money to try out. Adorama and B&H also sell used film lenses.

If you stop down these three lenses mentioned above to f/2.0, you'll get plenty of light, and the pictures will be gorgeous (at f/1.4, the lenses will be softer than at 2.0, but some people like that look anyway!).

I think it's worth trying the manual focus, IMO, as long as your eye sight is good. You'll also be surprised that, if you really practice, you can actually use MF for action. It's all about prefocusing (like on the ground) and anticipating the shot. You can also learn how to adjust focus as they run towards you and away from you, and still get like 50% keepers -- from a $100 lens and adapter setup!

If later you find you don't like it, you can sell it for at most a $30-40 loss.

Good luck!

 

[994]

Then why dont u pick up Nikon series 1 camera like J1 or V1.. they track kids well.
Cheers
Bhupinder

Good point, but still not a great portrait camera.

 

[redington]

I picked up a 50mm 1.8 fd for $15 on craigslist. Added a $30 adapter. Worth every penny for indoor shots of my kids, plus I love it for video. I wish the focal length was a bit shorter, but for $45 I am more than happy. My old telephoto lenses will be great for sports when the time comes.

Just saying...

 

[spinyman]

I think the Lumix 14 will work for your indoor action shots.It is fast focus and with your G3, you can up the iso to capture movement and still have good pics.It is my most used lens and can be had on ebay for around $175.

 

[steelfish]

Then why dont u pick up Nikon series 1 camera like J1 or V1.. they track kids well.
Cheers
Bhupinder

Very slow kit lens on the j1. Outside in bright light though the j1 af and tracking is stunning.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jloden]

My $0.02...

$0.01 - with any ILC system, you're going to have to invest some money in faster glass if low light shots w/o flash are important to you. The G3 can do just fine indoors, but you'd need faster lenses than the kit lens if you want to keep the ISO as low as possible and get a reasonably fast shutter speed. To give you some idea, this set was all taken on a GX1 (very comparable to the G3 in terms of sensor & capabilities). https://www.mu-43.com/f56/ny-overnight-camp-32967/

You'll notice most of those were taken around a campfire outdoors and at night, so we're talking about as low light as you're likely to see. But, that's using the 25mm f/1.4 for most of the shots, rather than one of the slower zooms.


$0.02 - an RX100 might work well for you; I've heard good things about the low light performance, and from all accounts it's an excellent camera. What you need to ask yourself is 1) whether you want a system, or just a camera. and 2) how much versatility matters to you. When the RX100 ages, the only option will be replacing the whole unit with an updated one. An ILC system lets you invest in quality lenses and then update camera bodies as desired. And you of course, you have the ability to swap out lenses and go from anything from macro to telephoto with the same system. It's not just about overall expenditure; it's always going to be about what you're going to do with it

Only you can decide if the RX100 or a similar compact superzoom is right for you, based on what criteria are most important for your photography goals. For me, the answer is an ILC system is what works best for my wants/needs, and I was/am willing to invest the money in building up a collection of suitable lenses etc. make that work for me.

 

[994]

I picked up a 50mm 1.8 fd for $15 on craigslist. Added a $30 adapter. Worth every penny for indoor shots of my kids, plus I love it for video. I wish the focal length was a bit shorter, but for $45 I am more than happy. My old telephoto lenses will be great for sports when the time comes.

Just saying...

You could also try a 35/2. They are a bit more, but there are some excellent examples out there in that focal length, if you find 50mm long.

 

[994]

I think the Lumix 14 will work for your indoor action shots.It is fast focus and with your G3, you can up the iso to capture movement and still have good pics.It is my most used lens and can be had on ebay for around $175.

Agreed. 14mm is a very strong indoor lens. Good FL, fast enough. Would be lovely a bit faster, but with the modern sensors at ISO1600+ it can work it very nicely indoors.

 

[994]

My $0.02...

$0.01 - with any ILC system, you're going to have to invest some money in faster glass if low light shots w/o flash are important to you. The G3 can do just fine indoors, but you'd need faster lenses than the kit lens if you want to keep the ISO as low as possible and get a reasonably fast shutter speed. To give you some idea, this set was all taken on a GX1 (very comparable to the G3 in terms of sensor & capabilities). https://www.mu-43.com/f56/ny-overnight-camp-32967/

You'll notice most of those were taken around a campfire outdoors and at night, so we're talking about as low light as you're likely to see. But, that's using the 25mm f/1.4 for most of the shots, rather than one of the slower zooms.


$0.02 - an RX100 might work well for you; I've heard good things about the low light performance, and from all accounts it's an excellent camera. What you need to ask yourself is 1) whether you want a system, or just a camera. and 2) how much versatility matters to you. When the RX100 ages, the only option will be replacing the whole unit with an updated one. An ILC system lets you invest in quality lenses and then update camera bodies as desired. And you of course, you have the ability to swap out lenses and go from anything from macro to telephoto with the same system. It's not just about overall expenditure; it's always going to be about what you're going to do with it

Only you can decide if the RX100 or a similar compact superzoom is right for you, based on what criteria are most important for your photography goals. For me, the answer is an ILC system is what works best for my wants/needs, and I was/am willing to invest the money in building up a collection of suitable lenses etc. make that work for me.

I agree with the above BUT for people with kids, the RX100 is a fantastic size, so you're wife isn't glaring at you when you say "honey, I've got to carry the camera bag."

The RX100 with a 28-100 lens fits in your pants pocket or a belt pouch, and is very versatile, though again it's weak in portrait shots if you want subject isolation.

 

[Art]

Agreed. 14mm is a very strong indoor lens. Good FL, fast enough. Would be lovely a bit faster, but with the modern sensors at ISO1600+ it can work it very nicely indoors.

Agree but then again my RX100 at same 28mm eq is just killing it at f1.8 with better resolution in both center and corners so I no longer use Panny 14

 

[Iceman73]

I can understand your dilemma - I've been in the same boat and I've been changing cameras and bodies for the last three years. Heck it's like I need something different for summer, and another one for winter as light dies down sooner.
I recently took the plunge and bought the X10. Absolutely brilliant camera to use and the printed images look great (7x5), but coming from m43 & apsc sensors, on the screen you see things you won't like. During PP I saw things which were a result of the smaller sensor and could not deal with it as hard as I tried. I knew in the long, I would not want it, so after a week of use I swapped it for a Oly e-pl3, and I use it with an OM 50 f/1.8.
If you have the time see the OM 50mm f/1.8 image thread for samples of images taken with this lens. You can sit far enough and let the kid play on while you are playing with the focus and when you get the shot correct, it is so rewarding. Just be mentally prepared and positive that it will work. You will get some amazing narrow depth of field shots for silly money. That should be all you need. Keep your G3.
If you insist on changing bodies - then pick up a used Nikon d5100 & a nikkor 35mm f/1.8 and you'll get shots to die for in low light.
Here in the UK a PL 25 costs £439 average - A D5100 new body costs £384 and a 35 f/1.8 costs £150 Total £534. It's not too much bigger that your G3. Think about it, and best of luck.

 

[~tc~]

While the RX100, and even more so the X10, are good for a compact camera, they have a serious disadvantage in low light. The f/1.8 can make up some of the difference, but only at the wide end, as the aperture shrinks down fast when you zoom.

The big draw for these cameras is solely when space/weight is an issue. If these had been out when I was looking for a travel camera when I started my new job a couple years ago, I may have very well gone this way.

 

[994]

Agree but then again my RX100 at same 28mm eq is just killing it at f1.8 with better resolution in both center and corners so I no longer use Panny 14

Agree on that, too! But the 14mm used is $150, the RX100 is $650, so something to think about.

Love my RX100, though!