Cost Effective "Pro" Compact
 

I will be travelling to countries where an expensive camera would
attract too much attention. I would love to take an LX3, G11 or Nikon
D40, but would not feel comfortable with it.

I would also prefer "pocket-size", or a maybe bit larger, for being as
inconspicuous as possible.

If I go down in price a few steps, what digital point-and-shoot
cameras with a mid-range zoom have the better reputation for quality
images.

RAW would be great, but I can do without.

Thank you for any advice.

Bill Murphy

Cost Effective "Pro" Compact
 

Bill Murphy wrote:
I will be travelling to countries where an expensive camera would
attract too much attention. I would love to take an LX3, G11 or Nikon
D40, but would not feel comfortable with it.

Get a G11 and get it dirty & scratched, black tape over the labels &
flash, flip the LCD over so it's hidden & use the optical viewfinder so
people think it's a P&S film camera. Carry it in a dumpy looking cloth
lunch bag.


I would also prefer "pocket-size", or a maybe bit larger, for being as
inconspicuous as possible.

If I go down in price a few steps, what digital point-and-shoot
cameras with a mid-range zoom have the better reputation for quality
images.

RAW would be great, but I can do without.

Thank you for any advice.

Bill Murphy


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Cost Effective "Pro" Compact
 

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:45:01 GMT, (Bill Murphy)
wrote:
I will be travelling to countries where an expensive camera would
attract too much attention. I would love to take an LX3, G11 or Nikon
D40, but would not feel comfortable with it.

I would also prefer "pocket-size", or a maybe bit larger, for being as
inconspicuous as possible.

If I go down in price a few steps, what digital point-and-shoot
cameras with a mid-range zoom have the better reputation for quality
images.

RAW would be great, but I can do without.

Thank you for any advice.


The Panasonic Lumix LX3 is relatively inconspicuous in black.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCLX3/

I would also suggest taking a look at the Panasonic Lumix GF1 which is
a Micro Four Thirds camera with interchangeable lenses. I have just
replaced my LX3 with a GF-1 and am happy with it. Effectively, it
gives DSLR quality in a much smaller package (my other camera is a
Nikon D700). Once again, it is relatively inconspicuous in black.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/

At a smaller size, the Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR gives surprisingly
good results at high ISOs making it a good travel camera. It is also
competitively priced - at least here in the UK.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf200exr/

(The reviewed F200EXR was in silver finish, however it is also
available in black.)

Not quite in the same class as the Fuji, but a good travel camera
that you wouldn't lose a fortune on is the Kodak Z915. Longer
zoom range and the (dis)advantage of being powered on AA
batteries. It's what I carry when I think there's a realistic chance
that I could use or "fatally" damage my camera. It's cheaper, too,
than the Fuji.

Cost Effective "Pro" Compact
 

I will be travelling to countries where an expensive camera would
attract too much attention. I would love to take an LX3, G11 or Nikon
D40, but would not feel comfortable with it.

I would also prefer "pocket-size", or a maybe bit larger, for being as
inconspicuous as possible.

If I go down in price a few steps, what digital point-and-shoot
cameras with a mid-range zoom have the better reputation for quality
images.

canon g11 or S90 has above average sensor size, but still small compared to
DSLR

if you need even better low light camera, then consider a micro 4/3
camera -- but this more than doubles the cost. In fact they cost more than
some DSLRs.

You can get a feel of low light capabilities by going to dpreview.com and
checking out the sample photos of each camera. Sample photos are taken in
different ISO settings.

(resent due to possible problem with nntp server)

Cost Effective "Pro" Compact
 

In article ,
james wrote:
I will be travelling to countries where an expensive camera would
attract too much attention. I would love to take an LX3, G11 or Nikon
D40, but would not feel comfortable with it.

I would also prefer "pocket-size", or a maybe bit larger, for being as
inconspicuous as possible.

If I go down in price a few steps, what digital point-and-shoot
cameras with a mid-range zoom have the better reputation for quality
images.

canon g11 or S90 has above average sensor size, but still small compared to
DSLR

if you need even better low light camera, then consider a micro 4/3
camera -- but this more than doubles the cost. In fact they cost more than
some DSLRs.

You can get a feel of low light capabilities by going to dpreview.com and
checking out the sample photos of each camera. Sample photos are taken in
different ISO settings.

(resent due to possible problem with nntp server)

I'm shopping in the same general area here, and was looking for a while at
the smallest of the Micro four-thirds cameras that look more like compact
P&S than smaller DSLR's (i.e. the Lumix GF-1 and Olympus EPL-P1).
Unfortunately they both have fatal flaws. Neither has a viewfinder as
standard equipment (optional accessories that add considerably to the
price and impact on battery life) and the LCD's have been described as
"useless" in bright sunlight. Both have weak flash. The Olympus has no
AF-assist lamp, and the Lumix has weird washed-out JPEG color rendition. I
_really_ wanted to like this little niche but I think the design factor
has a way to go.