Author Topic: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?  (Read 2924 times)

slope

  • Ride Fettle Ride
    • Current pedalable joys
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #25 on: June 22, 2016, 06:15:56 pm »
Many thanks again everyone. It really does help to get advice and recommendations based on experience and be able to sharpen the search in what is a bewildering market ::-) Not to mention learning lots if a very short space of time/posts :)

Trouble is one (me that is) starts out with wished for/imagined criteria and then gets tempted by further stuff :hand: And as we all know there is never no ONE camera.

If the Fuji X100 was 28mm equivalent, it would be a no brainer (I think?) - to start off with any road up. Maybe it's just a matter of adapting to a 35mm (equivalent) focal length lens?

Still going through all the suggestions and doing the cons and pros weighing + changing minds etc

(Anyone want to buy a mint, boxed Contax 167MT - bought new in the 90s and probably only had half a dozen rolls of film through it?)


Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #26 on: June 23, 2016, 11:07:32 am »
I'm happy with my S120 but the Canon G16 is available

Is the S120 still available ?  If its been superseded, what has replaced it ?

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #27 on: June 23, 2016, 12:46:55 pm »
The G7X I think (I'm a bit out of touch) but it's very expensive imo.
I'd be happy to get a used S120, they are built very well (solid metal body) for around the £100 mark.
New they were >£400

As anyone looking for a camera knows, it's a world of compromise.  The best image quality always seems to come with a crappy menu system or poor battery life.

Here are some recent S120 images for perusal (I really am very happy with it, it's basically a pocket-sized Canon G16).
It's dealt well with some tricky lighting situations*

https://flic.kr/p/Jijypb

https://flic.kr/p/HqgyaU

https://flic.kr/p/JeQF1B

https://flic.kr/p/HqqeLw

https://flic.kr/p/JmT4pc

*All images post-processed in Camera RAW & PS.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

fuaran

  • rothair gasta
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #28 on: June 23, 2016, 01:10:02 pm »
I've got the older Canon G12 (which I picked up for almost nothing at auction). It's an excellent camera and capable of great results in either full auto or PASM modes. It also has an optical VF but fails on the zoom control. I've never tried setting the focal length in a custom mode as LEE suggested but this seems a great idea. I would hope that the G16 is more compact and lighter as the G12 is a bit of a brick. Reassuringly solid though.
The optical viewfinder on the G12 is a bit rubbish IME. Its too small to see much through it. It doesn't show the full image you will actually get. Plus has the usual parallax errors.
Don't know if the newer models are any better.

Woofage

  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #29 on: June 23, 2016, 01:59:15 pm »
^ I never actually use it. Most of my use of the camera has been to take to gigs where the flippy screen comes in handy.

Here's a few examples:
https://flic.kr/p/wfzG4T
https://flic.kr/p/wg23wc
https://flic.kr/p/vXXT1o
https://flic.kr/p/Jow3Pf
Pen Pusher

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #30 on: June 23, 2016, 03:56:58 pm »
I've got the older Canon G12 (which I picked up for almost nothing at auction). It's an excellent camera and capable of great results in either full auto or PASM modes. It also has an optical VF but fails on the zoom control. I've never tried setting the focal length in a custom mode as LEE suggested but this seems a great idea. I would hope that the G16 is more compact and lighter as the G12 is a bit of a brick. Reassuringly solid though.
The optical viewfinder on the G12 is a bit rubbish IME. Its too small to see much through it. It doesn't show the full image you will actually get. Plus has the usual parallax errors.
Don't know if the newer models are any better.

My Canon S70 had a similar optical viewfinder, no improvement on my Mum's 1970's 110 film camera.

I saw it as an emergency Battery Saver, so I could shut down the LCD, and no more.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

slope

  • Ride Fettle Ride
    • Current pedalable joys
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #31 on: October 03, 2016, 04:58:41 pm »
So what did I end up buying, unseen? A feature packed, all singing, all dancing Canon GX5 ::-)

Arrived today from John Lewis. Battery in the separate mains charger* as I tap tap away.

Who knows whether we will fall in love? But it's passed its first important test - it fits my hand beautifully and even though I can't see through the centrally positioned EVF until the battery has charged, I'm excited and provisionally turned on :P Vaguely reminds me of happy days with only slightly larger Pentax MX and Olympus OM2. There's even a clicky ring around the lens :thumbsup:

* a feature I like


Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #32 on: October 03, 2016, 07:06:31 pm »
So what did I end up buying, unseen? A feature packed, all singing, all dancing Canon GX5 ::-)

Already?! Only joking. I take about as long to make an important life decision such as this.

Let us know how you like it. It’s an intriguing camera on paper.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #33 on: October 04, 2016, 02:36:05 pm »
G5X looks great and gets good reviews so you should be happy with it.

It should be a good camera though, it's not cheap.

I've owned Canon cameras for the longest time now, I just like them. 
Despite them rarely being the best at anything they generally feel better then the sum of their parts.

They always like to throw in a weird "WTF were you thinking Canon?" though.  With the G5X it's "Where's the microphone input?".
It's a crazy (unforgivable?) omission on a camera of this price and hailed as a travel "Vlogging" camera (Travel Vlogs and internal Mics just mean Wind-noise)
I can live without 4K but Canon is very late to 4K across the board and it rules out this camera for many users.

They drive you crazy in their attempts to protect other products in their line. 
Even when they DO provide 4K (5D Mk4) they implement it in such a way as to piss off all the Pro and semi-pro videographers.

As a stills camera the G5X will no doubt blow your socks off though.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

slope

  • Ride Fettle Ride
    • Current pedalable joys
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #34 on: October 05, 2016, 11:21:33 am »
As a stills camera the G5X will no doubt blow your socks off though.

I hope so, if I can get to see the results - My 2010 Mac Mini running OSX 10.8.5 Mountain Lion with Photoshop CS5 can't read the Canon CR2 RAW files :-[

And the Adobe DNG Converter required to process the CR2 RAW files won't work with Mountain Lion. Drats!

Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #35 on: October 05, 2016, 11:31:04 am »
Are you sure? Adobe says support for the PowerShot G5 X was added in DNG Converter 9.3, which only needs OS X 10.7 Lion.

It looks like you could run Adobe DNG Converter 9.5.1 though not 9.6 or later.

slope

  • Ride Fettle Ride
    • Current pedalable joys
Re: A serious simple cycle friendly camera without all the crap?
« Reply #36 on: October 05, 2016, 12:08:17 pm »
Are you sure? Adobe says support for the PowerShot G5 X was added in DNG Converter 9.3, which only needs OS X 10.7 Lion.

It looks like you could run Adobe DNG Converter 9.5.1 though not 9.6 or later.

I thought I was sure until I just checked your link

 :-[ :-[ :-[ Thanks Samuel D :thumbsup: