I have picrel, a G9X Mark II. If I wanted to upgrade to a better point-and-shoot to up the levels of my photos, what would I be looking at? There was a 1000$ Sony camera I saw people shilling a while back, is that the answer?
>>4253479fuck >>4253479your levels
>>4253479best p/s right now is ricoh gr iii .. but it's prime maybe you would rather a zoom?
>>4253488Damn, the Ricoh GR III is $1.5K CAD, that makes sense lol...I got my G9X Mark II for 300$ CAD on sale 3 years ago.The zoom is made by which company?
Get an old Nikon 1" or a rangefinder-style MFT like a Pen. Just as cheap and you won't notice the difference size-wise while also not being locked into focal length, minimum focusing distance, flash, etc.
>>4253479get a tommy mommy special. yup still got it
I love my Lumix TZ95 and its 720mm zoom
>>4253527Interesting, what kind of performance uptake can I expect from a G9X Mark II?I shoot everything in RAW and edit later in Lightroom of course.
>>4253601tz95 has smaller sensor than g9x so quality will be worse, but the small sensor is required to have a zoom that long
>>4253527>Digital
>>4253641nope
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 80DMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/10.0ISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/10.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length100.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManual
>>4253661why the fuck is it so expensive?
>>4253910It somehow has an evf
>>4253910it's popular. I remember seeing people wearing this on their necks in Japan several times. Sorta weird cause it seems so pocketable.
still the canon s90it's small, has the ring thing, fast lens, raw files, it's old but it's still great and it's one of the smallest to this day
>>4253910limited market. normies prefer their iphones. photogs in the know know that PoS stands for piece of shit quality so they don't buy those either. only people who go for those cams are street creepographers who watch to many youtube creepographers shilling overpriced piece of shit cameras to "capture the decisive moment".compact cams are a fucking meme. even the aps-c ones are terrible.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeRICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.Camera ModelRICOH GR IIICamera SoftwareCapture One 23 MacintoshSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)28 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiExposure Time1/320 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length18.30 mmImage Width1365Image Height2048RenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeClose View
>>4253488i'm underwhelmed by the GRIII. I mean it's 2023 and that cam gets sold for 1000 euros new and it still struggles with metering lol.
>take out phone>double tap "+" button to boot up cam>tap "+" button again to take the picPhones really are the best if we're talking point and shoot. For everything else I've got my mirrorless.
Guys you can call me an idiot all day but I recently bought a Sony A6400. I took it out for the weekend, I captured various things on the iPhone and some on the Sony. They either look identical or the iPhone looks better. I ended up returning the Sony even though it was a very fun to use camera as well as way more ergonomic than the phone.What's the point of something like a cheap digital camera when you own a phone? I mean besides the camera being more fun to use and ergonomic?
>>4254947Cameras have much better hardware, and the potential image quality is much greater as a result. Phones just have a lot of software going on to make up for the lack of hardware.A lot of people never venture beyond auto mode + kit lens, never print large and mostly just post on social media, and those people might as well just be using a phone. If you took the time to learn how to actually use a camera, make use of different lenses, made use of similar software enhancement, print large / pixel peep a lot, it's a night and day difference in terms of image quality.
Probably the Ricoh GR3 in either the default variation or the X if you want a tighter lens. This is prime onlyFor a zoom I would say one of either the Canon G7X MIII, Sony RX100VII, the ZS-200. All have nice zoom ranges, the Canon with the shortest but probably the best lens, and the other 2 with longer reaches but slightly worse image quality. I've been eyeing a RX100VII since I want to know what the fuss is about. I daily carry a Fuji XF10 but want to zoom sometimes
>>4253479Can you give me your g9xI really want a camera I can just put in my pocket with a decent sensor but even the old 1/1.7 ones are going for like $200
>>4254947I would ask this question too using a 24-70 f4 with auto iso picking 3200+ and lots of motion blur from speeds under 1/60 and sony’s shitty IBIS+normal subject motion. But knowing what the fuck I’m doing and not using a sony with a snapshitty kit zoom? Real cameras are da bomb.
>>4254947were you using some shit tier lens? my a6400 goes far and beyond my phone.What were you photographing and were you just loooking at the images on your phone?
>>4255720the 6400 doesn't have IBIS at all. which begs the question if he was using a stabilized lens at all and like you said auto settings nuking his shutter speed. My fiance took decent pictures in Japan when I just handed her my lumix zs100 point and shoot on full auto mode, better than her iphone.
>>4255720If you know what you're doing you can still get better results than in the phone with craptacular zoom lenses
>>4255978Normies view every photo on a tiny screen zoomed to fit AND have0 taste. If you don’t have authentic bokeh it’s hopeless so every photo has to be at the max length from as close as possible with the lowest ISO. That’s all normies like. If you say noise adda character they say your camera is broken or their phone (AI denoise smears) totally looks better.
>>4254821Just admit you’re trash
