This could be the choice for bushwalking photographers...

[Drifting]

And I just bought a small frame DSLR for portability. Grrrr.....

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/10/CanonG1X_Preview

[oyster_07]

Another item, but these look interesting for those solo shots.

http://www.amtcgear.com.au/products_det ... oductID=64

[phan_TOM]

Looks okay, but I think I'd prefer this one.

Regardless its amazing the image quality they are getting out of ever smaller cameras, great for bushwalkers. I love my 40d but it is a beast and if I was buying now
I'd love something smaller (no doubt the IQ of the canon you mentioned, the one above and the plethora of micro 4/3 type cameras would better mine in a competition).
Plus you could get away with a smaller tripod, well, smaller everything...

[photohiker]

Looks okay, but I think I'd prefer this one.

I'm with you on that, phan_TOM.

Depending on the trip, I use a 5D and/or micro4/3 system. Both pretty good in their own right. Low light high iso noise and dynamic range is where the 5D kills the micro gear. That Fuji promises the quality of the 5DII at a little more bulk and weight than the micro4/3rds.

The Canon spec looks ok, but not a fan of the lens choice. If you look at the sensor size, it's very close to micro4/3rds. Rumors are that there will be an interchangeable lens version soon...

[phan_TOM]

That Fuji promises the quality of the 5DII at a little more bulk and weight than the micro4/3rds.

Fuji claims it will out-resolve the 5d mkII, bold statement... but you are going to pay for that privilege as far as I can see, $1700 for the body and $650+ for each lens (which I guess isn't too bad when I look at the above sentence). Nice looking lenses too.

I don't like the non-interchangeable lens on the canon and it would be a fundamental reason for me to not even consider it. I had a G9, great camera, but the retracting lens was like a dust sucking bellows and a real pain in the *&%$#! in the end. I am personally all for compact interchangeable lenses especially those fujinon primes, mmmm!

[Drifting]

That Fuji promises the quality of the 5DII at a little more bulk and weight than the micro4/3rds.

Fuji claims it will out-resolve the 5d mkII, bold statement... but you are going to pay for that privilege as far as I can see, $1700 for the body and $650+ for each lens (which I guess isn't too bad when I look at the above sentence). Nice looking lenses too.

I don't like the non-interchangeable lens on the canon and it would be a fundamental reason for me to not even consider it. I had a G9, great camera, but the retracting lens was like a dust sucking bellows and a real pain in the *&%$#! in the end. I am personally all for compact interchangeable lenses especially those fujinon primes, mmmm!

Cheaper than a 5D!

[photohiker]

That Fuji promises the quality of the 5DII at a little more bulk and weight than the micro4/3rds.

Fuji claims it will out-resolve the 5d mkII, bold statement... but you are going to pay for that privilege as far as I can see, $1700 for the body and $650+ for each lens (which I guess isn't too bad when I look at the above sentence). Nice looking lenses too.

I don't like the non-interchangeable lens on the canon and it would be a fundamental reason for me to not even consider it. I had a G9, great camera, but the retracting lens was like a dust sucking bellows and a real pain in the *&%$#! in the end. I am personally all for compact interchangeable lenses especially those fujinon primes, mmmm!

Cheaper than a 5D!

Only just. 5DII's are selling in the mid $2k's now ($2k overseas). Lenses would make a big difference, any L lens is about double the Fuji prices. But, I already have lenses...

I've been hanging back from a 5DII upgrade for my 5D, so this Fuji rather throws the cat amongst the pigeons.

[wayno]

depends what you do with the photos, few people will every use their photos to full effect from a camera like the 5d II, most computer screens only display at 1 to 2 mega pixels. i sometimes shoot at only a couple of megapixels. and you can't tell the difference in a screen unless you're printing out poster size it's over kill to have the higher end slr's. it's about how good the lenses are and the compact cameras are getting better with thelenses to hte point you have to look closely to see the difference. i'm getting over lugging an slr around, the G1X is the type of camera i'm looking at. I"ve got a g12 and i find that does a reasonable job, i only take my slr out if the track is an extremely good one.
even if you go and get a sony slt, save on size and weight over an slr, sony make the sensors that go in nikons, you've got one extremely good camera....
friend of mine put a high end lens on a sony nex 7 and he says he can't tell the difference with his previous high end slr's

[Ent]

Hi

I find that once a camera get above a certain thickness then might as well go for a compact SLR. I have a LX5 and when I fit the lens filter tube the extra bulk makes my Canon 400D look reasonable. Picture quality is a very personal thing and unless you crop extensively or print very large pictures it is hard to justify the cost in dollars and weight of the SLRs. I must admit that the Canon S90 is creeping into more walks as I found a BW hard waterproof plastic case that it just fits in. The case is rounded and light so not hassle to carry. Sure a Pelican will out tough it but not be as comfortable to carry. I do miss the viewfinder that my Canon S70 had. Brilliant for bright daylight and one reason why I look longing at the Canon G11.

The trouble with integrated lens Canons is the lens get very slow at the higher focal range. I tend to lock the ISO in at the lowest setting so get hammered a bit by increasing need for a faster shutter speed to over come the camera shake by the rapidly dropping F stop.

Anyway, nice piece of kit the original link has.

Cheers

[nickthetasmaniac]

I think the G1X may have made sense and found a market if it'd been released 3 years ago (as a direct competitor to the Sigma DP models). But with all the compact, high-quality mirrorless options available now, why would you? Their sensor tech is in most cases similar or better, their kit lenses just as fast at the tele end and you can add faster/sharper/longer/wider lenses if you want and their often cheaper...

The Fuji though... Wow. I'll wait for reviews, but with Fuji's trackrecord for sensors and lenses and their focus on manual user interfaces, I reckon it could talk me out of my GH2...

Classic three prime kit anyone?

[wildlight]

Howdy

I am a full-time pro photographer, for last huge number of years. Done it since school, lotsa grey hair now.

Have got the full stable of pro nikon bodies, many lenses, love them all.

Used to lug a body (D700 usually) and at least 2x lenses on all walks.

Heard about Nikon P7000 and bought one, thrilled to bits with the image quality- have enlarged them to 42inch- not centimetres- and would compare them to a Nikon D200 slr with a top-end Tokina/Tamron pro lens- not quite as good as a D200 with a top end Nikkor Pro Lens, like 14-24mm f2.8.
But at THAT weight saving? Glorious.
Bought the 21mm adapter also upgraded to the P7100 when it came out, which is a better rig. I use a carbon fibre manfrotto tripod, which weighs about 800grams, and takes some of the credit for the stunning image quality.

The little camera sits in a pouch around my neck, and pumps out some stunning shots. The dynamic range is superb for what it is- and it shoots in the RAW format. I am hoping to get to Reedy Creek Chasm before the season ends, and certainly want to use it there, however- such a striking location with such difficult access- I will also take a pro outfit, as the chasm is not somewhere I can revisit comfortably in a couple of days' break, "if the light was wrong".

Cheers

WildLight

[Nuts]

Yes! ive talked up this little camera (p7000) in other posts (the wa converter is nice too). Iv'e never printed to that size but thats crazy resolution given the little camera lens and sensors.
Guessing there are others just as good and better (p7100/and others in the class) now which makes these 'pro' compacts even more impressive.

[Drifting]

Adam, a dedicated Nikonian, will approve of the unfortunate bend this post has taken.....

And I might add- just like Nikon people too- hijacking a perfectly respectable Canon thread....lol

All jokes aside, it is interesting to see the ways the different manufacturers have developed (no pun intended). When the wife and I bought our first DSLR, a 350D, Canon was the only way to go. Nikon's consumer grade stuff was 6mp. I don't know what I'd choose now. Nikon's lenses are so dear, Canon isn't as all-powerful as it once was (mostly because I can't afford a 5D or 1Dx), and now companies are making DSLR-quality cameras on rangefinder sized bodies! A lot of change for 6 years.

[north-north-west]

...I use a carbon fibre manfrotto tripod, which weighs about 800grams...

*sigh*
How many $$$$$?

[wayno]

the canon G1X ? US$700

[photohiker]

Doesn't float my boat.

Slow lens, non-interchangeable. Looks klunky, but might be better than that in the hand.

[wayno]

small and compact can't have it all. depends what your priorities are for a camera. I went for a g12 because i wanted a small camera to take reasonable quality panoramics.......

[Stibb]

Personally I think the retro styled cameras are as ugly as dead rats but this new Olympus E-M5 could be interesting for bushwalkers.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusem5/
Weatherproof micro 4/3! Great news IMO. Also, leaving behind the "user-friendly" non-button menu-digging approach.
Now, I only hope that inbuilt GPSs will find it's way into the m4/3 line. Not very likely though

[walkinTas]

A weatherproof point-and-shoot with an interchangeable lens, but they aren't SLR. I thought the whole idea of micro 4/3 was smaller DSLR. I'm not sure of the advantage of changeable lenses without SLR.

[photohiker]

A weatherproof point-and-shoot with an interchangeable lens, but they aren't SLR. I thought the whole idea of micro 4/3 was smaller DSLR. I'm not sure of the advantage of changeable lenses without SLR.

The point of Micro 4/3 is interchangeable lens, smaller but not tiny sensor, short lens mount to sensor distance, no mirror, no pentaprism. This delivers a smaller and lighter camera than a traditional DSLR. They were never SLR although some are styled after SLR's as is this OM-D. Some, like the OM-D, the Panasonic G3 and GH3 have an integrated electronic viewfinder which gives SLR like handling.

In practice, the OM-D has an electronic viewfinder but you can also use the rear screen as you would a point and shoot.

[tasadam]

Adam, a dedicated Nikonian, will approve of the unfortunate bend this post has taken.....

Nah. These P&S cameras don't do it for me. I agree they're all producing more and more impressive results, regardless of brand. But they don't do what I'm looking for.

My wishlist looks like this -

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journ ... ake-camera

80-megapixel back and two Schneider lenses

a specialised "pancake" shift camera for use with medium format digital backs and extreme wide-angle lenses, which is perfectly adapted for use in architecture and landscape work

and

http://www.photographybay.com/2011/05/3 ... jhYgcv62xu

The camera then captures 6 shots, by moving the sensor 1 and ½ pixel at the time, to create a 200Mpix capture. This process eliminates the issues which single-shot interpolation can sometimes introduce, such as moiré and color rendering issues, thereby capturing the red, green and blue information in each individual pixel point and then combining these captures into one amazing file. The mind blowing detail of these shots opens new creative and commercial doors to any kind of shooting where detail or resolution are important

Now go pick your jaw off the floor...

[tasadam]

OK, that sent me off on a tangent.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2006/9/30/seitzd3
A bit over $40,000.

[phan_TOM]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2006/9/30/seitzd3
A bit over $40,000.

What a bargain. You could shoot with one & keep a backup in your pack, what the hell why not throw another in the glovebox 'just in case'...

Seriously though, the images through that limited edition Cambo 'thing' are incredible, hows the detail in the extreme crops, in-sane. Might need to invest in a couple of cray supercomputers to process the 240mb tiffs though!

[nickthetasmaniac]

A weatherproof point-and-shoot with an interchangeable lens, but they aren't SLR. I thought the whole idea of micro 4/3 was smaller DSLR. I'm not sure of the advantage of changeable lenses without SLR.

How could the point be 'smaller DSLR'? The whole principal of MFT is that it is not a DSLR and does not have a reflex mirror - this is why they (both bodies and lenses) are so much smaller. The point of MFT is a compact kit with 'good enough' IQ (and believe me, it's very much good enough - there's buggerall real world difference between the best MFT sensors and APS) and the versatility of interchangeable lenses.

How many point-and-shoots can you use with a f0.95 lens?

[walkinTas]

How could the point be 'smaller DSLR'? The whole principal of MFT is that it is not a DSLR and does not have a reflex mirror

The point of Micro 4/3 is interchangeable lens, smaller but not tiny sensor, short lens mount to sensor distance, no mirror, no pentaprism.

Thanks guys - we all live and learn. I would have benefited from two things, firstly reading the whole article, and secondly steering clear of acronyms. By SLR, I was referring to the ability to see and frame the subject through the lens - which is not a correct definition of SLR.

At the bottom of the article there is some good advice. <quote> If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used). <endquote> While the glossary is useful it doesn't explain the whole SLR v 4/3s concept.

Since my obvious ignorance was showing, it did a bit of googling. I found the following extensive quote quite useful.

Single lens reflex

The primary distinction between pocket cameras and dSLR cameras is that the dSLR allows you to physically see through the lens without any conversion of the image to digital format. That is, the light goes straight through the lens and (after some bouncing around) directly to your eyes, hence the term optical viewfinder. Most pocket cameras see through the lens too {I did know that }, but they convert that light and display it on an LCD screen on the rear of the camera so in a sense you are not seeing through the lens: you are seeing what the camera sees through the lens.

The Olympus/Panasonic Micro Four Thirds system used in cameras like the Panasonic G1 and upcoming E-series cameras from Olympus work less like a dSLR and more like a compact camera in that there is no mirror and no optical viewfinder where you can see through the lens. Instead, there is an LCD on the back of the camera and a digital viewfinder that works like an optical viewfinder on a traditional dSLR except that what you see is a digitized image of what the camera sees through the lens. In a sense, the Micro Four Thirds system is like a pocket camera with a digital viewfinder that you can put your eye close to in order to see the viewfinder better in bright light. Having all the features of a dSLR plus the digital viewfinder, it's a compact camera that looks and feels like a dSLR to a large extent. In the end, whether you call it a dSLR or something else is up to you. You could argue that point either way, but to me, the most important thing is that the Micro Four Thirds system does make cameras that look, operate, and feel like a dSLR with some useful advantages!

And, of course, the Olympus OM-D E-M5 does display the image seen through the lens. That is not what the author meant in the article when he said "the OM-D models won't be SLRs ".

[Drifting]

I'm with you Adam, but those puppies ain't cheap. I'd love the new Pentax medium format.

[tasadam]

Beeen looking around.
First I found this - http://www.mamiyaleaf.com/products_aptus2645df.asp

But...
Look what I found...

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399872,00.asp
I don't want video, seems I'll get no choice. With an affordable 36 Mp to play with and no need to buy new lenses, sweet!

[Drifting]

I reckon that Nikon will max out 35mm glass, same as the 5D II did.

[photohiker]

I reckon that Nikon will max out 35mm glass, same as the 5D II did.

If any camera will, the D800E with no AA should be the one to do it.

That looks like one heck of a camera Adam.

Wonder which way Canon will go with the 5DIII?

[tasadam]

Indeed... 36 Mp in a 35mm DSLR. Wonder what the future holds. And there was me considering switching to medium format!