Best Camera That Fits in a (Large) Pocket

charlesoutcalt

Hey Everyone - I have seen some threads on this topic, but none seem all that recent, so I thought I would start a new discussion.

I'm looking for the best camera I can fit in my pocket. I'll define 'pocket' as pretty large - I don't mind if the camera is a bit bulky - but I definitely want to be able to tuck the camera in and go.

I've got a couple overseas trips planned, and I don't want to lug around my Canon 1D4 and all its lenses. The last time I tried to get away on a trip with a little camera, I took my Lumix LX-3. I wasn't too happy with the results - noisy, not quite sharp . . .

Of course, I know that nothing that fits in a pocket will compare with a real DSLR with a big lens, but I'm wondering if there's anything out there better than the LX-3. From what I've read, the Canon S90 is comparable, but probably not different enough to justify a purchase.

I can't get a good sense from internet photos of how big the Panasonic G2 will be. From the posted weight and the look of the lens, I don't think it's pocket-able, though.

After camera size, the most important things I want are ability to shoot in RAW, a good mix of auto and manual controls (I want control, and the ability to just haul the thing out and snap a pic when I don't have time/interest in thinking about settings), and build quality, so I don't need to baby the camera too much.

I'd like to stay under $1K.

Any and all opinions are welcome! Maybe the LX-3 is the best choice, maybe there's something better out there.

Thanks for your thoughts!

JohnBiggs

I was after something similar as you. I bought the G10 and liked it but the images were ok. I bought the s90 and liked the controls and size better. But again the images were OK. So then I gave up on these higher end point and shoots and got an Olympus E-PL1 because it has the best JPG straight out of camera I've ever seen and it has low noise, even better than entry DSLRs. (See review here)

It would fit in a pocket of a jacket or something, but it is bulky. I got the pancake lens attached to save even more space. I only use one lens with it because it's point is to be small.

The only thing I wish were improved was the focus speed/tracking. I'm used to DSLRs near instant focus.

Overall, I feel this is the smallest I can get that I will ever be happy with. I believe point and shoot with much larger sensors are coming, but until then, I'll enjoy this.

Shayebryd

WoW! I was going to say the Lumix LX-3, as I have it and LOVE LOVE LOVE it....but then finished reading your post..................................I love that it shoots RAW and it is awesome in low light....small....
I have had beautiful results with mine........though I do miss zoom........

Qarik

hands down..gotta be the GF1.

charlesoutcalt

Wow! I am so happy to read these helpful responses.

John, thanks for pointing me toward the Olympuses (Olympi?). The E-PL1 looks really promising.

Shayebryd, don't get me wrong - I love my LX-3. Sturdy, well-designed, great images . . . But I'm looking for the next step up, even if it costs more.

Qarik, I hadn't looked into the GF1 before. (I'm not familiar with any of the cameras in this class.) I think this might be my final choice, though. It seems to the hit the sweet spot in terms of image quality, price . . . Let me ask you this, though - Can you really tuck this in your pocket with the pancake lens? Like I mentioned, I've got some overseas trips coming up, and, with an 8 month old baby along, I think I'll need to leave the 'big gear' at home.


Thanks again, everyone. And if anyone else has an opinion, I am all ears. I really value your thoughts.

Qarik

the gf1 is 1/2 wider, 1/2 in longer, and 1/4 in thicker. With the pancake lens it should fit into coat pocket. The gf1 is a heck of a lot more camera then the LX3 though. I have the LX3 and have played with my freinds gf1. The shutter lag on the GF1 is an abosolute joy..it is very dslr like while the LX is stil an advanced PS.

charlesoutcalt

interesting
Good to know.

In some strange way, I think that the big DSLR actually inhibits photography. It's so d@mned heavy, and, just as importantly, so intimidating when I point it at someone, that the camera gets in the way of the photo, if that makes any sense.

I am very tempted by the GF1!

Thanks again.

Qarik wrote: »

the gf1 is 1/2 wider, 1/2 in longer, and 1/4 in thicker. With the pancake lens it should fit into coat pocket. The gf1 is a heck of a lot more camera then the LX3 though. I have the LX3 and have played with my freinds gf1. The shutter lag on the GF1 is an abosolute joy..it is very dslr like while the LX is stil an advanced PS.

JohnBiggs

One last emphasis here:
The GF1 requires raw processing for the images.
The E-PL1 is excellent straight from the JPG.

When I carry a camera like this, I am in a 'I don't want to work' mode, so I avoid the RAW processing. Though it is still there if I need it. I have been suprised by the AWB and AE on the Olympus as well as the great JPG conversion in camera.

Check these shots out... all straight from the camera: http://olympusdigitalpen.blogspot.com/2010/03/blog-post_13.html

charlesoutcalt

gorgeous
Gorgeous pics, John.

I get the sense that I can't go wrong with either of these choices.

I took the plunge and ordered the GF1 with the 20mm pancake. Then I took another plunge and ordered the Olympus 14-54mm.

Now it's up to ME to get good images - I can't fault the equipment

JohnBiggs

charlesoutcalt wrote: »

Gorgeous pics, John.

That was a friend's blog. Though he recently switched back to Nikon.

He only has money for one camera or he said he would have both.

charlesoutcalt

Nikon?
Oy, I take back what I said about the pics! j/k

Thanks again for jumping into this discussion. This is a really useful community to have on tap.

charlesoutcalt

First Pic from the GF1
To bring this discussion full circle, here's the first fruit of my new GF1 (which arrived today - thanks, Amazon!).

OK, OK, this is not the best pic the camera can make - but I thought that I would share the first image from the GF1. After all, new gear is good, but cute babies are even better

All that said, here is my 8 month old daughter and GF1 model -

http://www.potomacpix.com/Personal/Sarah/Sarah-Takes-a-Bath-May-2010/bath-3-of-7/880138976_kj9aQ-L.jpg

ziggy53

Congratulations on the new camera. Both the camera and your daughter look like keepers. clap

charlesoutcalt

thanks

NikonsandVstroms

Are we talking cargo pants size? I could fit the E-420 with the pancake in there no problem, so the E-620 would work as well.

Tee Why

I'd also consider the Pen 1L. It's more consumer friendly and probably has the best IQ out of the mirco or regular 4/3 image sensors.

charlesoutcalt

thanks again
Thanks again for the good advice, everyone. I went ahead with the GF1 with the 20 mm. So far, I am loving it - now I just need to sort out which other lenses to get

ziggy53

Congratulations on the new camera.

(Ooops Oh well, double congratulations.)

charlesoutcalt

thanks, but . . .
Thanks - and thanks for the advice from everyone.

But . . . I have to say that I was a bit naive in my expectations for the available lenses. I had gotten so accustomed to my 'big' lenses that I was taking them for granted. I've tried the Olympus 14-54, which I understand is a very good lens. However, it makes me really miss my Canon 24 - 70.

All in all, though, a very good outcome, since I now have a relatively tiny camera, and I have a renewed appreciation for the advantages of very heavy equipment. It turns out that all those pounds really do translate into better optics - now I just need to translate them into better pictures! And no fancy glass is going to do that for me.

JohnBiggs

charlesoutcalt wrote: »

Thanks - and thanks for the advice from everyone.

But . . . I have to say that I was a bit naive in my expectations for the available lenses. I had gotten so accustomed to my 'big' lenses that I was taking them for granted. I've tried the Olympus 14-54, which I understand is a very good lens. However, it makes me really miss my Canon 24 - 70.

All in all, though, a very good outcome, since I now have a relatively tiny camera, and I have a renewed appreciation for the advantages of very heavy equipment. It turns out that all those pounds really do translate into better optics - now I just need to translate them into better pictures! And no fancy glass is going to do that for me.

If you are going to buy an arsenal of lenses, you won't be saving much size/weight anyways. If you want lots of lenses, go with traditional SLRs. They have a better selection. If you want a smaller camera without the bulk, just get a micro 4/3 with a pancake lens.

charlesoutcalt

agreed
John, I agree. I think I'm going to send back the Olympus 14-54. I've got the 20mm pancake, and I'm pretty happy with it. I have ordered the Panasonic 7-14 (although it cost more than the camera!). Maybe the 7-14 and 20 will be my arsenal for this little guy, and I'll just reconcile myself to hauling out the big guns for more serious shooting.

I'm 90% happy with this solution. I want to travel with something that will give decent images, but won't weigh me down. When I went on safari a couple years ago, my camera gear was 29 lbs (the 300 mm f/2.8 alone was about 1/3 of that!).

I guess you get not only what you pay for, but also what you're willing to haul around on your neck.

liflander

Does anyone have an opinion on the Canon S90?

I'm thinking of buying a good P&S, and I'm hearing very good things about the S90.

Thanks,
Mark

ziggy53

liflander wrote: »

Does anyone have an opinion on the Canon S90?

I'm thinking of buying a good P&S, and I'm hearing very good things about the S90.

Thanks,
Mark

Please check out this thread:

The Amazing S90 (photo thread)
http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=162850