YES! Thanks for alerting me to that. No paper manual and I haven't browsed it online yet, so there are loads of features I haven't found yet.
I have to say... it is a stupidly good small camera. Like, REALLY good. It's not quite what I had in mind when I ordered it, but it far exceeds what I was expecting as far as features and IQ. I thought it was going to be more a larger, slightly newer s95, but it is actually quite a different beast. This lens + the larger G1x sensor and just a tiny bit more size (especially on the left hand side, to make it easier to hold two-handed) would make it close to a perfect small pro-feature Canon camera, IMO. Of course, the whole line is probably being pushed out by the mirrorless options (eg Sony a6000 and the Fuji offerings), but I have to admit - it's impressive... Especially for $230
Hope you don't mind me adding my questions to this thread but it fits perfectly.
I'm basically a step further back from the S95 with a Nikon P300 which means I don't have RAW and the sensor is even smaller. I've been out of the loop with compacts for a few generations now but I'm looking for something in the same class as the S95/LX3 were but newer. The 1" sensors are beyond what I "need" since this will be for very specific types of photos that my P300 is close to being able to shoot but falls just short. And I have a long list of gear for my DSLR's/computer that needs replaced so saving a bit here and there would be a big help. I'm fine with refurbished cameras as well.
Also just a general question, I saw that Fuji has a camera in that class so how is Lightroom (I'm using CC) with X-Trans sensors? I've heard conflicting reports about how well it renders their RAW files.
Further thoughts after using the G15 in the Real World today. It's a pretty outstanding camera.... even though not really the camera I was looking for. However, further research makes it seem unlikely I'll find anything better in my price range, so I'll probably be keeping it. If push comes to shove I can do what I did last time with the s95+slr+1 lens and use the compact as my "walkaround". I do think I'd love m43 (the Olys look fantastic), but I don't really want to invest in another full system of lenses + bodies for something that will see limited use when I'm at home, and anything I'd want is at least 3x the price of the G15, which is in itself a verrryyy nice upgrade to the (already capable) s95.
In any case, I put it through its paces today. Here are some sample shots - I haven't started a new thread since it's an obselete model, but I thought it might still be of interest, especially since the current model, the G16, shares many features.
NB: these were shot jpg and have no processing. I'll get around to raw at some point, but have been being lazy
ETA: AF is the fastest of any non-dslr I've ever used; it's extremely responsive. Also, lots of customization options for the controls. In that regard it feels much like the 7d (and subsequent models).
1a. Wide
1b. Max optical zoom
1c. Max optical + max digital zoom
2. Also max optical + digital zoom
2.5. Ability to handle pretty wide dynamic range in a shot is impressive
3. IQ definitely deterioriates in lesser light, but still perfectly useable. I think I may have had the DR booster running on this one, which may be why the whites are a bit much for my taste.
4a. The thing it doesn't do without some fineigling is isolate subject from background. This was at f4.5, and you can see it's pretty sharp front to back.
4b. HOWEVER, it is possible to do it if you can set up the shot. This was about 6ft from the window behind and shot on tele + wide open standing as close as I could while still framing it as needed. It's also iso 3200, fwiw... (don't you love my "model"?! )
HA!! Mine were taken in Centennial Park in Ellicott City (judging by your profile location you may have recognized it!!). Is yours Oregon Ridge?
With a few more days to consider whether to return it or not, I'm still vacillating on this g15. It is SO GOOD, but it isn't strictly what I need. Man I wish it had the bigger sensor as well as the wide aperture lens so I could get some more control over depth of field. At full price I'd definitely consider another model, but this is crazy bang-per-buck at this price, and to get the balance of features and hardware I want I'll have to go up to nearly dSLR price. My instinct is to keep it just because it's such a great camera, but self-indulgent or what?!? Conundrum..........
YES! Thanks for alerting me to that. No paper manual and I haven't browsed it online yet, so there are loads of features I haven't found yet.
I have to say... it is a stupidly good small camera. Like, REALLY good. It's not quite what I had in mind when I ordered it, but it far exceeds what I was expecting as far as features and IQ. I thought it was going to be more a larger, slightly newer s95, but it is actually quite a different beast. This lens + the larger G1x sensor and just a tiny bit more size (especially on the left hand side, to make it easier to hold two-handed) would make it close to a perfect small pro-feature Canon camera, IMO. Of course, the whole line is probably being pushed out by the mirrorless options (eg Sony a6000 and the Fuji offerings), but I have to admit - it's impressive... Especially for $230
looks good but I'm still looking at the mirrorless models for a lightweight travel camera
HA!! Mine were taken in Centennial Park in Ellicott City (judging by your profile location you may have recognized it!!). Is yours Oregon Ridge?
With a few more days to consider whether to return it or not, I'm still vacillating on this g15. It is SO GOOD, but it isn't strictly what I need. Man I wish it had the bigger sensor as well as the wide aperture lens so I could get some more control over depth of field. At full price I'd definitely consider another model, but this is crazy bang-per-buck at this price, and to get the balance of features and hardware I want I'll have to go up to nearly dSLR price. My instinct is to keep it just because it's such a great camera, but self-indulgent or what?!? Conundrum..........
Yes, it's Oregon Ridge. I live in Timonium, about 3 miles away from the park, so on what turned out to be an astonishingly beautiful spring Saturday, I went up there and took a brief walk around to flex the new cam a little. I've never been to Centennial Park, but I realized it was Howard County, MD from the logo on the sight. I either didn't realize or forgot that you're in MD. Howdy, neighbor!
What is it that you find underwhelming about the G15? From the shots you posted, I think you're getting great results from it. If I were super picky - which I'm obviously not, as you can tell by my own test shots - I'd say that 1B is a touch soft and 1C has too much pixelization (not surprising, I despise digital zooms).
2 is terrifically sharp, as were the dog pics you originally posted; I'm shocked that 2 is max optical and digital zoom.
Looking very, very closely at your images, I'm seeing a consistent area of washed-out, overexposure. If you have the thirds grid turned on, it would be roughly centered on the lower-right intersection. It's fairly consistent, though it's hard to see in some of the pics due to the subject matter, but it's most evident in 3a, 3b, 4a. You can see it if you concentrate on 1a and 1b. I'm not sure I can see it in the dog pic; it would show up between the nose and her left eye, but that's an area of white fur anyway, so it's tough to say whether it's there. I'd check your front lens element, it may be a smudge or streak. Hopefully it's not a bad spot on the sensor.
What I said when I saw the Grand Canyon for the first time: "The wide ain't wide enough and the zoom don't zoom enough!"
Yes, I noticed that too. I *think* it's the combination of a smudge (there was definitely a fairly substantial one when I went to check) and shooting into the light; it's not on the earlier shots I took (including the goose!) and then appears when I started shooting the bandstand. I'll be check it again in daylight tomorrow
PS it's not that I find anything "underwhelming", but that I want to control depth of field more, but without dropping the $700-2000 I need to make that happen! One thing this exercise has shown me is that I do want zoom capability - fixed lens isn't going to work for me, so that rules out the "affordable" fuji and friends, and pushes me in the direction of interchangeable-lens mirrorless.....which starts getting outside my price range and brings me back to the G15! Like I said - a conundrum
So... I stumbled over an open box deal at best buy for a Sony a 5000. Ziggy, any thoughts? It was very nice in the hand, and seemed responsive. if I were to get a lens adapter and use one of my Canon EF fast primes, what I get decent results? I am truly lousy with manual focus, so I would probably have to find an autofocus adapter. if there are no affordable ones of those, I will be out of my budget again. I have another two days before I have to return the Canon if I'm not going to keep it, so I guess I will have to make a decision pretty soon!
Another question: is the focal length of a lens adapted to use on a mirrorlwss body like the Sony going to have the crop factor of the sensor, or does the difference in distance from lens to sensor because of the lack of a mirror change the crop factor yet again? I'm a little unclear on that. short version: what would the focal length of a 35mm, or 85 mm, lens be on a camera like the Sony?
So... I stumbled over an open box deal at best buy for a Sony a 5000. Ziggy, any thoughts? It was very nice in the hand, and seemed responsive. if I were to get a lens adapter and use one of my Canon EF fast primes, what I get decent results? I am truly lousy with manual focus, so I would probably have to find an autofocus adapter. if there are no affordable ones of those, I will be out of my budget again. I have another two days before I have to return the Canon if I'm not going to keep it, so I guess I will have to make a decision pretty soon!
I haven't really studied too much about the Sony a5000, but I think that it provides very good image quality for the money and uses all of the Sony E series (and third-party compatible) lenses. It appears to have contrast detect autofocus only, so it probably works like most P&S cameras in this regard; pretty well in good light and pretty slowly in low light. There appears to be an AF Assist lamp on the camera which should help in low light and close subjects.
It has a built-in flash, but no hot-shoe for an external flash.
To be honest I am not pleased with the AF performance of the a6000 plus a Canon lens via adapter. Manual focus using focus peaking and LCD zoom methods do work, but focus peaking alone can have focus error with large apertures and low light. I suspect that the a5000 would be similar. It's best to stick with native E Mount lenses by Sony or Sigma (IMO).
For tripod work and still life subjects, the adapters work fine (because you can usually take more time).
Another question: is the focal length of a lens adapted to use on a mirrorlwss body like the Sony going to have the crop factor of the sensor, or does the difference in distance from lens to sensor because of the lack of a mirror change the crop factor yet again? I'm a little unclear on that. short version: what would the focal length of a 35mm, or 85 mm, lens be on a camera like the Sony?
The adapters that I am aware of do not have optics, so the native and apparent focal length of the lens does not change. The adapter properly spaces the lens for the correct flange-focus distance.
I'm going to mention the SL1 one more time because they're now down to $299 (twelve left) at the Canon refurb store. Down to $299. All your Canon lenses will natively fit and no adaptor is needed. The sensor is crop, but depth of field is way better than the 1" sensor on the G-series. Hot shoe, everything you expect in a dSLR except the size.
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Yeah, I keep thinking about that David! But the thought of schlepping my 24-70 + another lens is still weight + space. I know, I know - I'm being ridiculously picky and inflexible! I want FF IQ and depth of field with all the flexibility of a dslr in something the size of a cellphone with lots of built-in features without wanting to invest any $ into the project. Very realistic of me
The adapters that I am aware of do not have optics, so the native and apparent focal length of the lens does not change. The adapter properly spaces the lens for the correct flange-focus distance.
But I'm still unclear on what the formula for equivalent focal length is on mirrorless - is it just multiplying by the crop factor like you would on a dSLR, or is there something else involved too?
But I'm still unclear on what the formula for equivalent focal length is on mirrorless - is it just multiplying by the crop factor like you would on a dSLR, or is there something else involved too?
Exactly the same. The a5000/a6000 are both crop 1.5x sensors, and closely compare (in sensor size and crop factor) to your Canon 7D (crop 1.6x), for instance.
Exactly the same. The a5000/a6000 are both crop 1.5x sensors, and closely compare (in sensor size and crop factor) to your Canon 7D (crop 1.6x), for instance.
Just to keep this thread going, I'll say... THE SEARCH CONTINUES. Still looking for that unicorn
To avoid boring everybody with the blow by blow, I'll post a run-down of everything I've tried when I finally get through the choices and make a decision. For now I will say I - very reluctantly - sent back the G15, but anybody who DOESN'T need significant depth of field control should definitely give it a look. It's a stunning small camera with a ton of manual and creative control, a ridiculously sharp lens, and very, very good image quality (especially for a small sensor).
In any case, more once I've had a chance to play hands-on with the other contenders Thanks to all who have chimed in so far, and more soon!
I still think you are better off not getting anything in the price range you have budgeted and using what you have. You have dismissed the fuji x100/x100s as possibly being too limiting but I have found having one lens is freeing. I just shot a proposal celebration with a D3s/70-200 2.8 combo and my x100s. Out of 174 pictures I selected as keepers, about 130 were shot with x100s. IQ is not a step down from the D3s and f2 can blur out backgrounds for portraits while at the same time keeping the subject in the environment. The files are great at recovering highlights and shadows. After using the x100s, I would take it over a point and shoot with a wider focal range but so-so IQ. As a bonus if your strobes have optic salve capabilities you have 1/1000 f2 using the cameras flash and that is before using the built in ND filter.
Trouble is that what I have can't really do what I want without taking the big rig with me too, something I am really trying to avoid. I'll be abroad first and foremost to sing: gowns and shoes will have to travel carry-on in. case luggage gets lost, and with international carry-on restrictions i'll be pushed to get all that on board in a bag that still gives me somewhere to put my knees I no longer have a 50mm lens, which would mean taking the 35mm 1.4 or 24-70 2.8 and either the 70-200 (no.way.) or 135 (not too bad, but still more than I want to schlep).
I love shooting with primes, but for the combo of snapshots, landscapes, and possibly portraits, I think I'll be better served by a standard zoom of some kind.
I will say the Fuji xm1 with 17-50 zoom lens has joined my list of possibilities after I got to play with one yesterday. I'm still waiting for another camera on order to arrive before I decide (I swear I've checked out every sub-$500 "'photographer's' not-a-dslr" I can find), but for IQ and focus accuracy the APs-c Fuji is currently way up there. Far and away the most dslr-like images of the options I've tried so far.
Trouble is that what I have can't really do what I want without taking the big rig with me too, something I am really trying to avoid. I'll be abroad first and foremost to sing: gowns and shoes will have to travel carry-on in. case luggage gets lost, and with international carry-on restrictions i'll be pushed to get all that on board in a bag that still gives me somewhere to put my knees I no longer have a 50mm lens, which would mean taking the 35mm 1.4 or 24-70 2.8 and either the 70-200 (no.way.) or 135 (not too bad, but still more than I want to schlep).
I love shooting with primes, but for the combo of snapshots, landscapes, and possibly portraits, I think I'll be better served by a standard zoom of some kind.
I will say the Fuji xm1 with 17-50 zoom lens has joined my list of possibilities after I got to play with one yesterday. I'm still waiting for another camera on order to arrive before I decide (I swear I've checked out every sub-$500 "'photographer's' not-a-dslr" I can find), but for IQ and focus accuracy the APs-c Fuji is currently way up there. Far and away the most dslr-like images of the options I've tried so far.
More soon
For what you have I meant the Canon s95 you have now. I don't think you will be happy with the compromises of the point and shoots in your budget. I just think the way you are agonizing over this that a sub $500 camera is not going to be a major improvement over the Canon s95 for the quality you are looking for in the images. Take the $500 and enjoy eating out more during the vacation or spend the money on a better camera.
This is why I say the limiting factor of the x100 series of having one fixed lens is freeing. It frees you up from thinking about all the possibilities of what you could get with a zoom and you concentrate on what you can get. The x100s has become my snapshot, landscape, possibly portrait camera when I want just one camera. For occasions where the main focus isn't photography but I want an all around camera the x100s is the one I grab. It has also found it's way into my professional business and replaced the need of the 24-70 range zoom. I'll stop now with the fanboy stuff and just close that all the knocks against it you have I had. Then I started to shoot with it and the cons became the pros.
It's been a while since I hunted down gear - as a bargain-seeker by nature, there's a (partial) element of thrill of the chase..... And I like unicorns. Also, this is a particularly meaningful trip for me, so want to make sure I have my bases covered
ETA: John, I've been following your Fuji shots for months - they're gorgeous (and your examples above - rawwwrr! Fabu stuff). But you shoot a really different portrait style than I do, which is where I think the lens works for you and wouldn't for me
Cameras no, but lens choices definitely play a part. My portrait style owes a lot to telephoto lens compression; your lovely headshot above is great for a lifestyle vibe, but I am aware of some of the typical distortion that comes from shooting close with a wider lens. Doesn't make it a bad shot (far from it - it's a very nice image), but it's not typical of my headshot style
I get that. For classic headshots I'm in the 85-300 range. If portraits were a primary concern then I would take only my xt1/56 1.2 as that gives me an equivalent 85 mm look. I don't just take portraits at 35 mm. I do when I want convenience and don't want to carry around a bunch of stuff.
Besides, if people are bothering you with portraits on the trip, they want the lifestyle look incorporating the background, other wise the compression shots would look they could have been taken anywhere. My beach clients want the beach as part of the scenery. If I'm in Europe or on a vacation I want the environment in the shot. I would be disappointment of the photographer took compressed shots and you couldn't tell if it were in an old town Europe or the backyard.
For your stated purposes if you don't comprise some area you are going to have to bring everything you have. There isn't a camera in the price range that will give you the IQ you want. For me if it's one camera the x100s is the camera. For portraits I get back which fixes the distortion and then crop. If you try to get an all-in one camera at your price point you may get the focal length but suffer IQ. That is why I suggest go with what you have or spend the money and get a no compromise camera. For me the x100s doesn't not suffer IQ and I can get landscape, portrait, and snapshot. It isn't the best for each one except snapshot but I can live with the comprises on the other. It isn't based on style but what I am willing to compromise.
I say all this because I have done the research and tried to get a cheap all in one. It isn't out there. The all in ones that are out there then add more bulk which defeats the purpose of going small.
Cameras no, but lens choices definitely play a part. My portrait style owes a lot to telephoto lens compression; your lovely headshot above is great for a lifestyle vibe, but I am aware of some of the typical distortion that comes from shooting close with a wider lens. Doesn't make it a bad shot (far from it - it's a very nice image), but it's not typical of my headshot style
All good points. I'm trying to make sure that IF somebody suddenly says, "Oh, you're here - will you do some portraits?" I have something I can make work, ideally without having to go the rental route (rentals in the UK are $$$ from the research I've done). It probably wouldn't be lifestyle, but my typical headshot style. It's not all that likely to happen, but I have a week of downtime between commitments, and I'm trying to cover my bases! The rest of the time, "high quality personal images" are just fine, which is why I keep thinking I can maybe manage this without the dslr. I don't want to take the big rig for a "maybe" when quite a few of the other options out there can do most of what I want! As for the s95: I love it, but I really do want something with a newer sensor/processor; it's a great little camera, but it's nearly 5 years old which in digicam terms is positively ancient
I will say that from what I've found so far, I'm not yet 100% convinced I won't find something. I've been extremely lucky that some solid models are on sale and available as refurbs; I'm waiting for the last ones to arrive with me (the ones I couldn't find to try out locally) and will then compare and make a final decision. So far I've got two extremely strong contenders (one ~$300 and one ~$400), and a couple of "maybes". (I'm not trying to be coy, I'd just rather save full details until I can give my impressions side-by-side, and will post at that time for anybody else who may be interested when dealing with the fairly common conundrum of portability + IQ for travel............ )
All good points. I'm trying to make sure that IF somebody suddenly says, "Oh, you're here - will you do some portraits?"
I guess we think different. Unless someone is going to pay for my trip or pay for the portrait I only consider what would make me happy on the vacation. Not going to worry about an IF or somebody's expectations trying to grab me away from a fun trip and what i want to do. They can be happy with what I bring.
I guess we think different. Unless someone is going to pay for my trip or pay for the portrait I only consider what would make me happy on the vacation. Not going to worry about an IF or somebody's expectations trying to grab me away from a fun trip and what i want to do. They can be happy with what I bring.
We're talking at cross-purposes: this WOULD be paid shoots... that's why I'm working so hard at finding something I think would be acceptable quality if that happens!! Since I'm there to sing before I get to play, it's not really a "vacation" anyway - fun, but not entirely holiday. Also, I'm visiting my old stomping grounds, so a lot of people are friends/colleagues - I won't be a faceless tourist. And I'm ok squeezing in a couple of mini-headshot sessions while I'm there, as that could be some nice extra pocket change.............
Comments
Yes, sorry. My bad. The G15 also has a built-in ND filter, according to the DPR review:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g15/5
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
I have to say... it is a stupidly good small camera. Like, REALLY good. It's not quite what I had in mind when I ordered it, but it far exceeds what I was expecting as far as features and IQ. I thought it was going to be more a larger, slightly newer s95, but it is actually quite a different beast. This lens + the larger G1x sensor and just a tiny bit more size (especially on the left hand side, to make it easier to hold two-handed) would make it close to a perfect small pro-feature Canon camera, IMO. Of course, the whole line is probably being pushed out by the mirrorless options (eg Sony a6000 and the Fuji offerings), but I have to admit - it's impressive... Especially for $230
I'm basically a step further back from the S95 with a Nikon P300 which means I don't have RAW and the sensor is even smaller. I've been out of the loop with compacts for a few generations now but I'm looking for something in the same class as the S95/LX3 were but newer. The 1" sensors are beyond what I "need" since this will be for very specific types of photos that my P300 is close to being able to shoot but falls just short. And I have a long list of gear for my DSLR's/computer that needs replaced so saving a bit here and there would be a big help. I'm fine with refurbished cameras as well.
Also just a general question, I saw that Fuji has a camera in that class so how is Lightroom (I'm using CC) with X-Trans sensors? I've heard conflicting reports about how well it renders their RAW files.
In any case, I put it through its paces today. Here are some sample shots - I haven't started a new thread since it's an obselete model, but I thought it might still be of interest, especially since the current model, the G16, shares many features.
NB: these were shot jpg and have no processing. I'll get around to raw at some point, but have been being lazy
ETA: AF is the fastest of any non-dslr I've ever used; it's extremely responsive. Also, lots of customization options for the controls. In that regard it feels much like the 7d (and subsequent models).
1a. Wide
1b. Max optical zoom
1c. Max optical + max digital zoom
2. Also max optical + digital zoom
2.5. Ability to handle pretty wide dynamic range in a shot is impressive
3. IQ definitely deterioriates in lesser light, but still perfectly useable. I think I may have had the DR booster running on this one, which may be why the whites are a bit much for my taste.
4a. The thing it doesn't do without some fineigling is isolate subject from background. This was at f4.5, and you can see it's pretty sharp front to back.
4b. HOWEVER, it is possible to do it if you can set up the shot. This was about 6ft from the window behind and shot on tele + wide open standing as close as I could while still framing it as needed. It's also iso 3200, fwiw... (don't you love my "model"?! )
With a few more days to consider whether to return it or not, I'm still vacillating on this g15. It is SO GOOD, but it isn't strictly what I need. Man I wish it had the bigger sensor as well as the wide aperture lens so I could get some more control over depth of field. At full price I'd definitely consider another model, but this is crazy bang-per-buck at this price, and to get the balance of features and hardware I want I'll have to go up to nearly dSLR price. My instinct is to keep it just because it's such a great camera, but self-indulgent or what?!? Conundrum..........
looks good but I'm still looking at the mirrorless models for a lightweight travel camera
Yes, it's Oregon Ridge. I live in Timonium, about 3 miles away from the park, so on what turned out to be an astonishingly beautiful spring Saturday, I went up there and took a brief walk around to flex the new cam a little. I've never been to Centennial Park, but I realized it was Howard County, MD from the logo on the sight. I either didn't realize or forgot that you're in MD. Howdy, neighbor!
What is it that you find underwhelming about the G15? From the shots you posted, I think you're getting great results from it. If I were super picky - which I'm obviously not, as you can tell by my own test shots - I'd say that 1B is a touch soft and 1C has too much pixelization (not surprising, I despise digital zooms).
2 is terrifically sharp, as were the dog pics you originally posted; I'm shocked that 2 is max optical and digital zoom.
Looking very, very closely at your images, I'm seeing a consistent area of washed-out, overexposure. If you have the thirds grid turned on, it would be roughly centered on the lower-right intersection. It's fairly consistent, though it's hard to see in some of the pics due to the subject matter, but it's most evident in 3a, 3b, 4a. You can see it if you concentrate on 1a and 1b. I'm not sure I can see it in the dog pic; it would show up between the nose and her left eye, but that's an area of white fur anyway, so it's tough to say whether it's there. I'd check your front lens element, it may be a smudge or streak. Hopefully it's not a bad spot on the sensor.
PS it's not that I find anything "underwhelming", but that I want to control depth of field more, but without dropping the $700-2000 I need to make that happen! One thing this exercise has shown me is that I do want zoom capability - fixed lens isn't going to work for me, so that rules out the "affordable" fuji and friends, and pushes me in the direction of interchangeable-lens mirrorless.....which starts getting outside my price range and brings me back to the G15! Like I said - a conundrum
I haven't really studied too much about the Sony a5000, but I think that it provides very good image quality for the money and uses all of the Sony E series (and third-party compatible) lenses. It appears to have contrast detect autofocus only, so it probably works like most P&S cameras in this regard; pretty well in good light and pretty slowly in low light. There appears to be an AF Assist lamp on the camera which should help in low light and close subjects.
It has a built-in flash, but no hot-shoe for an external flash.
To be honest I am not pleased with the AF performance of the a6000 plus a Canon lens via adapter. Manual focus using focus peaking and LCD zoom methods do work, but focus peaking alone can have focus error with large apertures and low light. I suspect that the a5000 would be similar. It's best to stick with native E Mount lenses by Sony or Sigma (IMO).
For tripod work and still life subjects, the adapters work fine (because you can usually take more time).
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
The adapters that I am aware of do not have optics, so the native and apparent focal length of the lens does not change. The adapter properly spaces the lens for the correct flange-focus distance.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
But I'm still unclear on what the formula for equivalent focal length is on mirrorless - is it just multiplying by the crop factor like you would on a dSLR, or is there something else involved too?
Exactly the same. The a5000/a6000 are both crop 1.5x sensors, and closely compare (in sensor size and crop factor) to your Canon 7D (crop 1.6x), for instance.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
To avoid boring everybody with the blow by blow, I'll post a run-down of everything I've tried when I finally get through the choices and make a decision. For now I will say I - very reluctantly - sent back the G15, but anybody who DOESN'T need significant depth of field control should definitely give it a look. It's a stunning small camera with a ton of manual and creative control, a ridiculously sharp lens, and very, very good image quality (especially for a small sensor).
In any case, more once I've had a chance to play hands-on with the other contenders
I love shooting with primes, but for the combo of snapshots, landscapes, and possibly portraits, I think I'll be better served by a standard zoom of some kind.
I will say the Fuji xm1 with 17-50 zoom lens has joined my list of possibilities after I got to play with one yesterday. I'm still waiting for another camera on order to arrive before I decide (I swear I've checked out every sub-$500 "'photographer's' not-a-dslr" I can find), but for IQ and focus accuracy the APs-c Fuji is currently way up there. Far and away the most dslr-like images of the options I've tried so far.
More soon
For what you have I meant the Canon s95 you have now. I don't think you will be happy with the compromises of the point and shoots in your budget. I just think the way you are agonizing over this that a sub $500 camera is not going to be a major improvement over the Canon s95 for the quality you are looking for in the images. Take the $500 and enjoy eating out more during the vacation or spend the money on a better camera.
This is why I say the limiting factor of the x100 series of having one fixed lens is freeing. It frees you up from thinking about all the possibilities of what you could get with a zoom and you concentrate on what you can get. The x100s has become my snapshot, landscape, possibly portrait camera when I want just one camera. For occasions where the main focus isn't photography but I want an all around camera the x100s is the one I grab. It has also found it's way into my professional business and replaced the need of the 24-70 range zoom. I'll stop now with the fanboy stuff and just close that all the knocks against it you have I had. Then I started to shoot with it and the cons became the pros.
ETA: John, I've been following your Fuji shots for months - they're gorgeous (and your examples above - rawwwrr! Fabu stuff). But you shoot a really different portrait style than I do, which is where I think the lens works for you and wouldn't for me
Besides, if people are bothering you with portraits on the trip, they want the lifestyle look incorporating the background, other wise the compression shots would look they could have been taken anywhere. My beach clients want the beach as part of the scenery. If I'm in Europe or on a vacation I want the environment in the shot. I would be disappointment of the photographer took compressed shots and you couldn't tell if it were in an old town Europe or the backyard.
For your stated purposes if you don't comprise some area you are going to have to bring everything you have. There isn't a camera in the price range that will give you the IQ you want. For me if it's one camera the x100s is the camera. For portraits I get back which fixes the distortion and then crop. If you try to get an all-in one camera at your price point you may get the focal length but suffer IQ. That is why I suggest go with what you have or spend the money and get a no compromise camera. For me the x100s doesn't not suffer IQ and I can get landscape, portrait, and snapshot. It isn't the best for each one except snapshot but I can live with the comprises on the other. It isn't based on style but what I am willing to compromise.
I say all this because I have done the research and tried to get a cheap all in one. It isn't out there. The all in ones that are out there then add more bulk which defeats the purpose of going small.
I will say that from what I've found so far, I'm not yet 100% convinced I won't find something. I've been extremely lucky that some solid models are on sale and available as refurbs; I'm waiting for the last ones to arrive with me (the ones I couldn't find to try out locally) and will then compare and make a final decision. So far I've got two extremely strong contenders (one ~$300 and one ~$400), and a couple of "maybes". (I'm not trying to be coy, I'd just rather save full details until I can give my impressions side-by-side, and will post at that time for anybody else who may be interested when dealing with the fairly common conundrum of portability + IQ for travel............
I guess we think different. Unless someone is going to pay for my trip or pay for the portrait I only consider what would make me happy on the vacation. Not going to worry about an IF or somebody's expectations trying to grab me away from a fun trip and what i want to do. They can be happy with what I bring.
We're talking at cross-purposes: this WOULD be paid shoots... that's why I'm working so hard at finding something I think would be acceptable quality if that happens!! Since I'm there to sing before I get to play, it's not really a "vacation" anyway - fun, but not entirely holiday. Also, I'm visiting my old stomping grounds, so a lot of people are friends/colleagues - I won't be a faceless tourist. And I'm ok squeezing in a couple of mini-headshot sessions while I'm there, as that could be some nice extra pocket change.............