Recommend me a decent stills camera

[faustus]

Right. I used to be a keen-ish amateur photographer, in my own way. I had a lovely 2nd hand Olympus OM-10 SLR back in the day (2000?), and it took some lovely photos, though it was an expense when I was a student. Then went digital and got the most out of what I had, including a basic Sony a100 DSLR. About 6 years ago I got a Fuji EX-1 as a refurb (so an older model even then). But for various reasons found it disappointing. Like every other person, my phone is my everyday camera (Pixel 6) and it's good for that purpose. But I miss handling a 'proper' camera, and I like to head out to just take photos, so I can focus on changing settings and composition etc., just enjoying the process of taking pictures. I'm confident enough with manual settings and how to use them, and am keen for there to be room to use them more fully to improve my skills.

TLDR: Any ideas for something that is solely for images, specific models and types? I've no interest in videos, and have a phone for that. Would happily go 2nd hand, and it's not just for carrying on a bike, though it might come on some trips. Definitely less than £500 new or used. Here is a rough list of preferences:
- Useable manual focus
- In camera stabilisation preferable
- traditional/manual controls or ones that work well, I hate scrolling menus
- EVF useable (if applicable)
- Decent sensor (not neccesarily megapixels)
- Great image quality (again, not just sensor, but lens and camera software)
- lenses not too expensive (if applicable

I've previously considered 'super' compacts like the Sony rx100, Sony a6000 and Lumix lx100, Canon G series, various from Fuji but price is too premium, an older Sony a7 if cheap enough. I'm open to either a fixed lens or interchangeable. Would still consider a dslr if a really decent bargain and not a huge body, but it seems like smaller forms can achieve similar image results? If you have suggestions from your own camera, feel free to add photos to show off image quality!

[Hyppy]

No specific recommendations, but I've found it very hard to adapt to using any camera other than a Canon DLSR, as that's what I used for years when I took it up seriously again (ie. went I finally went digital having done film photography back in the day). I've tried Fuji compacts and have a Panasonic Micro Four Thirds but neither 'work for me' quite as I'd hoped, whereas using the Canon feels organic. With that in mind and your Olympus background is it worth looking at their system again?

And I can thoroughly recommend MPB.com for buying second hand from, and indeed to offload unused kit to as well. They seem to offer a good return policy so you may even be able to try something out before committing.

[faustus]

Thanks for the MPB link, not seen them before and looks really good!
I think the classic SLR layout of left hand focussing/zooming, right hand shutter and thumb button/wheel - feels right

[thenorthwind]

Just to provide one experience... I've got an Olympus M4/3 mirrorless (E-M10 MK3) which I've been very happy with - probably 4 or 5 years old now. It, or a similar, newer model probably meets most of your spec:

Useable manual focus

Depends on the lens focus ring to an extent, but the focus peaking in the EVF helps. Don't use it as much as I thought, the AF is pretty good.

In camera stabilisation preferable

This was a key thing for me.

traditional/manual controls or ones that work well, I hate scrolling menus

Ditto. Lots of physical controls good. Willing to pay the weight/bulk penalty.

Decent sensor (not neccesarily megapixels)

M4/3 so quite small. This was off-putting for me, but compromised given the other things, and haven't regretted it. Image quality is plenty good enough for me. Think they do some full frame mirrorless cameras now.

- Great image quality (again, not just sensor, but lens and camera software)

See above. One thing I've found is the in-camera processing is really hard to beat. In fact I've found it quite frustrating trying to get as good results in post (darktable) without using It Olympus' proprietary software, which I don't really want to do.

- lenses not too expensive (if applicable

Decent selection with M4/3, though good lenses are always expensive.

It's been on quite a few trips and proved very rugged. Had to replace the screen flex cable recently, but that's inevitable. Posted plenty of pics from it on here, e.g. https://bearbonesbikepacking.co.uk/phpB ... 43#p310143

Given your previous experience, you probably wouldn't regret another Olympus.

I used cameradecision.com when I was researching it last.

There's a few other specialist retailers doing used/refurbished kit, which is probably a good option. E.g. London camera exchange, Park cameras, though I've no specific experience.

[riderdown]

Olympus XZ-1?

[Hyppy]

Just noticed where you are Faustus. I lived down that way until a handful of years back and would have recommended T4 Cameras in Newbury, the now-closed odd 50/50 Camera/Whisky shop. I bought (and exchanged) a few bodies and lenses from them, and they still have branches in Swindon and Witney too, but TBH their stock was always quite limited.

[JackT]

I used a Canon 5d mk2 for the photography in the first two Lost Lanes books. Very heavy and bulky. Then switched to M43, an Olympus OMD EM5-ii for the next two books until the on/off switch kept failing and it was outside the 3 year warrantee so not worth repairing again. Moved to OMD EM1-ii and used for most recent book. I've supplied images to magazines and newspapers with no problems on image quality.

M43 is a good balance between weight, image quality and usability in my opinion. There are a lot of lenses available, and good quality for the money. Olympus is now OM System. Panasonic Lumix is the other major M43 brand, but M43 lenses are all interchangeable.

If you go for an older model Olympus (e.g. EM1-iii) with a weather sealed travel zoom (say the Olympus 12-100) with a couple of small 1.8mm primes for low light use is a good value travel system. Or a Lumix with the two excellent f2.8 zooms 12-35 and 35-100. I've bought from HDEW in the past and they've been excellent, honouring their 3 year warrantee.

APS-C or full frame sensors will give you more pixels, better image quality, more dynamic range, especially in low light but you've not just got a heavier camera body but much heavier lenses, and more expensive.

I'll keep going with my M43 system until it breaks, though I do quite like the look of the Lumix S5-ii which has some good deals right now. But it's a lot more money and more weight to carry.

[faustus]

Thanks for the suggestions so far, all really useful.

@JackT thanks for the insight on your kit, I love the photos in your books so your experience with the Olympus cameras is really interesting. I looked into the OMD-EM1ii or iii, and it looks a great option and would meet all my needs, as well as being a decent price used. It's up there on the list now.

All good food for thought, and i'll take my time deciding and buying

[GregMay]

My opinions... £500 second hand may limit you to a reasonable body (albiet a few years old) and you'll need to look at the possibility of spending a bit on glass unless you have some old manual primes lying around.... and you can use an adapter on a mirrorless setup. FWIW, most of my images are on an A7 this way.

While I would suggest an A7, be aware that with the originals they suffer from delamination on the sensor that shows up like dust spots...but it's not possible to remove the dust. You can fix in post, but it can be annoying. Mine suffers from this quite badly after the 10 years I've had it - but it is at least a reproducible "feature" so I know how to work around it.

The smaller 4/3rds sensors that Sony do are excellent, and again you can adapt old glass onto them. I have also previously used a few different RX100s, great cameras, and you can still manually focus...you're just limited to a 28mm (equiv) focal length.

All I can say is it's not about the kit, it's about your photographs and how you make them.

[Asposium]

.

Definitely less than £500 new or used. Here is a rough list of preferences:
- Useable manual focus
- In camera stabilisation preferable
- traditional/manual controls or ones that work well, I hate scrolling menus
- EVF useable (if applicable)
- Decent sensor (not neccesarily megapixels)
- Great image quality (again, not just sensor, but lens and camera software)
- lenses not too expensive (if applicable

I use canon, so cannot necessarily help with specifics.
However, from the above you’ve pretty much ruled out the Canon RF system.

For your research consider looking at an older Sony and a third party manual focus lens.

As stated fuji has the retro user interface of an old film camera.
Fuji is not full frame, just in case the FF “look” matters to you.

Your budget is limiting, so don’t expect modern sensor / camera technology.

[thenorthwind]

Re. old lenses, I liked the idea that I could use some of my old Pentax lenses on an inexpensive M4/3 adapter, since my previous camera was a Pentax dSLR - in fact the main reason I bought into the Pentax system.

But in reality, I rarely use them. The light weight and bulk of the modern M4/3 lenses and body makes them seem extra heavy/bulky in comparison, and since you lose 3/4 of the light (?) from a FF lens with an M4/3 sensor, and the AF, it doesn't make much sense.

Maybe if you have lenses you're very attached to, have a FF mirrorless and/or are shooting purely for the pleasure of creative photography, rather than documenting a trip, as I know you do Greg, but personally I wouldn't put much weight on it next time round.

[Alpinum]

Long time (11 or 12 yrs) Oly MFT user here. Coming from mostly Nikon's burly APS-C (DX) and full frame (FX) DSLRs (and never quite quit using them for certain stuff) I was waiting for compact mirrorless camera with bomb proof weather sealing and interchangeable lenses. Oly OM-D E-M5 (I) came out as the first one to offer these specs. I bought one with two lenses, added more lenses over time and did horrible things with it. Many sandstorms, lots of dirt (even toothpaste...), dropping it on rocks from hip height and (what impressed me most) had it in a puddle in a hip bag which froze over night. After knocking off the ice it worked as if nothing ever happened.
Photo quality easily high enough for >300 dpi prints at A3 format and can go bigger.

After about 11 or so years with the E-M5 I, I then got the OM-D E-M5 III and it pushes the image quality considerably further, is even more customisable (eg way more than Nikon D4s) and way more functional than the first gen E-M5 or even pro cameras from 5 - 10 years prior (of any brand). Body is not magnesium any more, but a very shock resistant polycarbonate. It feels solid, some users apparently didn't even realise it wasn't mag anymore. Also better feel than the magnesium when temps are very low.
There are some big changes between the three E-M5 versions. If into this series, play close attention to learn what you get/miss.
It's been on many wilderness trips, including bikepacking and has never let me down.
Only issue I have with my two Oly is night sky photography. What works on eg. Nikons with getting the focus right is something I struggle with on the Oly.
In December I was asked by two bands to shoot a gig. First I wanted to use the D4s, but tookthe E-M5 III instead.  Photos were taken mostly at ISO 6400, mostly in burst mode, moving objects (so 1/250 or faster) etc. I was stunned to find how little out of focus and images blurred by movenemt I got. Used a set of different lenses (mostly 25 mm prime and 40-150 mm tele) and all did very well. ISO noise was low and dead easy in post process to bring it down to amazing results. Not sure of the endresult would've been any better with the D4s, except for wrist pain from holding on to that beast for 2 hrs.

The MFT lens and body choices are still growing (see the fairly new Oly tele marco). Just a couple of years ago I believed MFT would die out very soon. Thankfully not.

My most used lens is the Leica 12-60 mm f2.8-4. Very good at open apperture in all zoom areas and excellent at f5.6 - 8. It compares to primes for sharpness.
For any other trips but bikepacking, I almost always bring along my Oly 40-150 mm f2.8. As soon as it was available I got the 1.4x and later the 2x teleconverter. This makes a crazy 600 mm equivalent on 36 mm sensors at a fracture of the weight. My super wide lens, 7-12 mm f4 doesn't see much use, neither do some of my primes, at least outside concert and indoor photography.

Just came back from a walk with a Leica 45 mm 2.8 macro on the E-M5 III and as usual, always amazing what this little camera can do.

The MFT system allows for genuinely small, and light yet fast lenses, I don't really see where I could get the same flexibility and performance with such low weight and bulk.
The trade off is the small MFT size sensor, most of all - for me, the lack of DOF in a first instance. But then in a second instance, there are many very fast lenses (f0.8 -1.4) for less money with less weight and bulk, great image quality compared to eg. f2.8 lenses for 36 mm sensors (f1.4 on MFT giving the same DOF as 2.8 on 36 mm sensors).

Regarding compact cameras:
My girlfriend got the first gen (IIRC) Lumix LX100. Close decision between a Sony and a Lumix. Can't remember why it was a Lumix in the end. For the package also well amazing. Again, many superb prints at 300dpi on A3 or comparable size. The lens has a very useful zoom range and is fast too. But, as (in my experience) with all fixed lens compacts the lens struggle to work smoothy, sometimes getting stuck after perhaps 3-4 years due to sand/grit/dirt entering the gaps. Good thing with this or similar cameras; they're so light and compact, I sometimes take the LX100 along on bikepacking trips where I'm going minimalist due to tons of climbing, hike-/carry-a-bike and tech, alpine riding.
Even the best and most up to date smartphoned are (still)  way behind what you can get out of an old LX100.

If you really want to get some of the best image quality (of anything up to 36 mm sensors), top weather sealing, the possibilty to set the buttons up like an Oly and don't mind carrying a bit more weight, look into Niko Z series. Z5s, Z6 and especially Z7 II are mind blowingly capable. AF and low light is something else on these.
But then I guess many other manufacturers are doing a great job too.

To compare lenses without running to the shop I like to check on ephotozine what the lab sharpness says. I find it's not always 1:1 applicable but gives you a good idea.

TL;DR
Get a secondhand Oly E-M 5 III with a lens that suits your needs.
Should be just about doable with 500 quid.

[Alpinum]

As stated fuji has the retro user interface of an old film camera.
Fuji is not full frame, just in case the FF “look” matters to you.

What Fuji? Are you meaning the compacts?

Not long ago I used a GFX 50S II. Biggest digital sensor I ever took photos with. Basically the first ever camera that's medium format but doesn't totally feel like it.

Back to the smaller ones

This was a key thing for me.
faustus wrote: ↑traditional/manual controls or ones that work well, I hate scrolling menus
Ditto. Lots of physical controls good. Willing to pay the weight/bulk penalty.

A mentioned before, the E-M5 are all very customisable. Above sums up what I meant with this. Coming from mainly Nikon, I love the dial wheels at the release button and back side for thumb and was able to set all cameras at home up the same way. There very little "where's that feckn buttton again". There's hardly any setting I use in the field which I can't access without opening the menu. Many of them can be done within the EVF if need be.

Canon is quite different to Nikon and Oly in this regard. Panasonic is closer to Oly too. Sony never cought my attention, probably for not being renown for sturdy weather sealing.
Saw two Canon bodies fail in very wet shooting conditions and tough condensation situations (sailing trip in the Arctic). I guess there were about 4 Canon bodies in use and 6 Nikons. All within semi pro to pro models. Not one Nikon failed.

[faustus]

Thanks very much for the further detailed replies and your experiences, all really valuable to know.

Quite a lot of reassuring experience with M43 which is good to know. I'm certainly leaning more toward an Olympus of some sort, as their range has a lot of the things I want, not least great image quality. I don't have any lenses left, so whatever I get i'll be buying into that system. I think i'm steering myself away from full frame for now, partly due to size and expense, but also because I probably don't need it.

I need to think how i'm going to process pictures, so any insight into how others use their camera photos would also be useful. I only have a work laptop now, which I can't plug anything into and I don't own, and it has many admin restrictions in place. I don't enjoy 'processing' photos very much at all, and only ever like to make small changes out of the camera. I like to get pictures how I want them with the camera as much as possible, and then it's just about storing and printing them if I fancy.

Interesting thoughts too on the LX100 vs a smartphone. I was looking at some older camera photos the other night (old TZ30 from some holidays), and I realised the quality is pretty good on some of them as the glass makes the difference.

Anyway, thanks for all the input!

[Valerio]

Fuji XT30 owner here.

I've got a couple of lenses (standard 18-55 zoom and a really wide lens) with autofocus, as well as a bunch of old prime and zooms that i took of my dad's Minolta and got on ebay for cheap.
For shooting while cycling I bought a 27mm lens which I find quite good when it works but it's driving me mad as it often causes an error and I have to turn the camera on/off repeatedly.

I'm not able to replicate this issue at home so my only conclusion is that it must have something to do with vibrations while riding.

I carry the camera in a hip pack which is not very convenient.
I'm too skint and too sweaty to risk carrying it on a strap around my shoulder/chest.

That means that I often end up using my phone instead and not taking the camera at all.

I find the XT30 a good compromise size & quality wise, but I've never taken with me any spare lens.
I'd recommend considering how you're going to transport the camera at the same time as making the selection as that's just as importnat as the camera itself. No point having the perfect camera if you end up not using it.

If people have suggestions on how to carry some camera gear I'd love to hear them (perhaps via DM)

[Alpinum]

Thanks very much for the further detailed replies and your experiences, all really valuable to know.

Thanks for reading it all

I need to think how i'm going to process pictures, so any insight into how others use their camera photos would also be useful. I only have a work laptop now, which I can't plug anything into and I don't own, and it has many admin restrictions in place. I don't enjoy 'processing' photos very much at all, and only ever like to make small changes out of the camera. I like to get pictures how I want them with the camera as much as possible, and then it's just about storing and printing them if I fancy.

Whilst I like to say "I want to take and make the photograph behind the camera, not behind a pc at home", I only work in raw files and need to convert them at home. But it's basically dead easy since I prefer a documentary stile of development/post processing, which I can do with so called "presets" in Adobe Lightroom (which I use on the pc and also - rarely - smart phone) - you define how you want to adjust your raw file and how to convert it and save it as a preset and can then use it on all other photos. From there the single photos need little adjustment. I tend to try and stick with my former rule; 1 35 mm film/day (36 photos). Often it's way less, but once I start shooting wildlife it's waaaay more...
From there it goes into shared clouds or prints, depending on the reason for taking photos in the first place.

In your case, I'd likely shoot only with jpgs and make sure to test and find the right settings. With modern system cameras you can dictate to quite some degree how the jpgs should look like coming out of the camera. There's quite a difference in the amount of options between today's and yesteryear's (well, 5 - 10 y old ones). The options on the E-M5 can be overwhelming for someone new to this and I bet it's the same with comparably prices bodies from any other brand. Just needs some time to dive into it and is well worth the effort once you see the results.

Interesting thoughts too on the LX100 vs a smartphone. I was looking at some older camera photos the other night (old TZ30 from some holidays), and I realised the quality is pretty good on some of them as the glass makes the difference.

Anyway, thanks for all the input!

Yeah, smartphones rely on tons on computation power for adjustments (like sharpness and dynamic range) and once you go to eg A3 you really need some luck (motive, colour, dynamic range, internal adjustments) to get a decent print. Any half decent compact camera will work with hardly any luck.
What's nice with cameras in similar size to the LX100 is that you can just about carry them on a shoulder strap.
DR and sharpness come with the sensor and lens, thus no risk of artefacts.

Not so sure just how applicable for UK, but I tend to almost always use a circular polarisation filter once there's some sun out. My sun glasses are polarised too. Guess I like the world more that way
So, in such a case of for other reasons it's good to have a threaded lens (only an issue on some conpacts).

Happy to help. Writing this made the train journey feel short.

[thenorthwind]

I need to think how i'm going to process pictures, so any insight into how others use their camera photos would also be useful. I only have a work laptop now, which I can't plug anything into and I don't own, and it has many admin restrictions in place. I don't enjoy 'processing' photos very much at all, and only ever like to make small changes out of the camera. I like to get pictures how I want them with the camera as much as possible, and then it's just about storing and printing them if I fancy.

An important consideration, and probably often overlooked till it's too late (i.e. you've bought a camera). In theory it shouldn't really matter: shoot in RAW, post-process in the tool of your choice to get the look you want, and you can usually speed the whole process up by applying the same processing to many photos, at least from similar settings. At least, that's what I thought. In reality, as I said before, I've found it very difficult to even match the in-camera processing, despite hours of messing around with colour profiles, etc. The manufacturer has the advantage of being able to precisely characterise the sensor, and base the processing on this.

So I would suggest shooting in RAW+JPG, using the straight-out-of-camera JPG when you like the result (which may be more often than you expect with a modern camera) and only using the RAW when you need to. TBH, I should probably follow this advice too: I'm too stuck in the habit of only fetching the RAWs and wasting time trying to get them nearly as good as the JPGs that already exist

[faustus]

Good further points on image processing, thank you. Shooting Raw+JPEG is a good point, as the RAW file is there if needed. To be honest i've only really stuck with JPEGs in any case, mainly as i've never had a decent enough PC/Laptop to do processing or use as a photo software platform. I've also not made many prints in the past. I'd probably be happy enough just dealing with 'decent enough' JPEGs for the time being, but having the option in future would be good, as I plan to print more.

Also, it goes back to my desire to get good images in camera, and not having much time or desire to do much post-processing - even if it's batch processing. I'll still need to set up a proper process for sorting and storing images though, I still have memory cards, dongles and CD-RWs hanging around that really need to be put in one place!

[Loki]

Olympus XZ-1?

I had the XZ-2, brilliant camera, sadly lacking a viewfinder or I would have kept it.