Camera selection for casual photos up to 50 t | Sony DSC-RX100 first three generations, Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II or Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II Kit?



Rep: (4)
Good day!
It is not necessary for a very expensive camera for photo at home, on walks, in a cafe, at concerts, exhibitions, travels. Video is not important at all.
I do not like to dig in the settings, preferably got it - I took off. I also do not plan to process after studying, maybe occasionally.
The main wishes are smaller than soap, the correct proportions of objects, viewing on screens 20-40 inches.
50 t is ready to give only a unambiguous leader, and if there is no different difference, the smaller the better.
I read the forum, revealed applicants.
The lowest price for Sony DSC-RX100. The second generation costs 3 tons more expensive, the difference in price with 3 generation is 16 tons (respectively, 13 tons the difference between 2 and 3).
Sony 4 generations back in my budget. It is almost 2 times more expensive than 1 generation. 7 tons are more expensive than 3 generations.
Canon PowerShot G7X Mark II (I realized that he was an analogue of Sony 3 and farther generation) the slightly cheaper Sony 3 generations.
Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II Kit for price in the middle between Sony DSC-RX100M2 and SONY DSC-RX100M3 / Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II. And in fact? I don't care for lenses exactly.
I watched a photo on the Internet, I won't say that I was right impressed by anyone. After the photo processed, the wedding photographer seems soapy (
I want a photo better than from a smartphone (not a chamber) and do not want to spit and dream of a replacement of 5 years.
Thank you in advance.



Rep: (29)
* Satie,
Perhaps once you need to take off removed, it would be better to invest in the purchase of a camera phone.

Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II Kit - Here with whale, of course you can get good frames, but for the man in the man, without processing and on the machine they will not be better than the smartphone, although the stabilizer will export a lot.

Sony and similar compacts personally in this case look preferable to me, but as before I said, perhaps it will be better to invest in a cameraphone, as it will have more chances to be with me.



Rep: (33)
Sati @ 12.07.19, 15:03*
I watched a photo on the Internet, I won't say that I was right impressed by anyone. After the photo processed, the wedding photographer seems soapy (
I want a photo better than from a smartphone (not a chamber) and do not want to spit and dream of a replacement of 5 years.

Those. Photographer worsened photos with his processing? It is strange. Highly. Although on the usual 2-mepixel monitor 20 Mpixel photos from the fotikov look not very, especially if the fotik is decent -)).
I suppose you for your terms to use the best choice will be Sony!



Rep: (29)
Aleksandr-1 @ 07/30/19, 16:51*
Those. Photographer worsened photos with his processing?

It means that examples of photos from the described devices seem soyl in comparison with the work of the weddress.



Rep: (33)
Imadik @ 07/30/19, 17:41*
It means that examples of photos from the described devices seem soleal in comparison with the work of the wedding

This is another thing!
I somehow treated the photo in the editorial office on a calibrated prof. monitor. The customer was dissatisfied, like "what is the color, which is nonresko?" Well, what to do, I sprinkled as ashes and did on the usual (but not the most squeezed) monica, twisted, the clarity lifted: "Now another thing! It is necessary to closely treat work!"
My friends-friend friends photos from Kenon650d, and from a large mirror in general (with a profile configured) is not very, but with a Kenon SX130 compact (also a little "configured") - very well look! Until then, until you increase ... "And why! We don't need this increase! Good photos, and you don't need to sit in your photoshop. What do you criticize?"



Rep: (24)
Aleksandr-1 @ 07/30/19, 22:26*
! As long as you do not increase ...

Increase

Attached images
Attached Image



Rep: (40)
* Net-vol,
This is not Canon SX130. If you believe EXIF, it canon g16.
The camera is completely different - more matrix, significantly better optics. The photo was done at the lowest ISO value with good light and small excerpt.
With a big desire, it is possible to find fault with it, but certainly SX130 to it as before Beijing cancer.

Post has been editedIce-kiling - 23.01.20, 17:33



Rep: (24)
Ice-Kiling @ 01/23/20, 21:31*
If you believe EXIF, it canon g16.
The camera is completely different - more matrix, significantly better optics. The photo was done at the lowest ISO value with good light and small excerpt.
With a great desire, you can and to it to find fault, but certainly SX130 to him as before Beijing.

Right. Canon G16.
The first photos, learned to make a macro, was very sunny day.
For the assessment of the photo, thanks: blush:

It is a pity that now canon "cut". Or photos, or video 60 frames.
We were lucky, solved. They decide to take Canon G15 or Canon G16. Canon G16 just went on sale and thought whether we need 60 frames per second.
I'm so glad you bought 16.
I do not see replacement yet.
In the sense of Canon.
So far, I will not replace it.

Post has been editedNet-vol - 24.01.20, 05:57


Full version    

Help     rules

Now: 01.02.21, 23:15