New camera

Bill,

It relates to the skill of the photographer in composing the picture BEFORE the shutter is pressed.

DK,

The ClearViewer is 23 grams. The felt bag is 3 grams. Together they are 27 grams, so there is some rounding up of fractions my scale doesn't measure.

The ClearViewer is 23 grams. The felt bag is 3 grams. Together they are 27 grams, so there is some rounding up of fractions my scale doesn't measure.

Apologies in advance, but you can take the boy out of engineering school but you can't take the engineering out of the boy (regardless of how many decades intervene).

Your scale may well be doing it correctly.

23.499999999999999999999999999 would be 23 if you are reporting to the nearest gram
3.499999999999999999999999999 would be 3. Summing them would be 26.999999999999999999999999998 …. 27

> some people here on BPL can take a better picture with a phone than I can take with
> my RX100. So… there is no need for me to get a iii.

Factor into that calculation several other 'facts':
* A few of the pics you take with any camera will be discarded as 'faulty'
* Most of the pics will be looked at a few times only and then forgotten
* A very small number of pics will be compressed from their 4k x 4k glory down to 640×480 for publishing on the web.

One really does wonder whether many people ever look at their photos anywhere other than on the LCD screen on their camera … OK, OK, I exempt a few professional amateurs who have a genuine use for 4' x 3' prints or who sell their work.

All of which is total heresy to our consumer-based economy. You absolutely MUST buy the latest whatever. (Did you queue up for an iPhone6?)

Cheers

I am excited about the prospect of a single 24-100mm f1.8-2.8 lens in a pocket sized camera that still gives me physical (versus menu) exposure compensation.

That would be the new Canon G7X. The Sony RX100iii is very comparable and I still haven't decided between the two. For a comparison take a look here…

http://www.gizmag.com/canon-g7x-vs-sony-rx100iii/33898/

> some people here on BPL can take a better picture with a phone than I can take with
> my RX100. So… there is no need for me to get a iii.

If that's so, then where can be found the cell camera without the phone. That would truly be a SUL camera.

"where can be found the cell camera without the phone. That would truly be a SUL camera."

iPod Touch? 3.1 ounces.

http://www.apple.com/ipod-touch/specs.html

"I am excited about the prospect of a single 24-100mm f1.8-2.8 lens in a pocket sized camera that still gives me physical (versus menu) exposure compensation.

That would be the new Canon G7X. The Sony RX100iii is very comparable and I still haven't decided between the two."

I have to say that I am enamored with the EVF on the Sony; I ended up using it almost all the time. You can actually save battery power by turning off the LCD screen all the time, then the EVF only turns on when your eye goes up to the viewfinder. Your face goes away…tada! EVF is off and the LCD is off, too.

Anyway – just another tick in the Sony column…..

I like the view finder of the RX100iii

but I like the 100mm zoom of the G7X…

why are decisions always like this???
I want the 100mm zoom AND a view finder !

Why can't I have it all? :(

Billy

Great article, Jennifer – I read that and came away convinced that the LX100 is a great choice because of the lens that comes with it. I'm already used to the limited zoom of the LX5, and really like the F1.7 of the LX100. For me, the kit lens that comes with the G7X isn't what I'm after, so I'd have to go spend MORE money on a lens.

At one stage I'd lug around a different chargers for each item but I've gone to USB rechargeable gadgets and only take one charger, so my next camera will be charged via USB. On my last walk I took a 12000 mAh battery and only used a third of it's capacity charging the phone and GPS on a five day walk so hopefully it'll charge the camera as well for longer walks.

Wondering about USB chargers.
do they all supply the same volts?

Is it possible to get the wrong one with too many volts and fry your device?

Or are they all the same and not possibility of frying anything?

thanks,

Billy

>Is it possible to get the wrong one with too many volts and fry your device?

I'm not sure about frying a gadget, but I bought a cheap three outlet charger from China and that charged my iPhone, GPs and small portable battery without any problems but if I was to charge a tablet, then it would struggle but in the States, you've got lots of good USb charger options, some will charge two big tablets together without any problems.

I got a USB charger that plugs into my car cigarette lighter plug.

When I plugged in my Sansa Clip, it fried it.

I got another Sansa Clip that I used for a year, then I hit the volume control on a rock and the volume control didn't work anymore. I kept using it with no volume adjustment and then the FM tuner quit working. Then I tried it again on the cigarette lighter USB charger and it fried the Sansa. Must be something wrong with that USB cgarger so I threw it and the Sansa away.

It might be that the Sansa is sensitive, or that USB charger had too high a voltage.

Sansa Clip is definitely a flaky device regardless.

"Sansa Clip is definitely a flaky device regardless."

I don't know whether the problem was in the charger, the Sansa, or the user. I fully agree that it should not fail catastrophically that way. However, there might be an explanation.

Some of those so-called chargers are not really chargers at all. They are only semi-dumb voltage regulators. They take the +12V from the cigarette lighter socket (not plug) and convert it to +5V to feed out the USB connector to your device.

For it to be a real charger, it needs to monitor the voltage of your device and then cut off the charge current when the voltage gets up to normal.

In some cases, if you have your device plugged into the USB connector when the charger first contacts the +12V, then there is a transient surge of almost +12V that hits your device, and that voltage might easily fry it. Alternatively, if you plug the charger in first and then plug your device into the USB connector, it might operate differently. The charger might just have a cheap design, and it will fry devices that are outside of its design limits. Many of these USB chargers simply can't handle much current. If your device demands too much current, the charger's voltage and current both sag, which causes the device's current demand to increase even more, and then something equivalent to a fuse pops.

When I use similar charging devices, I plug into the cigarette socket, and then test the USB output voltage to be +5V or whatever is intended. Only if that is normal do I plug my device into the USB connector.

There is a tiny lightweight power monitor on the market that plugs into a USB connector. It has a digital display, and it alternates its display between the incoming voltage and current. So, you can see that everything is normal before and while you plug in your expensive device.

–B.G.–

yeah, +12 V surge makes sense. And Sansa is cheap so maybe it doesn't handle surges like that as well as other USB devices

I should get one of those USB voltage and current checkers. Thanks

The USB charger that plugs into cigarette plug was cheap also, so it is in the garbage regardless.

"I should get one of those USB voltage and current checkers."

There are several similar types. The one that I got weighs about one-third of an ounce, but I only use it when I am hauling along my solar panel as a power source.

–B.G.–

hmmm, like this maybe http://www.amazon.com/AboveTEK%C2%AE-USB-Voltage-Current-Multimeter/dp/B00ICR1UB6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1413071823&sr=8-1&keywords=usb+voltage+current+meter

$11 at amazon.com

that's about what I paid for USB charger

and Sansa Clip was $30

I can't help myself when it's that cheap

Maybe someday I'll learn that "you get what you pay for".

"Just wondering that if you're willing to spend enough money to buy an LX100 and are comfortable with a bulky P&S, why not just go mirrorless m4/3 or e mount for basically the same weight, size, and cost but adding nearly unlimited lens options?"

For the lens. The standard kit lens with a Panasonic GX7 is a slowish 14-42 f/3.5-4.5. Panasonic makes a terrific 12-35/2.8 zoom (24-70 eq), for which I spent $1200 a couple of years ago. The GX7 kit lens is no comparison in terms of aperture and build quality.

The LX100 comes with a built in 24-70 eq lens that's even faster, at less cost than the premium lens by itself, and far less cost than a m4/3 camera with the same quality lens.

I have a Sony RX100ii, which is nice, but I just hate holding the thing out at arm's length to shoot photos. For one thing, I can't see the darn thing without my glasses, which I am otherwise not wearing while hiking. That said, it takes terrific quality photos, just amazing for such a small camera. But if I had the cash for a new one, the LX100 would be the most interesting trail camera on the current market.

The lens/sensor pairing of the LX100 is superb; no disputing that. OP asked for thoughts.

You don't have to buy the kit lens. An option is to save some money by buying body-only and get a fast wide-angle prime. If you can work within the parameters of the LX100's lens, then yeah, that's a great option that keeps things simple.

I'm farsighted as well. The viewfinder on the A6000 is a godsend for reviewing pictures and fiddle-farting around with the menu/settings and whatnot. Unfortunately our local Coscto is still carrying the RX100ii and not the iii yet so I can't say how the viewfinder compares.

Again, OP have fun with the LX100, it looks wonderful.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100

Now I want one.

I hate you all. Really.

Dibs on your RX100iii.

"Now I want one."

I don't take pictures when I hike, but I think I'll buy this camera. And then leave it in my gear room unused.

No no, don't thank me…..

I think that some people may be ignoring a really important part of this discussion – camera sensor size. In the world of these smaller compact-system cameras, image sensor size reigns supreme. I can't really do this properly on a forum but if you compare the sensors by size in all those digi cams with a 35mm camera, you don't even get anywhere CLOSE except with Sony.

Yes, panasonic/lumix can offer you leica lens quality. Yes, the other cameras on this post are good quality. But they all have tiny sensors. Anyone familiar with film photography knows how when you blow up a photo, the quality changes… you'll notice the grain when a photo is enlarged. The size of the sensor is what affects this more directly than the other components… So basically the sony is like shooting with almost 35mm film, while the others are MUCH smaller.

Remember that professional film photographers used to want 4×5 film or bigger… in order to have the best image quality. 35mm was the "lower image quality" choice for non professionals or those on the move. Be aware that all the inexpensive digital cams don't even touch the 35mm size… so that means that while you might have less megapixels and a lens that isn't as highly spoken about as the leica glass, you DO get better photo quality from the larger sensors. And its quite noticable once you get it up on a 27 inch iMac, for example.

IMHO there is no reason to buy any digital compact system camera that isn't a sony, unless you're forking over the $5,000 plus for the actual leica or another camera that can MATCH the 35mm size in the sensor size.

Personally I like the NEX6, which is the older version of the A6000 and is on sale everywhere right now as they sell them out. I bought one and I love it. The thing is an amazing all around camera and has so many manual options. Focus is quite fast, clarity is excellent, durability is excellent, and the price was right. I paid under $500 including lens a while back.

Adam, I don't believe that it is possible to oversimplify the issue more than you did.

–B.G.–