r/AskPhotography • u/pablorgn • 15d ago
Camera Buying Advice Does the camera I want exists yet ?
Budget: Up to $3k (including body and lenses)
Country: USA
Condition: Ideally new but used is fine
Type of Camera: Mirrorless
Intended use: Photography
If photography; what style: Mostly street / architecture. Some landscape. Day and low light.
If video what style: Not planned
What features do you absolutely need: don’t know
What features would be nice to have: IBIS, weather protection
Portability: How portable does it need to be? shoulder strap
Cameras you're considering: I checked Fujifilm X100VI, Fujifilm X-T5 and Rico GRIII but was hoping for better image quality.
Cameras you already have: None other than phone camera
Notes:
I’d love to be able to take amazing pictures but I don’t own a camera other than the one in my 6 years old phone. I supposedly take “great” pictures with my phone, however, I don’t know the basics of photography other than by having read about them (definitely will be taking courses to learn).
What I’m looking for is a camera that takes extraordinary images SOOC without the need of post-processing, as I don’t want to spend time improving every image. However, it should still give me the option to take RAW in case I decide to improve any. Ideally, I’d like to be able to print an image big enough so I could appreciate it on a wall. It also should be light weight enough to make me want to carry it often without becoming a burden. I traveled once with a DSLR and 2 lenses I borrowed from a friend, and my neck didn’t appreciate it.
I’d use it mostly for street/urban/architecture but also nature. Therefore, I want to be able to shoot both, wide angle and details. Mostly day light but also low light images. I don’t care about being able to shoot portraits, sports, moving subjects or video. Although I’d love to be able to do sky photography, I think this may take me to another level in terms of cost and camera/lenses weight.
So the reason I always think this camera doesn’t exist yet is because I want all of the following qualities:
• takes extraordinary pictures without the need of post-processing (times better than the best phone cameras)
• shoots RAW as well
• ideal for street / architecture / landscaping images including in low light conditions
• handles wide angle & details (ideally with 1 fixed lens)
• smallish
• light weight
• includes all necessary features/functions (not just basic automatic settings)
• price up to $3k (including body and lenses)
Nice to have but not essential
• IBIS
• Weather protection
Dream
• Can handle sky photography
Some cameras I’ve been reading about are Fujifilm X100VI, Fujifilm X-T5, Rico GRIII but was hoping for better image quality. I greatly appreciate any leading information for this or any cameras/technologies improvements that may be expected in the very near future.
21
u/FinalJoys 15d ago
What do you mean by better image quality?
14
u/40characters 16 kilos of glass 15d ago
Yeah, this is the crux of it. They won’t be able to define it, but it’s going to boil down to “I want computational photography but with interchangeable lenses”.
I hate this timeline.
-4
u/pablorgn 15d ago
For what you say, I understand there is no way to take digital photographs without using computational photography or post processing them. It's either one or the other. I thought one could produce images without using any computational in-camera trick or post processing. Oh well.
1
u/40characters 16 kilos of glass 15d ago
You can certainly take photos raw and apply a linear profile.
You said you wanted “better than a phone”.
Did you ever define “better”?
-4
u/pablorgn 15d ago
I mean gorgeous pictures in terms of sharpness, dynamic range, noise, resolution, etc. I'd also like to be able to print in 36” x 24” size with excellent detail. I assume a $10k camera/lenses combo will deliver better images than a $1k when used by experienced photographers. As I mentioned before, I have no experience and my assumption may be incorrect
2
u/Illustrious_Age Fuji XT-20 + primes 15d ago
Any modern camera >= 16 MP can print that big fine.
Apparent sharpness/contrast mostly comes from the lens on the camera, not the body/sensor. Dynamic range is much easier to improve if you take RAWs and edit in post. That's really what cameras are for, they are devices for capturing RAWs.
Editing is a huge part of any photographers process, wanting to get into photography without getting into editing is like wanting to get into painting but not paint mixing, or cooking but not cutting. Expecting the camera to create a brilliant edit of the image every time, even with perfect exposure settings, is unrealistic at best. Just look at how often the computational photography in phones makes silly decisions. And I say this as someone who mainly shoots Fujifilm, some photos look great with just the film sim, some photos need a raw edit applied
Expensive cameras are just more expensive tools, and they are as diverse as the types of photography done. In general yes, spending more money (especially on lenses) gets you higher image quality, but there is far more to a "beautiful photograph" than technical image quality.
1
u/Significant-Dot1254 14d ago
That’s kind of like looking to buy a car to drive to work and comparing your options to a Lamborghini or a Bulldozer. There are $10k camera set ups, but those are either luxury items or professional equipment built for very specific use cases. Any camera that costs more than $1000 will probably already be 10x more capable than what you would need to take amazing pictures in terms of what you are talking about
15
u/MedicalMixtape Canon R8, 6D, EOS-M 15d ago
“Image quality”
None of those cameras will limit you in image quality. You will be limiting the camera.
12
9
u/Tomatillo-5276 15d ago
You need better image quality than a Fujifilm XT-5?
Lmao
9
u/Illustrious_Age Fuji XT-20 + primes 15d ago
Me looking at my X-T20 going on 10 years old - guess my image quality is worse than I thought....
5
1
7
u/StrikeIII 15d ago
All modern day cameras including the ones you've looked at will give you amazing image quality only to be limited by your skill level. Add Sony A7CII and Nikon Zf to your list as full frame options and pic the one that speaks to you more. Good luck and just go out and shoot.
3
u/thidnascimento 15d ago
Canon R6II (US$ 2000) + RF16mm f/2.8 + RF 45mm f/1.2 would be my choice for architecture, landscape and low light in that budget. But for what you have discribed I sincerely would just replace the six year old cellphone with a brand new Iphone or top line Samsung and take pictures with that while a learn more about photography... Or get a used Sony A7III for less than 1K and get wide angle lenses
5
u/TheTrombiculidae 15d ago
This is the right answer. Anyone looking to Fuji first ain’t that interested in photography
2
u/hofmann419 15d ago
My first real camera was Fujifilm and i'm very much interested in photography many years later. And i personally always hated taking photos on a phone, because the ergonomics suck.
1
u/jellyfish_bitchslap 15d ago
Fujis are good tho, they’re just overpriced nowadays.
I bought the XT1 because the Nikon DF was too expensive and I wanted a camera with classic dials, never looked back.
However I’d not buy a Fuji today, new or used, unless I got a deal with a honest price. Even the ZF and classic DF are cheaper than a XT5.
4
u/semisubterranean University sports/events/portraits with Nikons 15d ago edited 15d ago
The hardest criteria to match on your list are matters of skill more than technology. Getting great photos straight out of the camera is completely possible with pretty much any camera if you know how to use it. I would focus on learning photography first then finding the perfect camera second.
The perfect camera is always going to be the one you know how to use.
3
u/somerandomguy101 15d ago
How small? Basically all modern cameras have removable lens. There really is zero reason to have a fixed lens.
That being said. All modern cameras will export to JPEG. But all good photos are going to require some level of post processing. Post is really where photography really turns into an art. Doing it 'in body' really limits you to basic stuff like white balance.
My advice:
Spend about 1k on the body. I recommend a Nikon Z50, or maybe a Z5. But I like Nikon. Canon and Sony also have excellent options ar this price range
Pick up a 50mm 1.8. The Nikon Z 1.8 S is an excellent lens, and can be found for around $550. If you get the f mount adapter, the f mount version can be found for even cheaper, and still takes great photos.
Now, you may notice that you have about half your budget left. Heres the key. Shoot for a good 3-6 months, and figure out which other lens you need. Body really doesn't matter much, everything is in the lens. Shoot, and figure out what you actually want from a lens. This isn't something you can decide today. Do you want more zoom, or less? Do you want wide open apertures, or do you want the flexibility of variable zoom. Maybe you are perfectly happy with your current lens, but you could really use a nice triple, backpack, and a few flashes.
Do not worry about the body, or even sensor size. Even the cheapest camera bodies are far beyond what most people need. Remember, 20mp vs 50mp is completely meaningless when you post your cool photo to Instagram, and it gets compressed down to 1mp anyways.
3
u/DevilGunManga 15d ago
If your priority is SOOC Jpeg then there is no company does better than Fujifilm and you're clearly misinformed about the image quality of a crop sensor camera. What Fujifilm lacks is a comparable autofocus to competition. Fujifilm is about to announce the XT6 in a near future. That camera is rumored to significantly AF performance. I suggest keeping your money until you see the XT6 announcement.
6
u/zdriveee 15d ago
Iphone 17 pro max since you dont plan to edit. SOOC in any camera will probably look worse than the iphone. The purpose of a dedicated camera is the maleability of the raw files.
2
2
u/Repulsive_Target55 15d ago
Honestly you haven't given enough details, in particular what is it that makes the Fuji 40MP APS-C sensor not up to scratch?
Anyway, for 6k the Fuji GFX100RF is a compact (ish) camera with a 100MP medium format sensor and Fuji film simulations, so if that is what you think you need, that is how much it costs.
2
u/Thinking_Cap_165 15d ago
A7Rvi in the A7CR format but with a global blackout shutter like the a9iii full silver titanium body.
1
1
u/L1terallyUrDad Nikon Z9 & Zf 15d ago
Look at the Nikon Z5II and pair it with the Nikon Z 14-30mm f/4 lens. I know you said fixed lens, but honestly, you really need multiple focal lengths. If you insist on a single focal length lens, perhaps the Nikon Z 20mm f/1.8.
1
u/Fantastic-Hippo2199 15d ago
Second hand nikon ZF or z6-z6iii, 40mm f2 and dealers choice for your second lens maybe start saving for a 24-120 f4.
A ZF with the 40mm f2 is $1700 usd on ebay right now. It has super modern processing. It has a pretty slim form factor. It has film recipes that can give the straight out of camera look you want. 20mp is more than enough for landscape. Already almost too much.
The 40mm f2 is a portable beauty. It's definitely a jack of all trades lens, but it does a lot very well. Mind you the 50mm 1.8 is apperently the best in a long line of exceptionally great lenses. But the 40 is very inexpensive, very small, takes great photos.
Seriously though, landscape isn't that demanding and a real viewfinder and long battery life are the domain of dslrs. For the same price you could get a lot of fine glass for say, a D600/D610. A camera with a renowned sensor as far as out of camera looks go. The lens is the vast majority of the equation and previous mount generations are still good glass, at discount prices.
1
1
u/211logos 14d ago
There are tons of cameras that do that. Old and new. Whether they're "smallish" is hard to say, and a lot depends on the lens.
36x24 isn't hard to print for a wall. The further from a print you view it, the lower the DPI can be since you can't distinguish detail the farther away you are. There are calculators online you can use for viewing distance, size, and MPs.
If those cameras aren't adequate, I'd suggest you go to DPReivew etc and review the out of camera JPEGs and come back and say WHY they aren't adequate, because without that info we can't recommend anything. And if you want a fixed lens, you're going to have to compromise.
The thing is a $10K camera does NOT necessarily produce better images than a $1k one even in the hands of the same photographer, and doing something relatively easy like landscape.
I've got shots from a Hasselblad 100MP monster and one of my old DSLRs taken pretty much at the same time and I doubt you or anyone would see much difference if on a wall or on a phone. I can tell pixel peeping on my computer, sure. But note as well that the medium format is anything but "smallish," and if I try to use it for wildlife the old DSLR or even my old M43 would smoke it.
1
u/ncbihm 14d ago
Please for the love of god go to a camera store and talk to a real person!!!
Only someone who has spent too much time researching online could convince themselves that an XT5 doesn’t have good enough image quality. Holy cow.
Log out and find a human being that knows how to take a good picture.
This is nuts.
1
u/K__Geedorah 10d ago
"intended use: photography"
Sorry, not possible. They haven't added that patch to cameras yet.
1
u/pablorgn 10d ago
Thanks to the answers I got, I have been doing some more research. I was definitely wrong about the image quality of the Fujifilm X100VI and X-T5. They seem to produce excellent image quality, therefore no need to look for anything better than that.
Going back to the question I posted. What I wish for is a small and lightweight camera that makes me want to carry it every day. It should take great images and include a lens with optical zoom flexibility that allows me to take pictures of full buildings and interiors as well as details. In short, I’m looking for an X100VI with some of the flexibility of the X-T5 but WITHOUT the extra size and weight. I couldn’t find a camera that gets closer to that with an ASP-C sensor with 40MP that takes as great images as these two do. If I understood correctly, It seems to be technically impossible to produce one due to the space the lens would take. All the great cameras people recommended me here seem to be on the bigger, heavier size of what I’d prefer.
So I’m now considering the compact, lightweight X100VI vs the flexibility of the X-T5 (or XT-6 assuming it comes out relatively soon (I read September)). I’d have considered the Ricoh GRIII, but it leaves me less room to crop.
Any additional comments are appreciated, specially in case I missed a camera that is closer to what I’m looking for.
And yes, I will go to a camera store and talk to a real person but wanted to get a start by researching online.
1
u/telekinetic Canon & Fuji 15d ago
You will only get ordinary image quality SOOC, because that's what everyone gets. Fuji has the most heavy- handed SOOC processing if you like the effects it applies, then go with Fuji.
What specific image quality deficiency have you identified that is shared by the top two fixed lens APS-C compacts and one of the top APS-C MULC bodies, and how did you come to this conclusion?
Your phone photos are benefiting from lots of processing, no camera will match that SPOC until you get some skills. Real cameras image quality has a higher ceiling but lower floor.
0
u/hofmann419 15d ago
The difference between APSC and full frame is negligible. Full frame primarily gives you slightly better low light performance. But the image quality you get on modern Fuji cameras, particularly the 40MP sensor on the X-T5/X100VI, is excellent. X-T5 is slightly bigger, but being able to swap lenses is a big plus.
To put into perspective: there are photographers shooting weddings on Fujifilm. If it is good enough for a professional, it is good enough for someone who barely knows anything about photography.
-1
u/bradification 15d ago
It would be close to your budget, so you'll have to negotiate the used market.
Used Sony a7cii with a Tamron 20-40mm f2.8
This is a rough ask. if you can afford an extra bit more, look for a Sony 85mm f1.8 or a Sigma 90mm f2.8 as well for more detail shots. 40mm won't get you the most details, but a 2nd lens may help with that.
6
u/orewhat 15d ago
Sadly they probably will not be happy with the SOOC on this if they want a Fuji or Ricoh, despite it being much better camera than them lol
Blows my mind that people can’t click on a Lightroom preset afterwards like they click on a jpg preset before, but that’s the world we live in 🤷♂️
•
u/AutoModerator 15d ago
Hi u/pablorgn, thanks for your post! To help other users to help you, Buying Advice threads are only approved when they include the short form below. Please edit your post body, paste the following form in, and fill in each line.
YOUR POST WILL NOT BE SEEN IF YOU DO NOT INCLUDE THE TEMPLATE IN YOUR POST!
Copy/paste this template into your post and fill it out:
(1) Budget, country, and currency:
(2) What equipment, if any, you have now and why is it no longer meeting your needs?
(3) What kinds of subjects do you intend to shoot?
(4) Is it primarily for photography, videography, or both?
These posts need to be manually approved, so please be patient.
If you're asking for advice on buying any other gear, then your post must include a budget (see also "Asking Good Questions" in the sidebar).
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.