SLR replacement w/reliable low light shots that isn't an iPhone/Pad?

May 2, 2017 7:30 AM

Lugging around piles of kid crap has forced me to look for a replacement for my much-loved SLR for documentation of those kids. I've been impressed by the speed + reliability of my wife's iPod Touch for everyday photos, esp. in middling light, but have no desire to get locked into Apple's firehose of ewaste and ripoffs. What are some good, light, highly portable point-and-shoot type alternatives to look at?

PLEASE NOTE: Only looking for opinions based on moderate to heavy use in a variety of conditions, with the ability to capture kids in motion being important. Thanks!

posted by ryanshepard to Shopping (10 answers total)

One of the Micro 4/3's cameras with a view finder and fast pancake prime lens will probably work well. That gives you lens options. May need to go used for one with a view finder though.
posted by sammyo at 7:37 AM on May 2, 2017

I assume you are looking for something you can put in your pocket and go? I still have my old Canon SureShotDigital ELPH whatever the hell it is pocket camera (basically something like this). If you get the ones with image stabilization they are really pretty good at motion capture and (I've found) better in low light than the iPhones. The downsides if you're used to iPhones are that it takes a half-second to turn on and get the lens open (really nothing but FEELS slow) and you have to deal with an SD card so you'd need a card reader or a cable to get the images to a computer. The batteries are good, hold a charge for a good long time and they've had the same form factor for quite a while. They're durable as long as you don't drop them in water (and even if you do that, sometimes they come back to life). You can check out DPReview to vompare models. I've used some variety of them on and off for a decade and they are my backup option to my phone.
posted by jessamyn at 7:44 AM on May 2, 2017 [1 favorite]

Seconding the Canon Digital ELPH series (they're called Ixus here, I don't know where you are). They are sturdy and very portable.
posted by Too-Ticky at 7:53 AM on May 2, 2017

Best answer: I just went through this. Two suggestions,

First, If you're going to invest in something more than a couple hundred bucks, rent some options and try them before buying. I used lensrentals.com to get a 4 day rental of a Sony mirrorless body with a couple lenses and an Olympus micro 4/3 body plus a few lenses. I took the gear on a weekend trip and had lots of fun trying it out. It even came in a cool case to keep everything organized.

Second - despite my test I'm not super happy with my choice. I went with the cheaper olympus micro 4/3 and a 20mm panasonic pancake lens. It's fun and fast, starts up quick, fits in a jacket pocket, and autofocus is great for rapidly moving kids. It is a perfect outdoor walk around camera. However I made a mistake and did not try it out enough in low light situations, and skin tone reproduction in artificial light is poor. The Sony mirrorless was much better at low light and skin tones, although it was slower, bigger, less intuitive and fun to use, and hundreds if not thousands of dollars more expensive for lenses. If I had it over I would do a sony and save my money for one really good lens.
posted by sol at 9:24 AM on May 2, 2017 [4 favorites]

I love my Sony mirrorless camera so if I wanted something even smaller I'd look at their rx100 or rx1r which are both large (1" and full frame) sensor compact cameras.
posted by JonB at 9:47 AM on May 2, 2017 [1 favorite]

I recently got a LX7. It's "outdated", but it's super affordable nowadays used, and the lens is fast, and the IQ surprisingly high.
posted by TrinsicWS at 9:48 AM on May 2, 2017 [2 favorites]

I carry a Sony Rx100 around in my pocket a lot of the time. It puts out beautiful images. You can pick one up used on KEH or Ebay for a couple hundred bucks.
posted by gregr at 12:10 PM on May 2, 2017 [2 favorites]

> I've been impressed by the speed + reliability of my wife's iPod Touch for everyday photos, esp. in middling light

Wait till you try out the iPhone 7+ then. It outclasses my (yes, now rather old) Canon DSLR in routine image quality. Apple has put in an enormous amount of effort into their camera - aside from the lens size, which is limited by physics for a thin smartphone, it is top notch.

For capturing photos of kids, in particular, their Live Photos seem like a stupid gimmick until you look at the results - frequently those few seconds of video convey a lot more atmosphere than you'd expect. (And a decent scanner app saves an enormous amount of photocopying grief for kids' school forms etc.)

But ...

> but have no desire to get locked into Apple's firehose of ewaste and ripoffs.

Ouch. Ok, I guess not, then. (Just FYI, though, Apple products are almost 100% recycled, and they are now talking about real closed loop manufacturing, where they no longer use mined raw materials at all.)

Are you opposed to all smartphones, or just Apple? If you're already carrying a smartphone, many of them have quite good cameras.
posted by RedOrGreen at 2:58 PM on May 2, 2017 [3 favorites]

Sony RX 100 III if the control feel or price aren't deal breakers. Otherwise Canon Powershot S-120. I'm on my 3rd generation Olympus micro 4/3 body. They're getting better at focusing on moving subjects but it's still poor (except for the high end model which is too big for your needs). I use my Canon S-95 for kids and dogs.
posted by Homer42 at 10:36 PM on May 2, 2017

I've got a first generation Sony RX 100 that I picked up to get away from being overly Apple dependent. It takes great photos, but it also takes way too long to turn on and be ready to shoot. I found that I end up going back to using my iPhone for point-and-shoot just because of how much faster I can shoot a photo with it. My wife got a Canon ELPH around the same time I picked up the Sony for under $100. It is light, fast, and small. If I had to do it over, I'd probably get one of those instead. I also like the fact that with a less expensive camera I just take pictures, and I don't worry about babying an expensive piece of equipment. When shopping around, I strongly recommend testing how long it takes for the camera to power on and be ready to shoot.
posted by mont the drifter at 9:41 AM on May 3, 2017