Camera Question

Jun 16, 2020
4,625
1,831
6,935
Visit site
Thought I would treat myself to a new camera. I did not think it would be such a headache.

I want a decent compact camera, lightweight which fits in the pocket. Just as an example.


That's not the latest model, and I am open to alternatives. But then I found the problem. It seems that all the big manufacturers have stopped including GPS in their ranges, even in top end cameras. What a backward step. Apparently, some will Bluetooth to a smartphone to geotag pictures. But they seem to be around the £500 mark. Also. linking to the phone is an extra task that might not always work.

I have two questions that someone may be able to help with.

Does anyone know of a suitable model with built in GPS?

Does anyone have experience with linking their phone?



John
 
Oct 8, 2006
1,765
538
19,935
Visit site
Do you really want a camera with GPS? You will need to carry a couple of spare fully charged batteries as GPS soaks up power like you wouldn't believe. What is more GPS will generally only work outside in the open - go inside and it stops!
In terms of a camera look at the Panasonic Lumix TZ80/TZ90/TZ100. Cracking small camera, will do jpg and raw at the same time and has lots of lovely bells and whistles. John Lewis for best price and warranty.
Thereafter do what my wife and I have done for decades - take a photograph of a street sign or town nameplate - or failing that take a picture of Google Maps or What3Words on your phone.
 
Nov 11, 2009
20,113
6,137
50,935
Visit site
Do you really want a camera with GPS? You will need to carry a couple of spare fully charged batteries as GPS soaks up power like you wouldn't believe. What is more GPS will generally only work outside in the open - go inside and it stops!
In terms of a camera look at the Panasonic Lumix TZ80/TZ90/TZ100. Cracking small camera, will do jpg and raw at the same time and has lots of lovely bells and whistles. John Lewis for best price and warranty.
Thereafter do what my wife and I have done for decades - take a photograph of a street sign or town nameplate - or failing that take a picture of Google Maps or What3Words on your phone.
I’d agree that the LUMIX TZ 80 is a great little camera. I have one and also a LUMIX FZ200 compact which I bought specifically for a holiday in India and it takes excellent photos, so much so that when our guide was editing some videos for us he commented on how good they were. He was impressed by the quality of the photos and flexibility of the camera. First one he had seen.

PS neither have GPS as it’s not something I really need have no problems recalling where a photo or video are taken when creating albums.
 
Last edited:
Jun 16, 2020
4,625
1,831
6,935
Visit site
Do you really want a camera with GPS? You will need to carry a couple of spare fully charged batteries as GPS soaks up power like you wouldn't believe. What is more GPS will generally only work outside in the open - go inside and it stops!
In terms of a camera look at the Panasonic Lumix TZ80/TZ90/TZ100. Cracking small camera, will do jpg and raw at the same time and has lots of lovely bells and whistles. John Lewis for best price and warranty.
Thereafter do what my wife and I have done for decades - take a photograph of a street sign or town nameplate - or failing that take reallya picture of Google Maps or What3Words on your phone.

I already have two cameras with GPS, an SLR, and an older Samsung compact. Both are fine on the battery. Extra consumption is not really noticeable. We also have smartphones with GPS turned on 24/7 without a problem.

As to why it is useful. I have Apple photos, Sony Playmemories, and Prime photos all of which are great at sorting pictures by location. I have not ever had a problem with use indoors. Perhaps it is more modern equipment. Though my current cameras must be over 15 years old.

To step back from this automation is a retrograde move IMO. Cameras that did have it were switchable for those that wanted to conserve their battery.

The Lumix are already on my list. But thanks for the heads up.


John
 
Oct 8, 2006
1,765
538
19,935
Visit site
I’d agree that the LUMIX TZ 80 is a great little camera. I have one and also a LUMIX FZ200 compact which I bought specifically for a holiday in India and it takes excellent photos, so much so that when our guide was editing some videos for us he commented on how good they were. He was impressed by the quality of the photos and flexibility of the camera. First one he had seen.

PS neither have GPS as it’s not something I really need have no problems recalling where a photo or video are taken when creating albums.

Nearly snap. I have the TZ80 and I bought my wife a s/h FZ100 a couple of years ago. The latter works well and sits her but it annoys the h**l out of me because of the plethora of icons around the edge of the viewfinder which I have yet to find how to switch off!
 
Jun 16, 2020
4,625
1,831
6,935
Visit site
I am warming to this one. It is now onto version 6, hence the reduced price. The reviews in 2017 were excellent. Mainly because it has a 1” sensor. I think it was the £700 ish price mark when it came out.


It will video in 4k and stills up to 5472 × 3648p

The video in this review shows great quality.


The downside is only 2.9 optical zoom, As opposed to 30 on some. (But wider angles). Though nice, large zooms are little used by me.

John
 
Nov 11, 2009
20,113
6,137
50,935
Visit site
Nearly snap. I have the TZ80 and I bought my wife a s/h FZ100 a couple of years ago. The latter works well and sits her but it annoys the h**l out of me because of the plethora of icons around the edge of the viewfinder which I have yet to find how to switch off!
I bought the FZ 200 for a wildlife and cultural trip overseas as it provided everything I required in one package. I printed off the owners manual to read on the flight, but risked having excess baggage charges levied, but it certainly aided on board sleeping. 😂
 
Last edited:
Jan 3, 2012
9,574
2,051
30,935
Visit site
Funny enough i have a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-P73 it is compact device with a digital 4.1MP Sensor that allows you to capture clear images .
i found it great taking pictures of my catches when i was fishing
I hope you get the one you are after .
 
Jul 18, 2017
11,952
3,330
32,935
Visit site
Couple of years ago I bought a Canon EOS 200D SLR camera from John Lewis and it has BT and GPS. Surprised that newer cameras do not have the GPS facility. Never had an issue with battery or signal whether indoors or outdoors however most of my shots were outside. Can't help with all the techno babble on cameras. :D
 

Sam Vimes

Moderator
Sep 7, 2020
1,587
1,153
5,935
Visit site
As a reasonably serious amateur photographer I often get asked "what camera should I get". Its such an open question that its impossible to answer and I usually respond with "How much do you want to spend", followed by "What do you want to do with it."

It seems these days that Smartphones are being sold on the basis of what wonderful cameras they have - debatable. Certainly convenient but to get what I consider a reasonable image you need to spend a lot more than a good dedicated camera. Of course there is more that a Smartphone can do. I believe you can actually make phone calls to speak to someone!

So I offer no real advice but just a few considerations:-

1. I find cameras with only a rear LCD to frame the shot hard to use compared to a real viewfinder - especially in bright light. So if possible find one with a dedicated viewfinder.

2. How big/small are your hands? I have large hands and have tried some cameras that are difficult to use. So if possible try before you buy.

3. How much control do you want over your camera? Most have a myriad of functions of which most casual users never bother to use. If you put it on the Auto function that's fine but if you need more control how easy is it to select different functions. Nothing worse than fiddling about trying to find the right setting only to find the moment has gone.

4. Once you've taken the shots how much work are you prepared to put into organising and processing the images? This question is prompted by the reference to in built GPS functions.

There are too many cameras on the market to be sure about whether or not GPS is in built. A quick search does seem to suggest that the GPS function is now passed to a Smartphone and you need to connect the camera to that. Having it in built will embed the coordinates directly into the image but you'll still need to externally reverse geocode them - i.e find out the location on a map for instance.

If some of the online photo storage sites do this and you're comfortable with sharing the images with the likes of Google, Apple or Microsoft then that's fine. Otherwise you'll have to do this your self and there are programs that can do this. It means sitting in front a a screen for some time to do it though - something I don't have a problem with.

For years I carried a seperate GPS tracker just for this function. It just recorded the track log and I merged the track log with the image files later. These days you can get a track log with a Smartphone.

Now though I have a dSLR with inbuilt GPS. It's not overly harsh on battery usage but then the advice I would give, regardless of GPS, is always to carry spare batteries. Usually I only turn on the GPS in certain circumstances.

My dSLR does have in built Wifi but its painfully slow to use and set up that I seldom use it. If I need to connect to another device I tether it using a USB cable. My grandaughter has a dSLR with Bluetooth function - equally fiddly to use but then maybe newer cameras are better.

I use my Smartphone as a back up device. I connect my camera or card reader to it via a USB cable and download the images to the Smartphone.. I also use the Smartphone as an external monitor when connected to the camera. It mounts onto the hot shoe and means I can take low level shots without getting down on my hands and knees. Actually getting down is easy - the reverse not so.

So good luck with whatever you choose. Its good that these days buying on line means you can try before you commit and send it back if required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PTA
Jun 20, 2005
17,267
3,487
50,935
Visit site
Sadly the I phone 12 has taken precedence over my faithful Canon. I like the interface with my I pad and all pics stored in the cloud. Probably not good enough for a wedding but for me more than adequate
 

Sam Vimes

Moderator
Sep 7, 2020
1,587
1,153
5,935
Visit site
Its true that some cameras can get the GPS co-ordinates from a Smartphone this way. The problem I've run into using a seperate device for this is that if the time and date of the camera is not accuratly set the GPS log entry will not match exactly where the image was taken.
 
Nov 11, 2009
20,113
6,137
50,935
Visit site
My three digital cameras come out periodically fir battery charging and checking but are used on holidays etc. But with all this need to geolocation I wonder how these guys coped.

4A63AE94-ECB2-4552-856E-0156B72655FB.jpeg
 
Jun 16, 2020
4,625
1,831
6,935
Visit site
As a reasonably serious amateur photographer I often get asked "what camera should I get". Its such an open question that its impossible to answer and I usually respond with "How much do you want to spend", followed by "What do you want to do with it."

It seems these days that Smartphones are being sold on the basis of what wonderful cameras they have - debatable. Certainly convenient but to get what I consider a reasonable image you need to spend a lot more than a good dedicated camera. Of course there is more that a Smartphone can do. I believe you can actually make phone calls to speak to someone!

So I offer no real advice but just a few considerations:-

1. I find cameras with only a rear LCD to frame the shot hard to use compared to a real viewfinder - especially in bright light. So if possible find one with a dedicated viewfinder.

2. How big/small are your hands? I have large hands and have tried some cameras that are difficult to use. So if possible try before you buy.

3. How much control do you want over your camera? Most have a myriad of functions of which most casual users never bother to use. If you put it on the Auto function that's fine but if you need more control how easy is it to select different functions. Nothing worse than fiddling about trying to find the right setting only to find the moment has gone.

4. Once you've taken the shots how much work are you prepared to put into organising and processing the images? This question is prompted by the reference to in built GPS functions.

There are too many cameras on the market to be sure about whether or not GPS is in built. A quick search does seem to suggest that the GPS function is now passed to a Smartphone and you need to connect the camera to that. Having it in built will embed the coordinates directly into the image but you'll still need to externally reverse geocode them - i.e find out the location on a map for instance.

If some of the online photo storage sites do this and you're comfortable with sharing the images with the likes of Google, Apple or Microsoft then that's fine. Otherwise you'll have to do this your self and there are programs that can do this. It means sitting in front a a screen for some time to do it though - something I don't have a problem with.

For years I carried a seperate GPS tracker just for this function. It just recorded the track log and I merged the track log with the image files later. These days you can get a track log with a Smartphone.

Now though I have a dSLR with inbuilt GPS. It's not overly harsh on battery usage but then the advice I would give, regardless of GPS, is always to carry spare batteries. Usually I only turn on the GPS in certain circumstances.

My dSLR does have in built Wifi but its painfully slow to use and set up that I seldom use it. If I need to connect to another device I tether it using a USB cable. My grandaughter has a dSLR with Bluetooth function - equally fiddly to use but then maybe newer cameras are better.

I use my Smartphone as a back up device. I connect my camera or card reader to it via a USB cable and download the images to the Smartphone.. I also use the Smartphone as an external monitor when connected to the camera. It mounts onto the hot shoe and means I can take low level shots without getting down on my hands and knees. Actually getting down is easy - the reverse not so.

So good luck with whatever you choose. Its good that these days buying on line means you can try before you commit and send it back if required.

Thanks for the thoughts Sam.

As I said, I already have a DSLR. But, good as they are. It is confined to a draw as I dont wish to transport it and keep swapping lenses.

I also have a Samsung compact which was praised when it came out, But it is a bit too big, really heavy and very very slow to come to life. But good pictures. Both cameras need putting on Ebay.

So what I am looking for is:
An improvement on my iPhone 10.
Small and light enough to fit in the pocket.
Quick to use.
Great picture quality.
Good movie ability.
Stabilisation.
WiFi
Bluetooth
GPS

I don't envisage using it to a great extent. So I do not want to pay a fortune. There are some amazing compacts for a lot of money. But I can’t justify that sort of outlay. That is for serious photographers, (But they should have a DSLR)!:)

Re GPS. Pictures I have taken over the past 10 years or so can be sorted completely automatically by a number of photo managing software packages and on cloud services. I know I can manually add coordinates, and possibly merge the data from a logger or a phone. But these are not tasks I want to do.

If anyone cares to examine any of the pictures I have posted, they will be able to see the coordinates in the metadata. (unless the forum software removes this). But it does not concern me, I would remove it if it did.

I am now of the conclusion that I cannot get what I want with regards to GPS. And the cameras that can do GPS via a smartphone are recent and too dear. It seems that manufactures by enlarge dropped it about 8 years ago, but are recently re-introducing it via the smartphone.

So, I feel I need to forget the idea, or go for the Sony RX100 (M4) @£251
To put that in context, a mark 5 is £559, Mark 6 £587, Mark 7 £770. (£1049 in Currys). And strangely, the mark 3 is £335. Making the mark 4 a decent buy.

John
 
Oct 8, 2006
1,765
538
19,935
Visit site
Look at the umidigi bison web site. They are one of the many sub-manufacturers who build for the big names - like Foxconn build many iPhones. They seem to get good reviews, are sold by both Amazon and Alibaba, and are half or less of the price of the equivalent branded models.
 
Jun 16, 2020
4,625
1,831
6,935
Visit site
Look at the umidigi bison web site. They are one of the many sub-manufacturers who build for the big names - like Foxconn build many iPhones. They seem to get good reviews, are sold by both Amazon and Alibaba, and are half or less of the price of the equivalent branded models.

I can only see Android phones there.

John
 
Jun 16, 2020
4,625
1,831
6,935
Visit site
Too many choices these days. I did a quick search for compact cameras with GPS and one option was the Olympus Tough TG 6.

I guess there may be others.

Good luck with your choice.


That is the only one I can find as well. Seems to have a good rep, but a bit small on mp’s and sensor. I don’t need the toughness and extra weight nor the underwater capabilities. Also a bit pricey.

I just got out my old Samsung EK-GC100. Rebooted it and put it back to factory setting. It is highly specked.

  • 16MP 1/2.3" BSI CMOS Image Sensor
  • 21x Optical 4.1-86.1mm Zoom Lens
  • Supports Wi-Fi & 4G LTE Connectivity
  • Android 4.1 Jelly Bean Operating System
  • HD Super Clear 4.8" Touch LCD
  • Optical Image Stabilization
  • Full HD 1920 x 1080p Video at 30 fps
  • Bluetooth 4.0 & 1.4 GHz Quad-Core CPU
  • Back up Your Photos to the Cloud
  • MicroSD/SDHC/SDXC Slot & HDMI Output
But painfully slow. The operating system is out of date. A company want £599 for one opened but unused on Ebay!!!!! In the past I have used it as a hotspot in the caravan.

It came out in 2012


John
 
Mar 17, 2020
486
361
4,935
Visit site
I am warming to this one. It is now onto version 6, hence the reduced price. The reviews in 2017 were excellent. Mainly because it has a 1” sensor. I think it was the £700 ish price mark when it came out.

I can certainly support your view of the Sony. I bought the first version at a time when reviews were full of praise and the camera was up with the best if not above them.

I've now got the Mk V but only because I use the Sony for underwater photography and I had a disaster - my housing leaked - nothing to do with the camera itself.

Remember that each iteration there have been changes. Most notably the sensor and the focusing performance but the early version was absolutely fine. Slow motion video has improved too and much more.

Today more and more cameras of this nature are around with the larger sensor. Maximum aperture of f1.8 is usually fast enough but the latest version with the extended zoom are only f2.8!

Someone mentioned "horses for courses" and in my case, quite apart from having a compact take anywhere camera with top quality images my diving use has no need for a zoom lens. In fact the 24mm end gets the majority of use.

If you take video then the range are ideal and feature some advanced features.

As a matter of interest I have been so impressed with the Sony I bought a Sony RX10 Mk IV which has very similar components to the Sony RX100. A top rate camera with a zoom of 24 to 600 ! And 600mm at f.4 is unheard of! (Just check the size and weight of say a Canon 600mm f4 lens (or any other quality make)

Last week I sold my Canon 100mm f2.8 macro IS USM lens and my Canon 70-200mm zoom. Both are series 1 lenses and of the highest quality but I now cover all focal lengths from 24 - 600 with one camera! I'm planning to sell other Canon equipment shortly. This decision took some time to make but I'm now convinced for my photography the Sony RX100 and RX10 cover ALL my needs and what's more I don't need a cart to carry them in!

Basically I would recommend the RX X100 of any version. All were and still are leaders in their class but all, unless you are happy to buy an earlier model, are expensive. I suppose the fact that new earlier versions are still sold says something! Maybe Sony just priced themselves out of the market but who knows?

Good luck with your choice. My advice would be to read reviews that mention the upgrades as each model appeared and decide if any of them are so important they provide the answer as to which you buy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jcloughie
Jan 3, 2012
9,574
2,051
30,935
Visit site
Sadly the I phone 12 has taken precedence over my faithful Canon. I like the interface with my I pad and all pics stored in the cloud. Probably not good enough for a wedding but for me more than adequate
Hi Dusty my wife use her phone to take pictures and they are great
 
Jun 16, 2020
4,625
1,831
6,935
Visit site
I can certainly support your view of the Sony. I bought the first version at a time when reviews were full of praise and the camera was up with the best if not above them.

I've now got the Mk V but only because I use the Sony for underwater photography and I had a disaster - my housing leaked - nothing to do with the camera itself.

Remember that each iteration there have been changes. Most notably the sensor and the focusing performance but the early version was absolutely fine. Slow motion video has improved too and much more.

Today more and more cameras of this nature are around with the larger sensor. Maximum aperture of f1.8 is usually fast enough but the latest version with the extended zoom are only f2.8!

Someone mentioned "horses for courses" and in my case, quite apart from having a compact take anywhere camera with top quality images my diving use has no need for a zoom lens. In fact the 24mm end gets the majority of use.

If you take video then the range are ideal and feature some advanced features.

As a matter of interest I have been so impressed with the Sony I bought a Sony RX10 Mk IV which has very similar components to the Sony RX100. A top rate camera with a zoom of 24 to 600 ! And 600mm at f.4 is unheard of! (Just check the size and weight of say a Canon 600mm f4 lens (or any other quality make)

Last week I sold my Canon 100mm f2.8 macro IS USM lens and my Canon 70-200mm zoom. Both are series 1 lenses and of the highest quality but I now cover all focal lengths from 24 - 600 with one camera! I'm planning to sell other Canon equipment shortly. This decision took some time to make but I'm now convinced for my photography the Sony RX100 and RX10 cover ALL my needs and what's more I don't need a cart to carry them in!

Basically I would recommend the RX X100 of any version. All were and still are leaders in their class but all, unless you are happy to buy an earlier model, are expensive. I suppose the fact that new earlier versions are still sold says something! Maybe Sony just priced themselves out of the market but who knows?

Good luck with your choice. My advice would be to read reviews that mention the upgrades as each model appeared and decide if any of them are so important they provide the answer as to which you buy.

You echo my thoughts completely.

Another camera into the mix is the newish Sony ZV-1. It is based on the RX100/7 but made for vloggers. It loses the viewfinder, flash and the lens reverts to the older f1.8 so loses a bit of zoom but gains a filter and better microphones a mic socket and a hot shoe. yet it is a few hundred cheaper than the. one its based on.

It also can keep focus on a chosen eye and follow it around. Oh, and it can do GPS via a phone.

John
 

Sam Vimes

Moderator
Sep 7, 2020
1,587
1,153
5,935
Visit site
I can certainly support your view of the Sony. I bought the first version at a time when reviews were full of praise and the camera was up with the best if not above them.

I've now got the Mk V but only because I use the Sony for underwater photography and I had a disaster - my housing leaked - nothing to do with the camera itself.

Remember that each iteration there have been changes. Most notably the sensor and the focusing performance but the early version was absolutely fine. Slow motion video has improved too and much more.

Today more and more cameras of this nature are around with the larger sensor. Maximum aperture of f1.8 is usually fast enough but the latest version with the extended zoom are only f2.8!

Someone mentioned "horses for courses" and in my case, quite apart from having a compact take anywhere camera with top quality images my diving use has no need for a zoom lens. In fact the 24mm end gets the majority of use.

If you take video then the range are ideal and feature some advanced features.

As a matter of interest I have been so impressed with the Sony I bought a Sony RX10 Mk IV which has very similar components to the Sony RX100. A top rate camera with a zoom of 24 to 600 ! And 600mm at f.4 is unheard of! (Just check the size and weight of say a Canon 600mm f4 lens (or any other quality make)

Last week I sold my Canon 100mm f2.8 macro IS USM lens and my Canon 70-200mm zoom. Both are series 1 lenses and of the highest quality but I now cover all focal lengths from 24 - 600 with one camera! I'm planning to sell other Canon equipment shortly. This decision took some time to make but I'm now convinced for my photography the Sony RX100 and RX10 cover ALL my needs and what's more I don't need a cart to carry them in!

Basically I would recommend the RX X100 of any version. All were and still are leaders in their class but all, unless you are happy to buy an earlier model, are expensive. I suppose the fact that new earlier versions are still sold says something! Maybe Sony just priced themselves out of the market but who knows?

Good luck with your choice. My advice would be to read reviews that mention the upgrades as each model appeared and decide if any of them are so important they provide the answer as to which you buy.

I confess that I've also thought about selling my Canon gear and going for something like an all in one. The concern is that the Canon stuff is excellent quality and will whatever I replace it with produce equally good results.

Did you sell privately or part exchange?
 
Mar 17, 2020
486
361
4,935
Visit site
Hi Sam

I sold both on Ebay.

I was fortunate to receive an email from Ebay 2 or 3 weeks ago offering no charges for sales. I decided now was the time in view of the potential savings and things turned out to be that way.

Sold as "buy it now" rather than auction. I had a look at the prices the lenses were going for and pitched mine around £50 higher! They were both in pristine condition as shown by pics and what I'd written.

I was rather scared that trusting expensive items to the vagaries of Ebay was maybe not a great idea. After the sales Ebay released the cash only after they had confirmation that the lenses had arrived (I sent them insured and signed for so was fairly sure all would be fine).

I had both Sony cameras for some time and since moving in that direction never used the Canon gear.

The only reason I kept the Canon was nostalgia I imagine! I still have my Canon body which would only fetch a few £ I suspect and retained a dedicated flash for the odd time I might use one. I've also retained a 10 - 22 mm lens just in case I want wider than the 24mm equivalent offered by both Sony cameras.

The fundamental reason I bought the Sony RX100 was for underwater photography and as a high quality take anywhere bit of kit. I really does have settings that I'll never use but they are there, including 2 auto settings they call "intelligent auto" and "superior auto"! Yup - but if you read the specs they both actually do make sense!

The reason I bought the Sony RX10 was primarily that I could never justify either buying or struggling to carry around a long telephoto. To have a 600mm f4 telephoto seems impossible but truly it's a superb bit of glass. We were going to South Africa on holiday and included a safari in Kruger National Park - hence the long telephoto.

There has to be a difference between a Canon prime lens and the Sony zoom. That is something I had to accept. BUT - as you might imagine I compared my series 1 Canon Zoom with the Sony and with images displayed on my 42" monitor I could see no real difference.

The reality is that for "normal" photography the Sony results are without doubt fantastic.

But put that to one side and consider the fact that depending on circumstances I now carry a single camera around when before I would struggle with a kit bag that was heavy and a pain to take around. The Sony RX100 simply slips into a pocket if I'm fairly sure I don't need the Sony RX10 but it's no real hassle to take both.

Basically I've not regretted "nailing my colours" to the mast of "convenience". Unless your images are blown up to enormous prints then I'll guarantee you will not see any difference in quality AND you will have unbelievable modes and functions to play with!

Not to mention that you'll maybe carry your kit around on occasions when currantly (edit currently - must have Christmas pudding on my mind!) you don't bother!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jcloughie

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts