Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

Question

Good Low Light Camera

Aug 13, 2015 7:51PM PDT

Could someone recommend a quality low light camera with a good size CMOS for grain free pics. It should fit in a woman's purse and have a decent zoom ratio. It should be priced between $250-$400. Thanks as this will be a present for my wife who has a fair knowledge of photography.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Clarification Request
re: Good Low Light Camera -- when zoomed in?
Aug 14, 2015 12:48AM PDT

If so, then the only camera I can think of that *might* qualify is a Panasonic FZ200. While it has a relatively small (1/2.3") sensor, it might fit into a larger purse, and you might be able to find one for around $400 since the successor model is due out soon.

If you can increase your budget to around $600 and are willing to sacrifice zoom ratio (4X), the Canon G7X has a larger 1" sensor, while the camera itself is actually smaller and will fit into a clutch, maybe with room leftover for a lipstick. (Full disclosure: I own one.)

Or if you can increase your budget to around $800 and are willing to sacrifice size (to shoulder bag, at the minimum), the Panasonic FZ1000 has a large 1" sensor and 16X (f2.8-4.0) zoom.

Or if you don't need low light performance when zoomed in (i.e. only when zoomed out/wide angle), you could probably pick up an older model Sony RX100 within your budget which will have a 1" sensor and be similar in size to the Canon G7X.

- Collapse -
Good Low Light Camera
Aug 16, 2015 6:47PM PDT

Thanks for the info. I am researching the Canon G7X as well as the Canon SX 710. The 710 is $329 and G7X is $649 at Best Buy. Is it really that much better for twice the price? I would like to get something that is recent and won't be technology obsolete in a short time. I have a Canon SX10 IS which was considered very good at the time. It still is but the low light capability is not up to snuff. If I or wife had to carry bag, would probably choose Canon T5I which Costco has for good price. Speaking of good price, what would be a good retailer/vendor to deal with for cameras in general?

- Collapse -
re: Good Low Light Camera - G7X vs SX710
Aug 17, 2015 6:40PM PDT

>" Is it really that much better for twice the price?"

In/for low light, absolutely!

a) the G7X's 1" sensor is significantly larger than the SX710's 1/2.3" sensor. I would guess a two stop advantage.

b) the G7X's lens is two stops faster on average than the SX710's lens. (Starts a little less than two stops at the wide end and ends a little more than two stops at the long end.)

So combining those, the G7X should have around a four stop advantage. And since each stop doubles/halves the amount of light, you're looking at 8X or 1/8th the light. i.e. 1 light bulb instead of 8 light bulbs.

The downside is that the G7X has only 4X zoom. If you need more than that, your choices are again/still the larger FZ200 and/or the much larger FZ1000. (Physics dictates that lenses that are good in low light have to be larger than those that don't -- think "funnel", the larger the funnel, the more water can pass through it; the lens basically funnels light to the sensor. And speaking of the sensor, physics also dictates that the larger the sensor, the larger the lens has to be to cover the entire sensor with light.)

And lastly, note that bright (f2.8 or brighter) superzoom (10X+) lenses for APS-C sensors (Canon T5i) are basically non-existent. And even the shorter bright zooms that do exist are large, heavy and expensive. e.g. Canon's 24-70mm f2.8 on three popular retailers (which answers your last question):

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/843008-USA/Canon_5175B002_EF_24_70mm_f_2_8L_II.html

http://www.adorama.com/ca2470.html

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-2-8L-Standard-Cameras/dp/B00009R6WT

- Collapse -
re: Good Low Light Camera
Aug 20, 2015 6:23PM PDT

That is a very expensive lens. $1750---$1900. Probably go with the G7x. I have read several reviews and they all sounded positive. The extra zoom power would be nice but what can you do. I would also like a viewfinder. I'm sure technology will change that in a short period of time. So its use my SX10 IS, my cell phone, or make some compromises.

I had been thinking of upgrading my SX10 (the G7x is for my wife) and going with the Sony A6 mirrorless but don't know much about advantages/disadvantages of mirrorless. I do have several Rokor lenses from my Minolta SRT101 SLR from 20 years ago and heard they will fit the Sony bayonet mount on the A6/

- Collapse -
re: Sony A6
Aug 20, 2015 7:54PM PDT

I'm not familiar with this model. Got a link?

Or did you perhaps mean the Sony A7 or Sony NEX-6? If so, then the main difference/advantage between them and the Canon G7X or SX10 is the ability to change lenses. (Note: the G7X and SZ10 are technically mirrorless since they don't have a mirror like a DSLR.) So if you are going to buy and use several lenses, then this is a significant advantage. But if you're just going to stick with the "kit" lens that comes with the camera, not so much. So you should first ask yourself: "do I need more than one lens?", "Does Sony have the type of lens(es) I need?" and "Can I afford them?"

One other consideration for you might be "Is the size of the whole package (camera body and lens) small enough for me?" This is the main drawback of the larger sensor Sony MILC (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras) vs the m4/3 (Micro Four Thirds -- Panasonic/Olympus) type. e.g. if you want a telephoto zoom that's good in low light (which is where the G7X is lacking), Sony's 70-200mm f2.8 is very large, heavy and expensive:

http://store.sony.com/70-200mm-f2.8-g-ssm-ii-telephoto-zoom-lens-zid27-SAL70200G2/cat-27-catid-All-Alpha-DSLR-Lenses

Whereas Panasonic's 35-100mm f2.8 (which would be equivalent focal length-wise to Sony's 70-200mm mounted on a full frame A7) is much smaller, lighter and costs somewhat less. (Although admittedly, still not cheap. Full disclosure: I own one.)

http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/g_x_vario_35_100.html

And lastly, note that, although it is often possible to use 3rd party/off-brand lenses on MILCs -- Minolta/Canon/Nikon lens on a Sony/Panasonic/Olympus camera -- you will generally lose some, if not all, automatic/electronic functions. i.e. autofocus, electronic aperture control (via the camera), EXIF data, etc. And this usually requires an adapter, so don't forget to add this to both the budget and size calculations. (Although, since Sony bought Minolta, this particular combo may have better interoperability. I'm not sure, off hand, and too lazy to look it up. Sorry.)

- Collapse -
re: Good Low Light Camera
Aug 20, 2015 6:44PM PDT

You mention how much faster the G7X is over the SX710. My wife is used to the SX10IS. Would the same hold true in terms of speed like it would for the SX710

- Collapse -
re: G7X vs SX710/SX10
Aug 20, 2015 8:08PM PDT

>"Would the same hold true in terms of speed like it would for the SX710"

Yup. While the SX10's lens is marginally (1/3 stop) brighter, it's handicapped with a much older (2 "generations") image processor -- DIGIC 4 vs DIGIC 6 -- and correspondingly older sensor technology. Remember that cameras are now digital devices, and so subject to Moore's Law. Or just note that both the SX10 and original 2MP iPhone came out around the same time. Now the iPhone is up to 8MP.

- Collapse -
Mirrorless Camera
Aug 20, 2015 9:40PM PDT
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/mirrorless-cameras/mirrorless-cameras/pcmcat234200050001.c?id=pcmcat234200050001

THis is Best Buy's page containing all their mirrorless camets Including their A6000 A5000 A5100 and some more. Now I have heard of a new mirrorlessk the Alpha 7000.

Maybe I'm better off getting a DSLR bundle that contains two lenses. Either the Canon T51 or Nikon 3300 for myself and the Canon G7X for my wife. Even if the the Minolta lenses will mount to the Sony a6000or a5000 as you said I won't have the automatic/electronic features. The lenses that come in either the Canon or Nikon bundles look cheap and flimsy. Even though it is factory lenses, i have to wonder about the quality of the glass lenses
- Collapse -
re: Mirrorless Camera
Aug 21, 2015 12:40AM PDT

>"THis is Best Buy's page containing all their mirrorless camets Including their A6000 A5000 A5100 and some more."

I don't see an A6 model listed, tho. A6000, A7 and NEX-6, yes.

>"Maybe I'm better off getting a DSLR bundle that contains two lenses."

Again, the real question is "do you need these lenses?" No sense going with even a two kit lens bundle if you don't need either lens. (You might also have a look at the Lenses for Canon 760D thread in which Bob -- correctly, IMO -- recommends the person use the 18-135mm kit lens to find out where it comes up short for his/her needs, and then buy lens(es) that fill those needs.)

>"The lenses that come in either the Canon or Nikon bundles look cheap and flimsy. Even though it is factory lenses, i have to wonder about the quality of the glass lenses"

Well, entry level cameras usually come with entry level lenses. And this would be another reason you might want to go with a T5i and 18-135mm kit (or the Nikon equivalent), and then spend more on an "L" lens (or the Nikon equivalent) once you know you need to/it. (As an aide, I own an 18-135mm STM, and find it quite decent in good light on either my T4i or 70D.)

>"Canon T51 or Nikon 3300 for myself and the Canon G7X for my wife"

That is essentially the approach I use, matching the camera/lens size to the situation:

I have a G7X because it's small enough to always have with me, but has much better quality, especially in low light, than my cellphone.

I have a (m4/3) Olympus E-PL5 that I use with small "pancake" prime lenses which, while larger than the G7X, is still small enough to fit into a jacket or cargo pants pocket, especially if I separate the camera and lens.

I have a (m4/3) Panasonic GH2 that I use (to shoot video) with m4/3 zoom or "hyperprime" lenses which are not pocketable.

And I have the aforementioned Canon T4i and 70D DSLRs which I use when I need a low light telephoto lens. (e.g. 135mm f2.0 or 200mm f2.Cool (Or when I'm doing a multicamera video shoot.)