thanks for all the help, after the reading of all cameras mentioned, to me it really did boil down to the two John Tymon mentioned as being at the top of the line, after having a look and test with both the Sony won, it is not cheap at £470 but compared to the Lumix at only £370 but the extra 100 pounds is worth it, the bigger 20 mp sensor is amazing, low light possibilities with the large sensor are very appealing, the macro function and depth of field is also superb and also usability, it is also far slimmer than the lumix, this fits all original criteria, by all the info gathered and read and also conversations ive had i would say this is by far the best small slim camera available if picture quality is the most important thing, it is the most expensive and i do guess you get what you pay for

Cheers Dennis

Canon Ixus 100 IS - a great little camera not much bigger than a fag packet. 12 Mp

Tz18 I'm sure it is sorry

Collette Collier wrote:

---

Lumix compacts are superb. My ex partner has one with 20x optical zoom. It's absolutely fantastic pocket sized I'm sure it was 18 million mega pixels. Cost around £200 I think it was lx18 though I'm not 100% sure. Highly recommended.

---

Lumix compacts are superb. My ex partner has one with 20x optical zoom. It's absolutely fantastic pocket sized I'm sure it was 18 million mega pixels. Cost around £200 I think it was lx18 though I'm not 100% sure. Highly recommended.

Another vote for the Panasonic LX5 - a superb little camera.

It's currently in the process of being replaced at most dealers with the LX7. Well worth looking around/searching online as dealers try to clear their remaining stock. I bought a replacement for an earlier one for £210 3 weeks ago at Park Cameras.

Personally I tend to use it for photographing plants, fungi etc. especially when I want a bit more depth of field than I'd get with a macro lens and the occasional landscape. Being able to save photographs in camera raw format in addition to jpegs is a big bonus. I've had photo's taken with the LX5 published by the National Trust and Cheshire Wildlife Trust. It really is an excellent camera.

I have a Lumix lx5 and agree with John. Superb little camera for landscapes and has a 16.9 aspect for wide shots. Battery life has not been a problem for me.

I have never needed a spare ,about 500-600 shots I would think .and that 1.4 lens is brilliant in poor light or night shots :)

ill look at these two, whats the battery life like on the lumix?

Hello all,


im hoping to pick your brains, im after a second camera to just keep in my pocket and use for landscapes and just wider aspect shots, i have a great little samsung hd thing but the battery life is rubbish, everytime i need it it seem to run out of battery,

ideal camera, main criterea

small in size, fit in pocket
must be high quality images, photos only, not interested in video
best battery life possible?
optical zoom that still keeps the quality,

i dont want to carry a second lens for my main birding camera, to much hasssle, just a second camera in my pocket that will keep a good battery life, and produce high quality images for the landscapes and scenery, willing to pay whatever the price for a good small camera, ideally just a second proper camera would do the job but the only problem is the size, i want every thing from the camera but the size,

im guess what im looking for is the best possible small fit in pocket camera, best for image quality and useability, price is last on the list?

any ideas?


thanks in advance for any thoughts

Lumix LX7 - that has a 24-105 1.4 lens made by Leica,is what I use for 99% of my landscapes,Only other with the same quality that would almost equal a dslr is the Sony RX1,forget the rest they are the best 2 out there,but you won't get change out of £400 for either

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Saturday 16th of February 2013 07:23:00 PM