UKH

I am currently looking to buy a camera to take with me backpacking and mountaneering, mostly to take landscape photos. I am also on quite a tight budget; I don't really want to spend anymore than £75 on it because I don't want to risk losing anything super expensive. I was looking at the Fuji FinePix S2950 which I can get second-hand for £50 from CeX, but I read a review saying it was bad for landscape photography because you can't focus it, I also enjoy fiddling about with stuff in editing softwares. I'm not sure if that matters too much for the level I'm at though. I'd just like to hear others thoughts and reccomendations.

Thanks

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

You're after something deeply unfashionable these days, a small, lightweight compact camera of the sort that has gone out of use since phone cameras got better.  This leads to the obvious question, can your phone do the job?

If not, or if you fancy a camera rather than your phone, then as you surmise the second hand market is where you're likely to get something that matches your aspirations and price bracket.  If you choose any of the major manufacturers there'll be something there, so do your reading around old reviews and trawl through eBay seeing if you can find one that's had light use but still works.  I've used a Panasonic Lumix LX 3 which might (just) squeeze into your budget.  Something less sophisticated, but smaller and lighter, like an Olympus VR 340 (which I also have) can still produce good shots if you find one that's been looked after (and if I were backpacking and scrimping over every gramme, that's the sort of thing I'd look at). 

There are plenty other options from the likes of Canon et al.  A search around the archives here will help you too.

Hope you find what you need.

T.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

Don't buy a compact camera.  Upgrade your phone instead.  Any even vaguely recent iPhone is better than almost every compact camera on the market, particularly the 12 and above, and you'd get a 12 Mini used fairly cheaply now.

It's only worth buying a dedicated camera if you're going the way of an SLR or similar with interchangeable lenses etc.

In reply to Neil Williams: phone cameras don’t have optical zooms and usually have very small sensors so a cheap compact camera can still be a lot better in some circumstances

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

I think you'll really struggle to find anything at that price point which is as good as a phone camera or isn't huge! Perhaps you're happy to carry a DSLR sized camera mountaineering, but anything small for £75 won't be a major upgrade on a good phone camera.

You could probably get a Canon D40/D50 for about £65 and a cheap 18-55 £35 but thats a chunky setup to carry climbing. You would definitely get some better pics out of that than an iPhone, plus shooting in RAW lets you tinker with them afterwards. The only downside with this (other than size) is that you're looking at some really quite old tech. It's going to feel clunky in comparison to modern phone/camera interfaces. 

If you can stretch the budget you might find a Sony RX100 for £150 ish, that would be my choice for a super compact camera to take mountaineering to get better snaps than an iPhone. 

I carry an iPhone every day for climbing and mountaineering, summer and winter, and have never had a problem loosing or dropping one. I've been more concerned about taking my full frame Sonys out, but at least they're insured. 

In reply to Tony Buckley:

Funny you should mention the LX3 because I resurrected mine yesterday to take in a bum-bag on a brisk trot over the Rhinogydd. Charged the battery (I'd kept it separately) and fired it up - worked like a dream. Super little camera with a big...ish sensor, 15 years old and has all the control you need. I'm sure the op could find one, or something similar, within his budget.

In reply to Neil Williams:

This is terrible advice. A refurbished phone like you suggest is still three or four times the OPs budget. Whilst it might have more advanced software than second hand compact camera, it will have a smaller sensor, no option zoom and probably an inferior lens.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

One further addition.  It's worth having a think about how you intend to view the pictures you take.

If you're intending to view on a screen, don't obsess about sensor size.  It doesn't really matter much printing up to A4.

Yes, bigger is normally better but unless you're wanting to print images at sizes most people would never print at, it's not a big deal.

That LX3 I mentioned, and which Myfyr Tomos has attached a picture from, is nothing special by the standards of recent cameras but I've seen at least one Trail magazine cover shot taken with one back in the day.

T.

In reply to Tony Buckley:

A small sensor with a greedy pixel count means very small pixels and hence poorer image quality, eg limited dynamic range

In reply to LucaC:

Wot he said.

At that price point, stick with a phone camera. You'll only be wasting your money on something that can NOT compete with a good phone camera. Even think about buying a second-hand phone as a camera alternative.

However if you up your budget and want something better than a phone (Subjective) then have a look at the MPB website for second hand cameras.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

There's a used Nikon P310 on a certain auction site just now that would fit the bill for only £40. Small, fast, good in low light and shoots RAW. And it's better than a phone camera. 

Edit: I should have said I had one a few years ago and only had to change when it was nicked. For a cheap compact the IQ and the RAW files are better and more 'tinkerable' than a mobile phone.

In reply to kevin stephens:

...writes a person who has never used a late iPhone, i.e. 12 to 14.

Indeed, the zoom is only semi optical by using multiple lenses and some level of interpolation, but I have never come across anything this side of an SLR that gives picture quality anywhere near as good as the iPhones.  The software deals with all the potential inadequacies of a phone camera admirably, and the night photography is near unrivalled.  And while I'm not sure about the 12, the 13 and 14 are fully waterproof, too.

The crap you get with cheap Android phones is not in the same league, though I don't doubt that some of the premium end Android phones probably come close.

In reply to Neil Williams:

I beg to differ. Pixel phones give iPhones a run for their money. And generation for generation, Pixel vs iPhone then the Pixel can and does outperform an iPhone.

In reply to Neil Williams:

I bought an iPhone 13 last autumn and I must say I'm stunned by the quality of the camera. The only snag is not being able to see the viewfinder very well in bright daylight.

In reply to Neil Williams:

I’m posting this from my iPhone 12 which I use regularly for taking pictures.

I also have and regularly use an Olympus Tough TG6, Canon G15 compact and a Pentax KP DSLR.

I stand by my earlier post. For £75 the OP should be able to get a second hand zoom compact that will out perform an iPhone when zoomed to telephoto and in low light. For wide angle well lit landscapes the iPhone would be as good  as my two compact cameras.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

I bought a Canon 7D and some lenses for the better part of £2k many years ago. It was a top level DSLR in its heyday. There is a 7D and a kit lens going for £130 on Marketplace right now. Not a compact, but you get the idea.. 

In reply to The Lemming:

Er, the Pixel is a premium Android phone, so I don't believe we do differ.

In reply to Neil Williams:

How foolish of me to think that a Premium Google Pixel Android phone was out of the OP's price range.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Google-inches-SIM-Free-Smartphone-Renewed-Just-Bla...

I used to own one of these, and they take great photos.

In reply to Neil Williams:

How foolish of me to think this.

A Pixel 3a on Amazon right now is going for £88. And I used to own one.

In reply to The Lemming:

Sorry. I thought the last link was deleted.

In reply to The Lemming:

Wha?

An iPhone 12 Mini is probably in their price range too, albeit possibly used.  The way the market is, premium phones get quite cheap when they're not the current model.  That applies to both Android and Apple.  A Pixel is not a budget range phone.

In reply to The Lemming:

Wha?

An iPhone 12 Mini is probably in their price range too, albeit possibly used.  The way the market is, premium phones get quite cheap when they're not the current model.  That applies to both Android and Apple.  A Pixel is not a budget range phone, Motorolas are an example of budget Android phones, and generally have weak cameras.

All my point is is:

1. Premium phones generally have cameras as good as the good end of compact cameras, often better.  iPhones are premium phones.  I'm less familiar with the Android market (though I've had Android phones), but Pixels and top end Oneplus devices certainly are too.

2. Budget phones generally don't.

Oh, probably add that the OP's budgetary situation may differ if they're upgrading their phone rather than buying a separate device.

In reply to Neil Williams:

A Pixel, or iPhone for that matter, is a budget range phone when its priced at what the OP is willing to pay because it is a few generations behind the current crop of extortionately priced phones.

In reply to The Lemming:

That's just deliberately being awkward.

OK, if you must - phones which were, when new, in the last couple of years, sold as premium phones, generally have cameras as good as or better than most compacts.  Phones which were at the budget end of the market when new generally do not.

The used price now does not dictate how a phone might be categorised.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

I had a Finepix years ago and currently have a Sony RX 100 (OG), Fuji X-T1 and an iPhone 14. I am no great shakes photography wise but enjoy taking photons most with the X-T1, by a long shot! I keep trying to use my phone more, and got it for the camera, but it's such a soulless experience and a lot of the photos feel really look SO "digital" that I haven't really got on with it. I have started taking n RAW and trying to edit them so they don't look so synthetic but have yet to master LR to an extent that I'm happy.

Re losing it, I climb now with my X-T1 and a small 15-45mm lens and don't worry about bashing it/knocking it etc, just enjoy using it and the images I get with very minimal editing. The RX100 sits forlornly on the bookcase......

In reply to Neil Williams:

I shall try and simplify the matter. The OP has given a budget that quite clearly asks for second-hand or massively discounted cameras or phones that are so old that their prices have dropped to their price point.

I and others have given examples of phones or cameras that are now within the OP's price range. Yet you keep blathering on that my suggestions are Premium phones. Yes they are and were but I'm still offering options within the OP's price range.

You still want to argue the toss?

In reply to galpinos:

Do you want to sell it?

Although I literally just last Friday bought a Pixel 7a, justifying the double-my-old-phone-price by thinking now I don't need to think about buying a separate compact camera... So maybe I shouldn't make offers on hours after all. 😆

In reply to TobyA:

Potentially? Sleep on it then message me!

In reply to The Lemming:

I'm not referring to the OP's budget at all.  Simply saying that the phones to consider are the premium brands eg Apple and Google Pixel and not the budget brands like Motorola.

We are saying slightly different things that don't actually conflict.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

Whilst phones are handy because you always have a camera with you, I much prefer the photographic experience with a proper camera. They are generally more comfortable to hold, have a lanyard and are significantly less fragile and water sensitive.

Not to mention that it allows you to keep the phone in a safe place with fully charged battery for emergency use.

In reply to Neil Williams:

I was, and still am.

And why would I even consider suggesting a budget brand like Motorola, when I can highlight a superior phone/camera brand for the OP's budget request?

Yes we are saying different things. But I'm trying to offer genuine solutions to a budget of roughly £75.

You are most welcome to suggest an inferior camera/phone brand to fit your narrative if you wish to prove a point that is not worth proving.

In reply to The Lemming:

And a used iPhone 12 Mini or Pixel would do just that.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

I'm on the phone camera side of the argument. I bought a refurbished Pixel 2 in 2020, already an old phone at the time, and it became my exclusive photography tool until I recently bought a used X-T1 body. Phones will never do certain things well because of physics (narrow DoF for example), but if the limitations are compatible with the sort of photography you want to do, they're remarkably capable tools.

In reply to Jenny C:

Yeah, thats exactly why I want a camera, plus I think if I was going to buy another phone for just for the camera on it I would be paying for a bunch of extra things in the phone I don't want.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

I’m taking photos on either a full frame canon or an iPhone 13pro.  I now use the iPhone for all outdoors photography where I am carrying a lot of gear and/or my 4 year old daughter is along for the ride.  When I send photos to people from the iPhone, I regularly get comments about how amazed they are by the photo quality.

My iPhone can do wide angle through to macro using different lenses i.e. not simple software trickery but does use in camera software to edit pics.

Of course I get much much better control and some aspects of image quality in my full frame SLR but that is increasingly for moments where I have the time and inclination to carry/use it.  As the old saying goes, the best camera is the one you have with you I.e. your phone! 

I think the points about upgrading your phone rather than getting a compact are made on the basis you need a phone anyway so, all things considered, it’s easier and arguably more cost effective overall to upgrade your mobile.

I’m no evangelist and more of a late but reluctant convert and hope that makes sense.

In reply to CaptnSiNich:

Slightly beyond budget but consider something from the Casio tr range. I have a TR70 (around £130) and love it. In fairness I have two Sony mirrorless cameras  and a range of lenses for them , ditto a Canon dSLR plus various random ancient compacts, all of which get me around the perhaps severe limitations of the Casio, but for landscapes it should be a beaut. Basically a phone camera minus the phone stuff, and with a superior lens and vastly superior sensor despite being maybe a ten years old model.

Disclaimers, I have not had the opportunity to compare it to anything newer than an iPhone and it is likely that a newer phone might offer similar pictures to the Casio, at 4-6 times the price. I like my Casio as it helps conserve battery on my phone - and maybe I like it because it is unusual; it may not be the best suggestion for an only camera