P&S Suggestions?

So I am in the market for something smaller to carry around in my backpack and a DSLR just isn't going to cut it for me. At any time, I can have my cables, laptop, tablet and electrical tester in my work backpack when I travel. I am looking for something that has a great IQ, RAW, and good AF. AF doesn't need t be DSLR fast but better than EOS-m. I travel a lot and I miss a lot of GREAT shots because I only had my phone and no camera.

Doesn't need to be pocket size either and this won't matter to me much since it will be in my backpack.

I was looking at Sony RX100 which is $550 or the G1X or S120. I'm open to anything and I wanted to see what other POTNers are shooing with and that they like and would recommend.

And my 60D and 40mm would work but I would need something on the wide end. And carrying the 18-135 would be an end all solution but again, this is too big for my backpack. If there was a 17mm, 40mm and 85mm pancake lens, it would be PERFECT for my needs but since those don't exist, it won't work for me.

G16. I shoot with a 5DM3. I just got a G16 a few weeks ago, as a replacement for my G9. I was in NYC over the weekend and took the photos linked below. Yes, I retouched them in LR. No matter, I used the G16 for 3 days, doing video and stills for The Kiddo™''s high school band competition. AF isn't up to 5DM3 standards, but if you work with it, it will do well for you.

https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=16797320&po​stcount=78
https://photography-on-the.net …p=16797389&post​count=2573

I like the G16 also. But I don't even have an SLR.

Yea I was also looking at that as well but none in the refurb store at Canon but since the G17 is coming out, I do hope the price drops on the G16.

I don't need AF like DSLR.

For example, I was in Niagara falls last week and it was BEAUTIFUL with the ice and snow but all I had was my crappy phone for photos. I tried to fit my DSLR and 18-135 in my backpack but no luck without risking breaking something.

EOS M is as fast as the G or S series, so I'm afraid you are probably looking at a latest generation m4/3 or Sony mirrorless if you need faster performance. Frankly for travel photos, I can't imagine needing more performance than the M, but if that's what you want it's probably not going to be a Canon or any other PnS.

EDIT: have you actually tried an EOS M?

I don't need fast performance. Moderate is enough for me. I don't plan on doing sports or people photog. Just landscapes or something that I want to snap a photo of.

The EOS-M is what I want to stay away from as well. That with a lens is still going to be pretty big for my backpack. I don't carry a normal electrical tester. This is what I use Rigel Tester

And it's pretty thick too. I would say thicker then my 60D with 40mm

RHChan84 wrote in post #16799069
And it's pretty thick too. I would say thicker then my 60D with 40mm

With the 18-55, maybe a little thicker, but certainly narrower, shorter and lighter. With 22mm no way. It's just over 2" thick with that lens. Honestly not much bigger than the RX100. 40mm is a bogus length for travel, too, whereas 22mm is perfect.

I just wondered why you specifically singled out the EOS M. Is it all mirrorless you would not be interested in, or just the M?

What kind of low light performance do you need?

tkbslc wrote in post #16799092
With the 18-55, maybe a little thicker, but certainly narrower, shorter and lighter. With 22mm no way. It's just over 2" thick with that lens. Honestly not much bigger than the RX100. 40mm is a bogus length for travel, too, whereas 22mm is perfect.

I just wondered why you specifically singled out the EOS M. Is it all mirrorless you would not be interested in, or just the M?

What kind of low light performance do you need?

Nothing with the M or Mirrorless. I like the M and it's a great alternative but with lenses, it will be too much to fit in my backpack without worrying about it breaking or damaging something else. The G16 has a 24-100mm lens and tiny but the EOS-m with 18-55 only gives me to 55mm and I would have to carry an extra lens is going to be a bit much for my travels.

I could get a bigger backpack but I fly a lot so I need to keep it small. I also go on the small regional jets where my backpack barely fits.

I don't need amazing low-light but something decent with a fixed lens that has a range of 24ish to 100mmish but no need to be pocket size either. There is just too many alternatives out there.

OK that makes more sense.

I'd honestly look at an LX7 in your case. The Leica lens on those camera is superb, it goes extremely wide (it's almost like 22mm with the 16x9 aspect ratio set). And the lens is very fast (F1.4) to give the best chance at keeping a low enough ISO to avoid bad noise in most situations. Manual controls and features are excellent.

It's also about $200 cheaper than the G16 and $250 cheaper than the rX100 and it gives a significantly wider view - which is very nice in a travel cam.

tkbslc wrote in post #16801797
OK that makes more sense.

I'd honestly look at an LX7 in your case. The Leica lens on those camera is superb, it goes extremely wide (it's almost like 22mm with the 16x9 aspect ratio set). And the lens is very fast (F1.4) to give the best chance at keeping a low enough ISO to avoid bad noise in most situations. Manual controls and features are excellent.

It's also about $200 cheaper than the G16 and $250 cheaper than the rX100 and it gives a significantly wider view - which is very nice in a travel cam.

Thanks. I will look into that as well.

another vote for LX7!