Pocket-sized digicams that do RAW format?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by VX, Jan 17, 2006.

  1. VX

    VX Guest

    I've been looking at web sites, specifically looking for pocketable digicams
    that do RAW format. It would be great of there was a web site somewhere that
    actually listed them, or gave some short cut of this sort.

    Any ideas- any web sites that make the search easier?

    And while I'm asking- does anyone have any recommendations for particular
    cameras that fit this description?

    TIA for any info.
    VX, Jan 17, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. nikojorj_jaimepaslapub, Jan 17, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. VX

    VX Guest

    VX, Jan 17, 2006
  4. VX

    SMS Guest

    Canon S70 is about your only choice. It's larger than the ultra-compacts
    though. Note that the S80 dropped the RAW format.
    SMS, Jan 17, 2006
  5. Both the Leica D-LUX 2 and Panasonic DMC-LX1 do.

    Here's a review of the LX1.



    "I believe that all government is evil,
    in that all government must necessarily make war upon liberty...

    From "Mencken's Creed"
    H.L. Mencken (1880 -1956)
    John A. Stovall, Jan 17, 2006
  6. VX

    John Bean Guest

    Only if you're restricted to Canon. Other manufacturers also
    offer pocketable cameras with raw output.
    John Bean, Jan 17, 2006
  7. Forgot toa say a thing : check also their reviews for writing times, it
    might be prohibitive for some models to shoot RAW (I remember of an
    (old ;o) Dimage7, you could go for a cup of coffe between one RAW shot
    and the next one...).
    nikojorj_jaimepaslapub, Jan 17, 2006
  8. VX

    Frank ess Guest

    Frank ess, Jan 17, 2006
  9. VX

    SMS Guest

    Not according to dpreview.

    Go to: "http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp"

    Select "compact" and "raw" and choose a reasonable zoom range of 28-100.
    Five cameras come up, but only two are "pocketable," the S60 and S70.
    The latest in the series, the S80, dropped the RAW format.

    If you expand the selection to eliminate the relative wide angle (28mm),
    then you can add the Fuji Finepix F700, and the Samsung Digimax V700,
    but most people who care about RAW, also are probably smart enough to
    insist on the wider-angle lens.
    SMS, Jan 17, 2006
  10. VX

    John Bean Guest

    Indeed. I own one :)

    There's also a couple of Fujis - the F710 is the compact one
    (I think), and of course the Ricoh GR-D. But the LX1 was
    certainly my choice.
    John Bean, Jan 17, 2006
  11. VX

    John Bean Guest

    That would be great but... the OP just said "pocket-sized",
    you seem to have invented some lens limitations that were
    not specified. Even with your new 28mm requirement, the
    Ricoh GR-D or the Panasonic LX1 both have 28mm and are
    "pocket-size" for example. Just because Phil hasn't got
    around to testing a camera doesn't mean it doesn't exist ;-)
    John Bean, Jan 17, 2006
  12. The Panasonic LX-1 (and it's reskinned twin, the Leica D-LUX 2) would
    seem to meet that description. It's a few mm smaller in length and
    width, and a few mm thicker, than the S70. 28-112mm, 8 MP, RAW output.
    Why it doesn't come up in the DPReview search, I don't know, since they
    did a full review.

    Daniel Silevitch, Jan 17, 2006
  13. VX

    VX Guest

    Many thanks for the responses. I should probably have said that I vastly
    preferred cameras with viewfinders and I'm finding myself in a state of some
    alarm each time I find a camera that seemed interesting doesn't have one! The
    wideangle lens is a plus- I much prefer a 28-100 than a 38-114 or whatever
    equivalent. I also prefer RAW to be fully usable. Somewhere I read that the
    Ricoh GR digital takes 10 seconds to write a raw file. I may be confused but
    I think I read a user report on the Panasonic LX-1 that said that RAW was
    quite slow to write. (And I just realised today it doesn't have a viewfinder
    either, unless I'm really getting confused) And in another thread i found
    that the Olympus SP 350, which seemed like it might do some of what I want,
    also has very slow writing of RAW files. My last serious compact digital
    camera was the Canon S50 and although it was slow in some ways, RAW was
    actually usable and didn't take forever to write to the card. Canon has now
    removed the RAW capability with the S80 and that is a bit worrying for me,
    and I wonder who else is going to make this kind of camera? With a viewfinder
    built in- AND RAW file writing that is not horribly slow? So I found myself
    an S70 on Ebay. The way things are at the moment I feel I should probably
    find another S70 to keep it company! I hope some manufacturers do get it
    together to make small digital compacts for serious photographers without
    major flaws or feature omissions. But until recently, for me anyway, Canon
    S-60 etc was it, by default. I should probably look more into the Fuji
    options but the ones that do RAW don't seem to have been coming up on
    dealer's sites here in the UK, at least not on those I looked at today.

    It's all a bit discouraging in a way. Someone please tell me that its all
    going to improve very soon!
    VX, Jan 17, 2006
  14. VX

    SMS Guest

    Yes, I stand corrected. I don't know why it doesn't show up in dpreview
    when you do a feature search. Just select ultra-compact and RAW, and
    nothing shows up, even though the LX1 is listed in the dpreview database
    as having those criteria.
    Yes, I wrote F700, but I meant F710.

    and of course the Ricoh GR-D. But the LX1 was
    Ricoh doesn't sell in the U.S. anymore, which is unfortunate.

    In any case, the S70 is still probably the best option. I don't know
    what it is with Panasonic. They pack in all the best features including
    a wide zoom, and image-stabilization, but as the reviewer from
    dcresource wrote: "The Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 is an intriguing digital
    camera that falls short of greatness in the most important area: image
    quality," while dpreview was also unkind to the LX1, with "noise, noise,

    As to pocket size, as the dcresource reviewer wrote, "The DMC-LX1 is a
    midsize camera made mostly of metal. It's too big to fit in most of your
    pockets," and "the LX1's lens sticks out quite a bit, so in reality it's
    not as small as the numbers make it sound."

    Bottom line is that there are zero ultra-compact cameras with RAW
    capability, you have to move up a bit in size, to get RAW, and even then
    you have a very limited choice if image quality is important.
    SMS, Jan 17, 2006
  15. VX

    John Bean Guest

    Not everyone is in the US. I'm not, for example, and neither
    is dpreview come to think of it.
    Your opinion, mine differs. That's why I bought a LX1 and
    not a S70. I use it, I print images, I'm more impressed with
    what *I* can do with it than the opinions of dpreview.
    The OP didn't say "ultra-compact", not even close. The LX1
    is "pocket-sized", which is the specification required by
    the OP.
    John Bean, Jan 17, 2006
  16. VX

    John Bean Guest

    Yes, that put me off.
    You are confused :)

    The LX1 writes a raw file in under two seconds unless you
    use a *very* slow card, in which case it could be as long as
    three seconds...

    I've use cameras for over half a century and I didn't think
    I'd like a camera that has only a LCD. I was wrong, I like
    the LX1 more than any camera I've owned in the last ten
    John Bean, Jan 17, 2006
  17. VX

    VX Guest

    Now that is interesting. I like the tripod effect of steadying a camera
    against a heavy object- my head- even with image stabilisation I think
    holding the camera steady is fundamentally a very good idea- and I think I
    might feel a bit silly holding a camera out in front of me. More to the point
    I'd like to disappear visually and not be noticed when doing street
    photography, and holding a camera in front of my head seems to work up to a
    point, but I'd really worry about holding it at arms length. Do you find this
    affects how you take pictures in public, or in low light? (FWIW I do have it
    in the back of my mind that there might be a viewfinderless camera that is so
    desirable that I'd want one anyway {as well as, not instead of, an S-70!} and
    I'd find things i wanted to do with it. The LX-1 sounds like an interesting
    camera- I've read user comments saying they get great images from it ).
    VX, Jan 17, 2006
  18. VX

    John Bean Guest

    A couple of things:

    1. Size matters. The big, legible LCD is very important.
    I've tried (and failed) to use LCD-only cameras with smaller
    screens. Which leads to...

    2. I don't actually hold it at arms length but much closer,
    though I guess it could be a problem for anyone who can't
    see at normal reading distances or even a little closer.

    I've advised several people I know to never buy a camera
    like the LX1 sight-unseen, you really have to try the camera
    first-hand to decide whether you will enjoy using it.

    The LX1 is not an "ok" camera, you either love or hate it.
    Most people who use it love it, most people who read reviews
    about it hate it ;-)
    John Bean, Jan 17, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.