If I bought a point and shoot, it would probably the Ricoh GR series. Super classic format and amazing sensor + lense.

I wish there was a Ricoh GR with a 80-90mm lens.

That would be sick!

I pulled the trigger on a GR IIIx about a year ago. It's mind bogglingly amazing and several orders of magnitude better than anything my iPhone 13 Pro nor my Pixel 6 XL can muster. It goes everywhere my smartphone does as it is very pocketable.

Can it do clean HDMI or DP out to be used as a webcam at full resolution?

I've found there comes a point where your webcam can be too good.

The GR III/IIIx does not have HDMI out, however it does support the DisplayPort protocol where you can solve video output in various ways with adapters, do note the max video resolution output is 1080p. The main problem is that eventually it will overheat and turn off (within minutes). Video was and is not a strong suit with Pentax/Ricoh products unfortunately.

Why not go with a thin mirrorless? I love the Alpha 6100 from Sony for exactly this purpose.

a5100 FTW! It must be very cheap now, and with a compact prime lens or even the very versatile 18-135 it fits in most larger pockets.

When I had my Pixel 2 XL I was constantly amazed at how clear, sharp, and non-muddy the computational photos came out. It was astonishing. I now have a 13 Pro Max and wish that I could just shut off the “water color effect”. I don’t know if it’s just me being picky, but I swear to god the Pixel 2 XL had a better camera in every way. More zoom, higher quality color, sharper pictures, WAY BETTER IMAGE STABILIZATION, and the computation stuff like Google’s night mode is leagues ahead of iPhone.

Try enabling RAW shooting, it’s way better quality.

Shoot with Halide:

https://halide.cam/

The RAW images from the iPhone have been processed. From my limited testing they're not really RAW anymore. They've been demosaiced and noise reduction has already been applied.

I created an account just to recommend shooting ProRaw with the Pro Camera app on an iPhone. There's even a setting to turn down some of the computational photography features (under 'Capture Quality'). Makes a world of difference!

https://www.procamera-app.com/en/

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/procamera/id694647259

How much post-processing do third-party camera apps like Halide actually do? Would that be an option?

I'd prefer that to a separate device, which I won't have with me most of the time.

I want to know the answer to this also! Total photography noob contemplating getting a new iphone here, is it possible to use a different camera app to disable a bunch of the computational magic?

Yes, and https://halide.cam/ is an excellent choice if you want more than the native RAW mode offers.

I only shoot RAW, it does require post-processing to get social media looking photos if that's your bag. (Normies want the pop, not the accuracy; nice it has both.)

I bought the RX100m3 from Sony for this reason with the birth of our first child. It worked amazingly and was exactly what I was looking for in what I was buying. Shooting RAW was nice, and all the Sony tech from the larger bodies makes it way down into the RX100 line. They are not cheap though.

https://www.sony.ca/en/electronics/cyber-shot-compact-camera...

And there is a bit more modern take in the form of ZV-1.

I currently have a small digital point and shoot that’s about 5 years old and notice it still manages to take better photos than my iPhone 12 mini due to the crazy processing the iPhone does.

I also am a relatively recent new dad and this comment resonated with me.

What’s your quick review on it? I’m a pretty amateur photographer, but is this camera worth an upgrade over my current setup and amateur experience?

This is my current camera.

Canon PowerShot G9 X Digital... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0167Q140U

I'm quite an amateur as well (although with some work experience on vision systems). The latest Sony RX100 is $1600 CAD so it's quite a different level than the one you currently have. Like they say, and it's true, the best camera is the one you have with you... I really liked the RX100, and my favourite thing with it was actually taking it to events. Concerts and hockey games, it did OK with low light with it's RAW processing, and it was small enough to bring in a pocket.

The G9 X has a "one inch" sensor, which is about as big as you can get in this size, like the RX100. The bigger sensor and the bigger / nicer the optics, the better your pictures. Like you are saying, when you get it right these small point and shoots can easily out perform the phones.

Honestly for the family shots, even though the camera was nice and small, I didn't end up getting it into the diaper bag or backpack as much as I thought I would, I ended up with my phone a lot of the time. Then, I got back into prime lenses on an old Nikon and then new Fuji, and there's no comparison (for me) between a fast prime and a point and shoot, no mater the number of fancy features on the latest RX100. The Fuji 56mm spoiled me.

I think I might have overstated my amateur status, I had to look up what a prime lense was :) I mostly just used the "auto" setting on my Canon heh.

Anyways the only things I really dislike with the Canon are the lack of viewfinder and no auto-transfer photo to phone which the Sony has.

It sounds like the image quality of the Sony isn't that dramatic of an upgrade as my Canon?

Thanks for the info though, maybe I just momentarily got excited at the prospect of upgrading as that Sony looks really sweet. There also might have been hint of "I'll get even more into photography if I upgrade" so I'm going to sleep on it.

I think all the tech that's in those Sony's would probably allow for some more shots to turn out, you'll get really good Auto Focus as well as a crazy number of pictures in burst mode - great for chasing kids around.

If you are looking to get more into photography, and honestly it's a hobby that can pay nice dividends as a parent, I might suggest looking at a used body for an interchangeable lens camera and a prime lens to get some of those nice family shots. With another point and shoot, while the option is there to go full-auto, I never found that I did.

Awesome. Do you have any suggestions for what kind of interchangeable bodies/lenses to look at for a noobie?

I'm also debating getting a film camera too, one of my friends took some really great film photos on a recent trip and he's quite amateurish as well.

Edit: You mentioned Fujifilm, I looked at the X100F and X100V, are those the types you had in mind?

The X100 line has a fixed lens, it does not swap out. It’s a bit of a larger, fancier point and shoot that does not zoom. They look really nice and I’ve always wanted one!

I have an X-T2 and have started a collection of lenses. The 56mm F1.2 is a bokeh monster with the autofocus speed of a slug! But when it hits it is beautiful. They just came out with a new version of the 56mm lens that might do better in Auto Focus, and they are up to the X-T4 which has a bunch of features that are nicer too, like IBIS.

Note that the Fuji cameras are unique in that they use a custom colour filter, not a Bayer filter on the sensor. This can affect the RAW processing depending on how you might want to do it. Honestly I got into Fuji cause a friend shot with it, lent me the body when he was out of country for a while, then I just got used to it and that was that. The XT line has more dials than a lot of other makes, some people like that.

I’ve decided on suggesting this to people who ask what camera they should get:

1. Pick your budget first

2. Pick the type (point and shoot, mirrorless interchangeable lens)

3. Go to a camera store and pick up some of the models you might be interested in. See what you like the feel of and the interface of. Between all the big companies, you can’t really go wrong.

4. Don’t go all out on the body (go used!) and get nicer lenses. Once you pick a make with a certain mount, you can have the lenses for life and upgrade the body as you go along. Try 2 lenses to start a prime portrait lens and a zoom in the normal to telephoto range to be able to be a bit away from your kids but still get a tight shot.

You can take a look at my Flickr account and see that a lot of the pictures up there are with a Nikon D40 and a $200 prime lens. In good light, it still takes fine pictures! My son and daughter now runs around with it and get some great shots from their POV.

Sweet, thanks for all the info :)

I went down a small rabbit hole yesterday, checked out fuij's line and read quite a few review and spec pages, I'm definitely captivated. I think I'm getting drawn towards the fuji x-t20/30 or one of the older x100 series as a start, but I'm def going to go to a few camera stores next week to see how they feel in person!

Thanks again for all the info, where can I find your flickr? Tried looking in your HN profile but couldn't find it.

Cheers

Wait until the iPhone 23 just has an AI construct an image from a rough prompt - no camera needed at all.

No need to wait, we already have that, it’s called DALL-E.

I've been learning to take "real" photos with a Sony A6400 over the past few months, with a couple of Sigma prime lenses. I've been super super happy with the photos I've managed to get out of it and definitely recommend a similar setup!

a6400 is mighty powerful indeed. I upgraded to it from a5100 (which I still have for its compactness) and was amazed by its customizability. Also with mirrorless you can adapt pretty much any old cheap manual-focus lens and get creative bokeh or fast telephoto for under $200.

It feels limited for video though — a lot of options but no way to get beyond 8 bits per channel, so iphone hdr videos win in most cases.

> It feels limited for video though

I think it depends on what you want - I have managed to get some absolutely fantastic video out of it, especially with the 30mm sigma lens

Sure, my use case involved a black dog among sunny landscapes, that stretches the need for dynamic range and color grading flexibility. Maybe with better shooting technique it’s less of a problem, but I’ve got used to post-processing flexibility it gives with stills.

I'd recommend shooting in ProRaw and then using Affinity/Darkroom/Pixelmator-Photo to edit it.

Photos shot in ProRaw still display the opinionated high-clarity [1] version in the photos app. Only editing in a third-party app will override that.

Unlike Raw, ProRaw will still do much of the good (IMO) processing, while allowing you to avoid Apples color-grading.

[1] I believe clarity, not sharpness, is the reason why iPhone 13 photos look so bad. It clears up parts of the image that are supposed to be foggy, thus removing an important depth queue and making the image look flat.

In the following examples, notice how minor details are blown out, making the image almost look like a mosaic.

- https://ibb.co/Stjh2xr

- https://ibb.co/TghZqVx (Apples default processing)

- https://ibb.co/fHD7R13

- https://ibb.co/Hh53pWL (Apples default processing)