New Street Camera

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I'm getting a new camera for street photography. For years I've used a NEX-7 with manual primes set to hyperfocus. It was fast to shoot and produced good files. The camera died, so now I'm curious to hear if anyone has any advise?

[EvilTed]

Unquestionably - Ricoh GR.

I've tried them all (Leica, Fuji, Sony) and still keep coming back to the little GR.

I tried the A6300 but it is noisy in regular mode, distorts verticals in silent mode, has too much shutter lag and the lens choice is poor, except for the $1000 24mm F1.8.

 

The GR is small, silent, can be shot one handed, has a built in ND filter and a super sharp 28mm Equivalent Focal Length lens.

This camera was designed for street photographers.

 

Pros

-Extra large shutter button so it can be engaged easily using your thumb (one handed)

-Snap Focus mode - basically zone focus is supported. You set the distance and it will take the shot without engaging AF - almost zero shutter lag.

-AF mode with Snap Focus override (I use this mode). It will use AF if depressed slowly, but will use snap mode if done fast.

-In camera multiple - exposure (I use ME combined with reflection and intentional camera movement in my street work).

-Good battery life. A charge lasts a good days shooting for me. I carry a spare but seldom need it.

-Small enough to carry in your ass pocket.

-Filters are added via a twist on hood - this makes it really easy to combine long exposure using ND and then ME it with something else by quickly removing the hood.

-4 custom buttons allow you to turn on features as you want/need them (like ND), 3 dials can be customized too.

- $600

- It is a creative powerhouse of a camera. I'll guarantee it is more capable and customizable than anything else you've ever tried for street.

 

Cons

Manual mode doesn't allow auto ISO

TaV mode does support auto ISO, but cannot allow cap (there are workarounds https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3499245)

 

A lot of my work, especially the creative stuff was done using the GR (as well as the newest 4 images)

 

https://www.instagram.com/sfstreetz/

[Gilgenberg]

coming from nex 7 i have now A7S, ...........much bigger than Ricoh GR!

 

i thought it will be much to bulky for me but i´m very happy with it 

 

awesome EVF, silent mode, awesome low ISO, small RAW files, very good dynamic, very good IQ

 

use it with manual lenses, so no shutter lag

[Zé De Boni]

Unquestionably - Ricoh GR.

I've tried them all (Leica, Fuji, Sony) and still keep coming back to the little GR.

 

 

Unquestionably, EviTed is a different kind of photographer. Or he must be kidding!

That Ricoh camera has a fixed single focal lens, so it doesn't fit in the same category as the cameras he is comparing (or has tried). We may discuss about street photography and what lenses are fitted for that kind of work. He must think that everybody must use a 60^o lens (35mm in full-frame), as it is his personal choice. We may also ponder about viewfinders: electronic, like in NEX7, or simple optical with no information, which is the only option for his favorite camera (but which may also be mounted on any camera with  shoe mount).

Jaf-Photo, you've used the plural to define the lenses you used on the NEX7. So I guess you own at least 2 primes mounted on adapters. So, It is more reasonable to keep with the E-mount system, or at most choose another one that allows the use of your lenses with new adapters. If those lenses cover full frame the options widen. But considering that you are used to the NEX7 (and to the coverage of your present lenses), we must stick to the APSC format on our reasoning. With all information available on the web, I understand that you posted this question on Sony Alpha Forum to get a feedback from people that use newer cameras from the same brand.

The answer is simple. If you were satisfied with the NEX7 results you will be much more pleased with the A6300 or even the A6000, which today is a bargain.

I've stepped up from one NEX5 to two NEX 7, then one NEX6 and finally to two A6000. The evolution in less than 5 years is astounding, mostly in sensor performance and viewfinder quality. Surely I will get one ore more A6300 bodies as soon as I can. So far, that is my obvious recommendation.

From the NEX7 to the A6000 you will see great improvements in low light/high ISO performance and shadows rendering. You also get clearer and more natural viewfinder. The autofocus is also impressive, working at high speed and covering virtually all the image area (this maybe not relevant for those working on hiperfocal, but the tool is so powerful that it may change the way you work once you work with native lenses). The high speed continuous 11fps is also amazing and useful. It shakes the foundations of the decisive moment, or better, it turns it more attainable. The A6300 promises further advances in all those parameters and much more, like the silent shutter, which must be a great tool for street photography (which is not only done in noisy neighborhoods but also indoor). Add the advanced video capabilities, the A6300 is the best you can get, coming from where you are, until the next Sony release is on the streets.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Thanks for the tips! The Ricoh GX is a very good suggestion, EvilTed. I've seen great work with this camera, invluding the shots on your instagram.

 

What I realised when my NEX-7 died is that I rely heavily on both the viewfinder and flipscreen. So, for that reason I'd be a fish out of water with the Ricoh.

 

A7s is also a very good recommendation, Gilgenberg. Unfortunately, I sold off my FE gear a couple of months ago. At the moment it doesn't feel right to go back there for me personally.

 

A6300 is the obvious first contender, Za. It lacks a few things that I loved about the NEX-7 but everything else it does better. While the NEX-7 was working, I had no plans to buy A6300 but now it does look like a better option than sourcing a used NEX-7.

 

Before I decide I like to keep an open mind so I'm open to more suggestions.

[EvilTed]

@Ze De Boni

 

I'm a street photographer

 

A Ricoh GR is 28mm, not 35mm Equivalent Focal Length, just like the Leica Q - possibly Leica's best street camera.

The 35mm fixed lens camera that a LOT of other street photographers use is the Fuji X100.

I've owned one of those too and while it is nice, I find it too large and cumbersome for my taste.

 

The Ricoh GR doesn't have a viewfinder because, I don't need one.

I learn the focal length of the camera and frame the shot in my head.

I shoot in close, one handed and nobody knows what I am doing.

I've had friends walk alongside me and not be aware that I am shooting people, I'm that discrete.

For me, there is no time for framing things in viewfinders and I don't want to pollute the scene by standing around like a tourist pointing a camera at things.

That will get me killed here in San Francisco.

 

Again, everyone is different and has different ways of shooting.

This is how I have evolved to work on the street and the Ricoh GR is the best tool I have found for my art.

[Golem]

.................

What I realised when my NEX-7 died is that I rely heavily o

n both the viewfinder and flipscreen. So, for that reason I'd

be a fish out of water with the Ricoh.

 

.............lacks a few things that I loved about the NEX-7

........................................

     

All you actually need is another Nex-7. They're available.

But if an upgrade more or less falls into your lap, then it

could be time to upgrade. And with an upgrade comes

typically a few detail changes. If those details are truly

intolerable to you, get another Nex-7. If not intolerable,

accept small changes ... of maybe give up photography ?

  

Clearly the current production model that replaces it is

the a6300, but there are great bargains on the a6000 at

the moment.  

   

Simplify the question: a6300, a6000, or Nex-7. Those

three cameras are direct, or nearly direct, replacements

for the Nex-7 that you would still be using if it were still

alive and well.

  

Not that I'm exactly in your shoes, but here's my version

of simple ... and I use a Nex-7 and a6000:  

  

Nex-7: Familiar and very affordable, but high ISO noisy.

a6000: Basically an improved Nex-7, very affordable.

a6300: Ultimate state-of-art replacement but costs more. 

  

I know my needs. High ISO very important, price is also

important. If my Nex-7, my sunny days camera, dies I'll

just keep favoring my a6000. If the a6000 dies I'll replace

it. The a6300 is not a quantum leap over the a6000 so I

won't consider it. 

   

Apply your needs to those three cameras, just as above,

but applying your own needs instead of mine. See if you

can hit upon a simple shake out, similar to the paragraph

immediately above. Have at it, and good luck !

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Thanks, Golem. Very sensible thoughts, similar to my own musings.

 

A6000 is about half the price of A6300 where I am. Used A6000 and NEX-7 go for about the same price (NEX-7 being rarer).

 

As I prefocus instead of using autofocus, I'll be fine with either. A6000 is probably the best price/performance option.

 

EvilTed, I hear you. I shoot a bit longer, usually 35mm or 50mm equivalents. I'm mostly concerned with not disrupting the scene before I push the button. I don't mind talking to people after I take the picture. No assaults so far (touch wood).

 

I'm not aware of my camera while shooting. I tried shooting street with a camera without viewfinder. I found myself repeatedly staring into black plastic as I raised it to my eye...

 

It's hard to learn new tricks for us old dogs.

[Mr_A7s]

1. rx1rII - small like a toy, however, it delivers MF IQ

 

2. a7r II + FE35 f2.8 or FE28mm - I favorite day time combo.

 

3. A6300 + FE35 f2.8 or FE28 - compact and fast shooting

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I had a look at the shutter lag measurements at imaging-resources. It turns out NEX-7 has less shutter lag than later E-mount cameras. It's the only one with less than 100 ms lag with manual focus. That may actually sway me back to the NEX-7 for that instant shutter experience.

[Gilgenberg]

but:

 

Prefocuse   0.024 second

 

with Sony A7S

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I like the RXR II suggestion. It has very low shutter lag with manual focus and an aperture ring. Unfortunately, it has focus by wire, I believe. That makes hyperfocal use very impractical. Basically, I need an aperture ring and a coupled focus ring with a distance scale. I would also like to use my range of manual primes. But, yeah it's a great street camera generally.

 

1. rx1rII - small like a toy, however, it delivers MF IQ

 

2. a7r II + FE35 f2.8 or FE28mm - I favorite day time combo.

 

3. A6300 + FE35 f2.8 or FE28 - compact and fast shooting

1. rx1rII - small like a toy, however, it delivers MF IQ

 

2. a7r II + FE35 f2.8 or FE28mm - I favorite day time combo.

 

3. A6300 + FE35 f2.8 or FE28 - compact and fast shooting

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

but:

 

Prefocuse 0.024 second

 

with Sony A7S

Yeah, absolutely. That's when using autofocus and half-pressing the button, letting it focus before pressing it fully.

 

I use the old rangefinder style of shooting. It's an adapted manual prime, where I dial in aperture and focusing distance. That waybI get a sharp image from about 2 meters to infinity. That means youbcan just point and shot without any focusing action. It's split second shooting. In those cases you go by the manual focus shutter lag.

 

If memory serves me right, it wss 73 ms for NEX-7 and 107 ms for A6000, A6300 etc. Not a massive difference but in my experience you need to be well below 100 ms to get that instant click.

 

I was a bit unclear, I admit.

[Golem]

When you find test figgers on shutter lag, in your MF-only

context, are you comparing truly equal testing procedures ?

Are both tests using E-1st-curtain ? Not sure about other

features or settings to question, but you get my idea here ?  

  

Also, make sure not to deprive yourself of a benefit such

as lower noise, just to favor a camera that shaves off .015

or .025 sec of lag, cuz those are not realistic measures of

toadall delay.

  

This class of cameras have such minimal shutter lag that

differences between the best of them may be .015 sec or

thereabouts. Here's the bogus math: 

 

"Body-A has .0125 sec shutter lag, body-B has .025 sec.,

so users of body-B suffers 2X the lag vs users of body-A." 

That is fantasy, erroneously based on the simplistic math

of ".025/.0125=.5". A shutter release moment is just not

actually THAT simple.

 

If you include an optimistic .2 sec human reflex time, you

find that the response times for the two bodies are .2250

and .2125 sec ... in actual use !  

 

Back to that same math: .2125/.2250=.9444 ..... so in real

use there's not quite 6% difference between brain impulse

and actual start of the exposure. It clearly makes no sense

to deprive yourself of possible benefit of a newer body just

cuz the older body has a 6% advantage in REAL lag time. 

  

Don't know what the margin of error is in the lab tests you

read, but I know in my over-edumacated gut that it's more

than that 6%.

  

____________________________________________ 

   

   

I did not use numbers from any particular lab tests but just

presented typical numbers. The point is not to surgically or

geekishly compare the exact test  figgers for two particular

bodies. The point is to demonstrate that, for modern bodies,

the tiny differences in body-A vs body-B "shutter lag" are

meaningless cuz they are hugely overwhelmed by a much

larger lag, a lag that remains constant and does not change

just cuz you change bodies.

  

The human reflex lag is the Great Equalizer, and CANNOT

be removed from the equation. 

[Zé De Boni]

...The point is to demonstrate that, for modern bodies,

the tiny differences in body-A vs body-B "shutter lag" are

meaningless cuz they are hugely overwhelmed by a much

larger lag, a lag that remains constant and does not change

just cuz you change bodies.

  

The human reflex lag is the Great Equalizer, and CANNOT

be removed from the equation. 

Great point! Just for fun I will correct you. Human reaction does not remain constant, it varies among individuals. 0.2 seconds is the average.

I got mine measured when I was 26: 0.15s. Now, at 65 my reactions are surely slower, though as an average tennis player at the net I can still volley like a pro and hit the fastest balls that come within my reach.

Now, on the streets and outdoor, my reaction is much slower as my camera is usually turned off while my eyes do the job of finding the subjects that attract me.

However, 10 years ago I was shooting ballet with a Nikon D200. There you must anticipate the shot, so you must get the rhythm of the dance and train the lag so that you press the shutter the exact fraction of a second before the right position of the dancer. On jumps, it is tricky, it is like a kind of sport. No camera will react instantly. Maybe a new approach of getting 120 FPS at high MP will turn this job ridiculously simple. One will just need to choose the right frame.

[Golem]

Of course human reflex time varies. When I said it was

"constant" I didn't mean "every case, everywhere, every

person". I meant that, pragmatically, reflex time was/is

"a mathematical constant" for purposes of doing an A-B

comparison between any two bodies ... IOW, reflex time

holds constant, while electromechanical lag varies from

body to body, cuz the same human triggers both bodies

for making the comparison between two bodies. Some

other day, our test human might be faster or slower but

for purposes of the comparison, s/he's is not a variable

but serves as a constant.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I forgot to mention I have lightning reflexes

 

I also think there are more variables. Street shooting is very much about reading the flow and predicting when to push the button to capture something that is just about to happen.

 

Also, in my experience I don't notice any lag below 100 ms. Above 100 ms it no longer feels instant and above 200 ms it feels like lag.

 

I've shot laggy cameras and I ust have to learn to push a bit earlier. But it's definitely easier with no perceptible lag.

 

P.S. I also checked imaging-resource's measurements on A77II. It has very low lag across the board, which confirms my impression of it as one of the most responsive cameras I've used. Not great format for street though.

[joshinthecity]

Ricoh GR.

Especially if you do a lot of B&W street work..

 

I have an RX1R, and while superior in many (actually most) ways..

 

as a pure "street" blade, the GR is king..

[Golem]

The GR appears to be a different camera for a

different purpose, king of some other kingdom.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

The Ricoh is a very good suggestion, purpose-built for street photography.

 

A few years ago I would probably have bought it in addition to a new mirrorless ILC. But I've promised to stop hoarding cameras, so I have to go with the one that fits my method best.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Final report: I ended up with a new A6000. I couldn't find a tidy NEX-7. But I found a store with a new A6000 for only $100 more than a used one. A6300 improvements weren't relevant for my use.

 

The NEX-7 is the first camera to die in my hands and I hope the A6000 will last better.