Compact Raw

Are any of the compact range capable for taking images in raw format?

Yes.
LINK

John

Only the Q in the Pentax range.

Panasonic LX3, and LX5.


Take care.

I'd say Pentax KR if you put one of those nice pancake lenses on it

Bill has a good point. By the time a compact becomes large enough so it doesn't fit in a pocket and has to have a camera bag, then it might as well be a DSLR.

But if you wanted a lens to cover the wide range of a compact which lens would you choose for the Kr?

Not a problem, when in Madeira next week I'll be dragging wide angles and zooms out of my Lowepro bag and my wife Trish will be snapping away with her Optio RZ10 (RZ18 is the new one)and taking much better pics than me at low ISO

Seriously though the 18 - 55 kit lens (I have the nice MK II with metal mount and quickfocus) is great over your shoulder in a soft case for most purposes when you don't want to carry the rucksack. The KR is hardly a chore to carry. I think we get obsessed with zooms (how many only use their telephoto at max or teir wide angle one at widest?). A 35mm fast prime seems to me a nice return to the days when we mostly had film SLRs with a 50mm Standard lens and couldn't afford anything else!

Now where did I put my Christmas wish list?...

To answer DrOrloff, basically I would either take a very compact compact that was unobtrusive, such as the I-10 or W90 that I use, or I would be carrying a camera bag anyway so within reason it wouldn't matter much. Pentax cameras and lenses are relatively light and compact.

For the minimum of messing, the 18-250mm would be ideal, but failing that any of the two lens kits would be just as good really.

The idea that we can get SLR quality from a compact with a lens that has immense zoom is fantasy. I've tested lenses that give incredible zoom ranges, but small apertures, poor quality and relatively high bulk make them pointless IMHO. And high cost of course.

Thanks people. I am looking for somthing to go in my pocket. So far I had a play with the Q and while the body is very small, with the lens on it's still "bulky" in the pocket. I also have had a look at the LX5 and Canon G12. So far the Canon is in the lead mainly because of rave reviews from other guys in the camera club and it also offers an optical viewfinder.

Hi,

I had the Canon G9 before my Pentax KX and now KR. The DSLRs are vastly superior in every way except size with equivalent lens.

The optical viewfinders on the G series are worse than useless. The cameras are good although I personally think the newest model over priced and over sized. The sensors are tiny as with all compacts compared to APSC with all the obvious shortcomings.

I chose the LX5 over the G12 as it is more compact and the picture quality is superb (although I have no doubt the Canon is just as good). I bought a seperate viewfinder which is attached to the strap should I need to use it.

The thing has more menus and options on it than my K-5 .. also it has constant AF video which I believe the Canon lacks. Didn't think that would make much difference but I quite often use the video (never touch it on the K-5).

What makes the viewfinder useless? I've had a look through the G12 version, it looked quite clear to me and it zoomed with the lens!

One of the guys from the camera club had 4 A4 prints last night two taken with the G12 and two with an EOS something and no one could see any difference. Mike, unfortunately I have not see any results yet from an LX5, or the Q for that matter

I liked my G9 BUT never used the tiny non parallax corrected viewfinder that I recall wasn't more than about 80% of the view compared to 100% on the LCD screen. Ohh and the lens got in the way! I've played with a friends G11 and no better. I confess the G12 i've only played with in a shop.

I really like them as compacts BUT they have got bigger and bigger dearer and dearer and I really have to say don't buy it for the optical viewfinder.

As to comparisons with DSLR's I can only repeat the Pentaxes are better value for money and better cameras all round for reasons posted on here many many times. Can't speak for Canon DSLRS. My pro friends have the big ones that are great BUT I've never liked the entry level Canon's thus I'm on here and loving my Pentax.

Have been toying with the idea of a go everywhere compact for certain situations. Q is not worth it imo, and would definietly need to shoot RAW. Shame Pentax don't cater for that.