Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Sitwon
277
Dec 7, 2018
Priced about $25 less than Amazon. What I find fascinating about this particular camera is that it's a very ruggedized point-and-shoot... with the the ability to shoot RAWs. While there are a few other point-and-shoots that can capture RAW, the vast majority do not. Also, the lens on the wide end has a 35mm equivalent of a 25mm FOV, which is slightly wider than average for a point-and-shoot camera. Not quite wide enough that I would recommend it for real estate photography, but I'm sure this is targeted more at the travel/sports segment. I could see this as an alternate for the DSLR/mirrorless addict who is worried about damaging their equipment in a wet, sandy, high-impact environment*; but still wants to edit RAWs in LR. *: the beach, ski slopes, water sports, thru-hiking, construction site, in the hands of kids...
(Edited)
smallbit
1328
Dec 7, 2018
SitwonI like that they used a wide FOV and 12mp sensor... It's like they thought "Instead of competing with cell phones, let's just make a giant cell phone camera and even use the same sensor as always." I want to like new cameras... But my samsung s9+ eats most of them alive.
Sitwon
277
Dec 7, 2018
smallbitI mostly agree with you. Flagship smartphones have truly impressive cameras these days. Many of them can shoot raw. But it doesn't even matter because with the advanced computational photography techniques they implement you can get some amazing shots. Using automatic frame stacking they can emulate HDR and shallow DoF, or they can deliver sharper, cleaner low-light shots... all without the work of manually editing. If you just want to snap and share, there's really no question. In comparison to the Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus: This camera is half the price. Has a significantly better flash than an LED with a fresnel lens. Has 4x optical zoom, not software interpolated zoom. Has a BSI sensor, which should deliver cleaner low-light RAWs. Focuses as close as 1cm for macro photography. Can log not just location and orientation (GPS, compass), but also temperature and atmospheric pressure. Waterproof to 50ft and shockproof to 7ft. Can be operated when wet (touchscreens suck in the rain). Works in sub-freezing temperatures, and can be operated with gloves on. It's not all-around better than a flagship smartphone, but it does have some advantages that just might justify the cost for some use cases.
(Edited)
Jaysun
1855
Dec 7, 2018
SitwonPriced about $50 less than Amazon.
smallbit
1328
Dec 7, 2018
SitwonI disagree with "Has a BSI sensor, which should deliver cleaner low-light RAWs." due to ---> "both phones have Samsung's fancy new 12-megapixel dual-aperture camera (which lets in more light by adjusting the size of the phone's iris, much like a DSLR), only the Galaxy S9 Plus has a second 12-megapixel camera with a 2x telephoto lens " which is ACTUAL HDR. S9+ is ip68 while this is rated ipx8 which the average user probably wouldn't need to tell the difference on unless you were going deep sea diving which would really require a super low light sensor anyway. But the phone has it beat with the equivalent of a f1.2. Not trying to troll just pointing out that this product is probably not going to be ongoing in production as demand dwindles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJYqgZDmsZo
Sitwon
277
Dec 7, 2018
JaysunAmazon lists it as $399 w/ free shipping. But right now they're offering it with a 5% off coupon, so that drops it to $379. MD has it listed at $350, plus another $5 for shipping (to the USA), for a total of $355. 379 - 355 = 24 Plus, if bought it with my Prime Visa card I'd get another 5% back from Amazon. So really the difference is more like $4. https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B0711C1R4X/
Jaysun
1855
Dec 7, 2018
SitwonThat certainly makes more sense with a little explanation. Thanks for breaking it down as I am sure I was not the only one wondering how that worked.
Jaysun
1855
Dec 7, 2018
JaysunWhich camera would you recommend for real estate photography?
Sitwon
277
Dec 7, 2018
smallbitWith the S9+ can you shoot RAW? Does it give you one RAW or two? Does it perform interpolation on the RAW before you get it, or does it give you the actual readout of each sensor? Or maybe you just get the readout of one sensor? This is sort of what I was alluding to earlier. The S9+ gets you better results quicker by using software interpolation to combine multiple frames, potentially using two sensors at once, to give you a JPEG that is probably in most cases better than the in-camera JPEG of the TG-5. But what does the RAW look like? Is it better or the same or worse? A BSI sensor should have less noise at an equivalent exposure. It's purpose it to increase the light captured by the sensor, all other things being equal. Physically, both of the cameras on the S9+ are smaller than just the lens of the TG-5, even though each of them has a sensor of nearly equal size (1/2.55 "and 1/3.6" vs 1/2.3"). Just given the physics, that kind of size reduction seems implausible without making some trade-offs. Whatever distortions or aberrations are being created are probably corrected by the software before you see the final image. If the viewer can't tell the difference, then maybe it doesn't actually matter. But I would still find it interesting to know.
Sitwon
277
Dec 8, 2018
JaysunI'm not actually sure yet what I would recommend for real estate. It's something I've been thinking about and researching recently. The ideal would be for realtors to hire a professional to shoot their listings. I was hoping to find something that would also work for home inspectors, insurance adjusters, and property managers. On paper, the Casio EX-ZR5000 looks like a good fit. But it doesn't seem to be available anymore, except on eBay. https://www.dpreview.com/products/casio/compacts/casio_zr5000/specifications Failing that, it seems the larger SLR-like point-and-shoots are the next best fit, and indeed I've seen a lot of realtors who use them. But honestly aside from gaining a slightly wider FOV I think any flagship smartphone and even many more moderately prices smartphones can outperform these clunkers. I'm actually eager to test the front-facing, wide-angle, "groupie" lens on the Pixel 3 for taking real-estate shots. I believe the front-facing cameras give it an equivalent of a 19mm field of view. The obvious downside is the lower resolution of the front-facing camera. So at the moment, the best option seems to be: buy the cheapest ILC + kit lens you can find with the best low-light performance you can afford and also grab a rectilinear ultra-wide angle lens for it, even if it's just a cheap Chinese manual-focus lens. For instance, start with the Canon Rebel T6 w/ standard and telephoto zooms for $449. (Already you're getting more capability for around the same price as the SLR-like "bridge" cameras.) Then add the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 @ $259. Total price: $708. You can get a similar Nikon setup for about the same price. Fuji and Sony each clock in around $1000 for equivalent packages. An equivalent MFT kit (Kodak PIXPRO S-1 kit + Laowa 7.5mm f/2) will set you back just under $800. So you can see why on paper that <$400, pocket-friendly Casio point-and-shoot would look so appealing. It offers seemingly equivalent capabilities to a much bulkier $700+ kit.
smallbit
1328
Dec 8, 2018
SitwonNifty fifty would probably work better for real estate if you were on a budget and using a rebel t6 right? edit: oh i see you want the bubble shots. hahah. just get an old use asymmetrical monster. you can find old nikon lenses for cheap and buy the adapter.
(Edited)
Sitwon
277
Dec 8, 2018
smallbitActually, no. Not for most shots, at least. I'm not going to say you can't shoot real estate with a 50mm, but for most properties it's probably not the best choice. For real estate photography, you typically want to go as wide as possible. The first shot buyers will want to see is the whole front of the house or building as viewed from the street. Unless the place is a "tiny house", that requires a wide-angle lens. Next, buyers want to get a sense of the size, shape, and layout from the pictures. As they flip through the pictures, they want to be able to build a mental model of how big each room is, and how it connects with the previous one. Even a 35mm lens can be too narrow for this, as you may need 3 or 4 shots to cover a cover a smaller room, which can become disorienting and confusing for the prospective buyer. It also makes it difficult to tell how big or small the room actually is. I'd say that 95% of the photos buyers want to see will be wide-angle shots. The other 5% that you might use a 50mm or longer lens for would be things like detail shots of specific features (a new appliance, or a hand-carved fireplace). Or showing damage that the seller is disclosing. Ultra-wide lenses are the ideal. The National Association of Realtors recommends 12-18mm on a full-frame DSLR. That's roughly 8-12mm for an APS-C camera. https://www.nar.realtor/digital-cameras-photography
Sitwon
277
Dec 10, 2018
JaysunHaving researched more, I now have a recommendation. For anyone in real estate or adjacent industries who needs to take decent RE photos without the bulk or investment in a DSLR, I would suggest the Moment Wide 18mm smartphone lens. $100 lens + $30 phone-specific case/mount = $130 total investment. It gets you significantly wider shots than you'd get with your un-aided smartphone. Targeting an equivalence of 18mm give you a horizontal field-of-view of about 90-degrees. Enough to mostly capture a room in one shot, or get a full street-view of a building without having to stand impractically far away. For phones that might need a little help on the telephoto end, Moment also sells a 58mm telephoto lens, which can help capture some tighter shots as well. Even if you need to also carry a small point-and-shoot for super-telephoto shots, it's still worth the $130 investment to capture better wide-angle shots. Of the wide-angle smartphone lenses on the market, the Moment 18mm has the least apparent distortion, which is a must for real-estate or architectural photography where you want nice straight lines. Once you have a nice low-distortion image, there are free apps like SKRWT that can help adjust the perspective.
smallbit
1328
Dec 10, 2018
SitwonWow check out how tiny it is! I like it! But with my dual lenses I do not believe I can fit it. But if I had a normal s9 and not the s9+... I would have bought this in a heartbeat. Great recommendation!
search
search

cbsamc
1
Dec 11, 2018
SitwonI was also looking at this camera but primarily for shooting underwater - snorkeling, water parks, etc. Tried the iPhone (7 plus) in the waterproof cases or bags and the results were pretty bad or plenty of missed shots. This looks like a good replacement for those situations. If not for underwater, there are loads of point-and-shoots that would do a much better job although at a higher price points (Sony RX100, Canon, Panasonic, etc.) Thanks for the price break down though - tend to agree that the discount is not enough to replace Amazon. But that's a person choice.
smallbit
1328
Dec 11, 2018
cbsamcYou know new phones are waterproof right?
Sitwon
277
Dec 11, 2018
smallbitThat's not really true. They may be a lot more water resistant than they used to be, but they're certainly not intended for underwater photography. Water damage is not covered by the manufacturer warranty for any phone I've seen, and touchscreen controls do not work well when the screen is wet.
smallbit
1328
Dec 11, 2018
SitwonWe already talked about this Sitwon. I assumed cbsamc didn't read what I wrote but I'll just link a video I guess? You guys like some videos ya? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1j5ckZwKEQ Here is normal swimming with the s9+ that a lady posted that is exactly the usage I was describing here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlQzifnTk7U
Sitwon
277
Dec 11, 2018
smallbitBoth of those videos show the phone being submerged while on, and there is sufficient waterproofing that they don't immediately fail. However NEITHER of those videos demonstrates operating the phone while underwater. Try it yourself, stick your phone in a bucket of water and then try to change camera settings (adjust focus point, zoom, exposure, etc.) I bet you'll find that the screen becomes a lot less responsive when submerged or even just wet.
smallbit
1328
Dec 11, 2018
SitwonThe entire second video is the lady operating the phone underwater. She even shows you the screen and touches it. She event tries bixby which was a nice touch.
Sitwon
277
Dec 11, 2018
smallbitI watched the video. She shows the screen working underwater, but I don't see her operating it while the phone is submerged. Nowhere in the video does she try to touch the screen and manipulate it while it's underwater. But please, make a video of your own phone in a bucket of water and show us how well it works.
cbsamc
1
Dec 11, 2018
smallbitJust watched the first one - the S9 is impressive although from the spec perspective, S9 and iPhone do have different ratings (where S9 is better I think, IP68?). But I have an iPhone 7P, which is at best the same waterproof rating as the X shown in the first video. I paid a bunch at the time for the iPhone 7P, and I did a bit of reading specifically on the IP67 rating on the iPhone, which frankly should say water "resistant" than water"proof". So again, to each his/her own. Given Apple Care does NOT cover water damage, I choose not to test that. :-)
smallbit
1328
Dec 12, 2018
SitwonBut then I would have to put my phone under water. WHAT ARE YOU CRAZY?! :P
(Edited)