 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / April 2005P&S recommendations
Tired of hauling my big SLR around at times, so I'd like to get a nice little P&S film camera to just slide in my pocket. Something like a 28-80 or so on the zoom. Any thoughts? Alternatively, I would like to have a digital with similar specs, where shots would not be enlarged beyond 5x7 or so. Thanks! It's not a zoom, but the Olympus Stylus Epic is an incredible little camera. I am sure mine will be only one of many recommendations. It's very small and handy and weatherproof, and a very sharp lens (35mm, f2.8). Pretty cheap, too. > It's not a zoom, but the Olympus Stylus Epic is an incredible little > camera. I am sure mine will be only one of many recommendations. It's > very small and handy and weatherproof, and a very sharp lens (35mm, > f2.8). Pretty cheap, too. Yes the Epic is a great little performer, especially if you make use of the spot metering and forget the flash mode. But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders from the 1970s, which have great (non zoom) lenses and are no bigger than many P+Ss , but give you full manual control to be as creative as you like, are perhaps more fun to use, built like tanks, and usually not battery-dependent e.g. Olympus RC (probably the smallest and my own favourite) or the slightly larger Canon equivalents. > But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders from > the 1970s... I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders. It fits handily into a larger coat pocket. I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on it. And I love the lighter weight. *>UncaMikey >> But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders > from [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders. > It fits handily into a larger coat pocket. The mercury battery is not really a big problem since it only powers the meter. The shutter is mechanical. Solution - forget the battery and use the sunny 16 exposure rule (which works perfectly) or, if you must have the meter, use a 675 1.4 volt zinc -air hearing aid battery (doesn't last long, but dirt cheap for a six pack). As for the seals - you can fix them in 20 min using strips of foam cut from a computer mouse pad. I have not handled a Pentax ist, but would be surprised if it is comparable in size with the Olympus RC, which is really small for a full function rangefinder. > I have not handled > a Pentax ist, but would be surprised if it is comparable in size > with the Olympus RC, which is really small for a full function rangefinder. According to cameraquest, the Olympus RC is 4.5 x 2.95 x 2 inches, and 15 oz. Pentax ist body (per Pentax) is 4.8 x 3.3 x 2.5 inches, and 11.8 oz. The FA 50mm f1.7 adds about 6 oz and another inch. Those measurements make them sound pretty close, although the lens on the Pentax will protrude more. As for functions and features, the Pentax has far more than I will ever master, LOL -- you can go from full auto to full manual and everything in between, with plenty of focus and metering options. But I think both of these are a bit too big for a carry everywhere P&S, unlike the Olympus SE. I know there are workarounds and fixes for seals and mercury batteries, but I dealt with that stuff before, and got tired of it all. Sometimes modern technology is a Good Thing. YMMV, of course. *>UncaMikey > But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders from > the 1970s... I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders. It fits handily into a larger coat pocket. I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on it. And I love the lighter weight. *>UncaMikey > But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders from > the 1970s... I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders. It fits handily into a larger coat pocket. I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on it. And I love the lighter weight. *>UncaMikey > But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders > from the 1970s... I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders. It fits handily into a larger coat pocket. I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on it. And I love the lighter weight. *>UncaMikey > [three blank posts????] eeeuuuww! I just noticed that, it looks ugly! Sorry, folks -- blame it on google posting combined with an older version of Safari -- it couldn't have been MY fault! *>UncaMikey >Tired of hauling my big SLR around at times, so I'd like to get a nice >little P&S film camera to just slide in my pocket. Something like a 28-80 or [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Thanks! The Olympus Stylus Epic with 35mm f2.8 non-zoom lens is an excellent camera. The Contax T3 with similar lens is also but at a much higher price point and much more controllability. I've used both for primary and backup camera in lieu of a SLR when I had to pare down. For the digital, I have a Canon S60 with 28-100mm equivalent zoom lens that is one of the few compact P&S digital cameras with a 28mm wide end. This is also an excellent camera - with near SLR like controllability - but with clearly a P&S release/lag time. Even with the latter, I have gotten a lot of very good use from it as a daily carry and travel camera. BTW: the film P&S cameras are also burdened with the same kind of P&S focus reaction time although with the T3 and the S60 digital, you can choose presets that almost eliminate the lag. Hope this helps. I'm hanging on to my P&S cameras because of their compactness, versatility and durability. For some kinds of photography they do the equivalent of a SLR with consumer lens quality. The Epic and T3 are so good that I've never considered a film P&S with a zoom. There are not many pictures I've take that could have been improved dramatically at the 4x6 / 5x7 level with a zoom. These cameras do, however, fit my style of photography - friends, family, events, travel, street. The same could not be said for making African Safari Brochures. Regards, Roger > >Tired of hauling my big SLR around at times, so I'd like to get a > >nice little P&S film camera to just slide in my pocket. Something [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > excellent camera. The Contax T3 with similar lens is also but at a > much higher price point and much more controllability. I've used both > for primary and backup camera in lieu of a SLR when I had to pare > down. [SNIP] > The Epic and T3 are so good that I've never considered a film P&S > with a zoom. There are not many pictures I've take that could have > been improved dramatically at the 4x6 / 5x7 level with a zoom. > These cameras do, however, fit my style of photography - friends, > family, events, travel, street. The same could not be said for making > African Safari Brochures. If you go this route and decide you can do without a zoom - which I think is good advice - you should also look at the Ricoh GR series. Sadly no longer in production, but findable on that auction site. The GR1 (of which the GR1v is the latest, most controllable model) has a truly superb 28mm f2.8, and is a great camera: my normal 'pocket' camera when I have nothing else with me. The GR10 is considerably cheaper with less control, but the same excellent lens. There's also a GR21 with 21mm lens and price to match (but it is excellent) and some cheaper options, including the R1 wiht a 30mm lens, which I do like as a cheap but quite good back up camera. Peter > If you go this route and decide you can do without a zoom - which I think is > good advice - you should also look at the Ricoh GR series. Sadly no longer > in production, but findable on that auction site. Leica has several nice models their P&S range, if the higher price is acceptable. There also may be some Contax P&S camera on dealer shelves. Rollei USA was selling off two of their P&S models for $70.00, just before they discontinued operations. > Tired of hauling my big SLR around at times, so I'd like to get a nice > little P&S film camera to just slide in my pocket. Something like a 28-80 or > so on the zoom. Any thoughts? With the demise of the Minolta FZE/Riva 28-75 and Konica Lexio 28-70, the Yashica T4*Zoom might be your best best. I don't know if you'll be able to get it serviced however, now that Kyocera has given up the camera business. Olympus makes a Stylus Wide 28-100 but it's a slow f/11.9 at the long end, yikes! It's probably not worth paying extra for the Leica C2 or C3. just got a Vivitar 38-140mm for $55. Vivitar 35mm seem to be best value, same quality, _much_ lower prices than Canon, Olympus, Minolta, etc. > just got a Vivitar 38-140mm for $55. > Vivitar 35mm seem to be best value, same quality, _much_ lower prices > than Canon, Olympus, Minolta, etc. dream on Mr. Big Dick. There are no free lunches. Haven't you learned yet that the longer is zoom range, the crappier is lens quality? AndresV > > just got a Vivitar 38-140mm for $55. > > Vivitar 35mm seem to be best value, same quality, _much_ lower prices > > than Canon, Olympus, Minolta, etc. > > dream on Mr. Big Dick. There are no free lunches. Haven't you learned ^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is actually a translation of the name to English from Russian, not name calling... > yet that the longer is zoom range, the crappier is lens quality? Never mind that its actually attached to a P&S camera ;-) > AndresV  SignatureSander +++ Out of cheese error +++ Never found the P/S camera with a great zoom optic at the long end. The Pentax 928 came close, followed by the Olympus Stylus that goes to 28-100mm. (Skip the Samsungs, Vivitars, and Minoltas.) For sheer pocketability and SLR-like optics, the Olympus Stylus Epic wins, followed by the Olympus XA (which gives manual control of focus, EV, film speed setting and aperture). Both have amazing 35mm f2.8 lens optics. For wide-angle, the Ricoh GR-1 gives astounding results in a very compact form. This all assumes you're devoted to film images, of course. "(Skip the Samsungs, Vivitars, and Minoltas.) For sheer pocketability and SLR-like optics, " BS. I have taken great photos with $5 disposables. Skip paying mucho more for so-called "pro" brand names like Nikon and Canon. I bet if I upload my photos you wont be able to tell which were taken with a Vivitar, digital, SLR, or disposable. (Mr.Bolshoy Huy) wrote: > I have taken great photos with $5 > disposables. Skip paying mucho more > for so-called "pro" brand names like > Nikon and Canon. >I bet if I upload my photos you wont be > able to tell which were taken with a > Vivitar, digital, SLR, or disposable. You had an eye exam lately? :) Cody, http://community-2.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/PhotographyLinks (Mr.Bolshoy Huy) wrote: >I have taken great photos with $5 >disposables. I believe you. The reason you "upgraded" to P/S is probably poor zoom range of disposables? >I bet if I upload my photos you wont be >able to tell which were taken with a >Vivitar, digital, SLR, or disposable. Quite possible. It depends too much on your scanner, scanning technique etc. However, I have seen sigificant differences between the ones taken with disposable and the ones taken with decent P/S. Like Olympus Mju http://www.busheron.ru/master/camera/olympus-mju2.jpg AndresV > I bet if I upload my photos you wont be able to tell which were taken > with a Vivitar, digital, SLR, or disposable. Yes, some people are pretty bad with their SLR's. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. Yes, one-time cameras are okay in certain situations. So is a homemade pinhole camera. But today's plastic Vivitars and Minoltas are a joke; they simply haven't proven as well-built as the cameras I mentioned earlier. My Minolta Freedom Zoom Explorer has a very nice lens that's trapped in a body where lint gets into the viewfinder and the zoom mechanism makes more noise than a 20-year-old Kawasaki dirt bike. Nikon? Not the P/S king by any stretch. Nor is Canon. They're simply trading off their pro brand reputation in cheap consumer models. Anyone who bought Canon's Z90W will confirm this for you. For the amount of money John has to spend, he'll get a much better camera if he simply bypasses the zoom P/S models and zooms with his feet. Rock on. -CD > Tired of hauling my big SLR around at times, so I'd like to get a > nice little P&S film camera to just slide in my pocket. Something > like a 28-80 or so on the zoom. Any thoughts? I've been happy with my Minolta Freedom Zoom Explorer, 28-70, I haven't used it in years, let me know if you want to buy it. > Alternatively, I would like to have a digital with similar specs, > where shots would not be enlarged beyond 5x7 or so. I suggest Canon SD200. Not quite as wide at the wide end as you'd like, but tinier than any full frame 35mm camera. If you don't mind something a little bigger, I suggest the less expensive A510, which uses normal AA cells instead of a proprietary lithium rechargeable. Thanks to all. I settled on the Olympus Stylus Epic, bought new on eBay for under $40. John |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.