P&S Advise Needed

S

Sailor Ted

Well-known
Local time
4:09 PM
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Messages
867
View My Gallery
I need a P&S camera for those situations where my M8 is too large. Any advise or thoughts behind suggestions would be greatly appreciated. One thing I must have is instant shutter exposure- no time lag or delay between the time I hit the shutter and the time the camera takes its exposure. Also being able to "easily" control depth of field and accurate auto focus would be nice as would film like grain at high ISO but not a lot of ugly digital "noise."

My top two choices are:

1. Ricoh GR Digital
2. Leica D-LUX 3

Hopefully someone out there has some experience regarding a good Walther PPK/S backup to our full frame side arms!
 
Last edited:
Wait a couple of years for the Leica CL-D?

But seriously, the GRd fits the bill BUT I've found it hard to pick up now that I've got my M8. All these P&S cameras have at least some lag but on the Ricoh it is barely noticable. It produces a lot more noise than the M8 but it is famously film like (especially in B&W). All that really means is that there is virtually no in-camera noise reduction. It's a good little camera but in image quality the M8 leaves it far, far behind.
 
Leica D-Lux3 is essentially a Panasonic DMC-LX2. All the P&S cameras that I have seen thus far with the exception of the Fuji has horrible high iso settings due to small sensors

P&S tend to also have very large DOF due to wide angle lens necessary for the small sensors. The actual focus length is probably less than 10mm to give the equivalence of 28mm.

Reviews
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/default.asp?view=alpha

Panasonic D-Lux3
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclx2/

Fuji F30 soon to be replace by F40
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf30/
 
The dlux3 has no lag unless you consider autofocus. It takes time to autofocus but if you prefocus or manual focus there's no lag.
To me, being able to zoom, which the Leica does, is important in a P&S.
The Leica is mostly worthless above iso200 but takes great pics at iso100.
If you shoot raw, the Ricoh has a ridiculously slow write time.
If you want an "artsy" camera, get the Ricoh. If you want a P&S, get the Leica.
 
Indeed the Ricoh has a 5.9mm f2.4 lens and hence a LOT of DOF. The lens itself seems pretty sharp it's the very small sensor that is the weak link.

And the RAW write time is indeed so long (about 12 seconds even with a fast SD card) that you can basically forget about using RAW unless it's for a 1 off important shot.
 
Last edited:
RFNewbie said:
Fuji F30 soon to be replace by F40
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf30/
Click to expand...

I fully endorse the F30 and all its excellence as a P&S

but if you wait for the F40FD http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Fujifilm/fuji_finepixf40fd.asp

It will use either XD or SD... big improvement for most people

Also Panasonic is coming out soon with some tasty new treats
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0701/07013105panasonictz2tz3.asp

and my personal interest http://www.dpreview.com/news/0701/07013104panasonicfx30.asp 28mm lens with OIS, ISO 1250 capabilites, and tiny
 
I had a GR-D when they first came out and sold it. Good build quality. Nice files for a P&S. Good 28mm lens which is too wide for me as a fixed lens. The real issue was that the camera was only really useable to me in JPEG since RAW write times were in the range of 13 seconds.

I currently have the DLux-3, which is a great little camera. Build quality and ergonomics of the Ricoh are slightly better. This camera has zoom and a good macro where the Ricoh does not. That is a big plus in a P&S to me. RAW speed is about 3 seconds which is fine. Files are very nice at 100 & 200. 400 & above is USELESS. No small sensor camera is going to give you very good selective DOF but the DLux3 does try and is much better than a 28mm fixed lens for this purpose. I really do like the B&W mode of the DLux3 where you can compose in B&W on the LCD. The LCD of the Leica is MUCH better than the Ricoh. File size is a drawback on the Leica as RAW files are about 20MB with no compression options and no way to eliminate the 3MB JPEG file it takes at the same time.

If I was you, I would wait till after PMA in another month and see what else gets introduced.

Between the Ricoh and the Leica/Pana, I think went with the Leica/Pana.

Best,

Ray
 
Why don't they put viewfinders on these anymore? I wanted to get a somewhat cheap digi p&s to always have with me but the lack of viewfinder kind of pisses me off 🙁

I think I'd grab one of the Fuji's F-line. They're really good in low light but some ppl say you need to get used to them...
 
Sailor Ted said:
I Also being able to "easily" control depth of field and accurate auto focus would be nice as would film like grain at high ISO but not a lot of ugly digital "noise."
Click to expand...

The Panasonic/Leica's are particularly unsuitable to your criterion of not ugly digital noise at high ISOs. The DLUX3 has the worst-looking noise (and the worst-lookingdetail-smearing noise-reduction) of any camera I've seen lately, much worse than the DLUX2. Honestly if you consider usable MP's rather than total MP's, the CLUX is the better choice. Also smaller.
 
There must be some demo DLUX2's out there at Leica dealers. Most people who buy that kind of camera count megapixels...that and the "3" being available in that cool matte black finish 😀

Another discontinued one to look out for is (sorry about this) the Canon S80. A true 28mm fov (3:2 format), a true direct viewfinder, 8.4MP (just about the limit for that size sensor before noise rears its ugly head), and very decent (lack of)shutter lag even with the AF working. Nice big bright LCD also. My wife's gal pal got refurbs for $325, one for herself and one for my wife, I can't pry it out of her hands.
 
RFNewbie said:
P&S tend to also have very large DOF due to wide angle lens necessary for the small sensors. The actual focus length is probably less than 10mm to give the equivalence of 28mm.
Click to expand...

The lens on the GRD is 5.9mm.
 
I had the Ricoh GR 1 and can testify that whilst it is a good camera it probably will not fit your criteria. My friend turned up the other week with a new Leica D-LUX 3 and whilst it is only my opinion I just didn't think that I was holding anything spectacular and the files it produced are no better or worse than many other PS cameras I have seen.

Again - I now refuse to buy a PS camera without an optical viewfinder. I've tried shooting by LCD composition and I just don't get it. The new Sigma PS sounds very very interesting or did sound interesting until I discovered that it also lacks an optical viewfinder.

What is needed is simply one or two manufacturers to have the courage to make proper photographic tools for those who want to shoot with a degree of seriousness.

The day that a real serious small PS arrives is the day I will rejoice.
 
I had the Ricoh GR 1 and can testify that whilst it is a good camera it probably will not fit your criteria. My friend turned up the other week with a new Leica D-LUX 3 and whilst it is only my opinion I just didn't think that I was holding anything spectacular and the files it produced are no better or worse than many other PS cameras I have seen.

Again - I now refuse to buy a PS camera without an optical viewfinder. I've tried shooting by LCD composition and I just don't get it. The new Sigma PS sounds very very interesting or did sound interesting until I discovered that it also lacks an optical viewfinder.

What is needed is simply one or two manufacturers to have the courage to make proper photographic tools for those who want to shoot with a degree of seriousness.

The day that a real serious small PS arrives is the day I will rejoice.
 
If it is going to be used like most Leicas are (available light) then the Fuji F30 gets my vote. Great low light capabilities and very responsive shutter.
 
Thanks for the info and hopefully this helps us all. I'll take a look at the Fuji. Regarding the need for an optical viewfinder, does the attached image of the GRD not fit the bill?

Also if interested does anyone have anything to comment regarding these shots made with the GRD? http://www.flickr.com/photos/matador_snaps/page2/
 

Attachments

  • grd.jpg
    grd.jpg
    88.2 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
I don't see all the fuss about an optical viewfinder. With a zoom lens, the optical viewfinder is going to be a tough match for what's actually being recorded. For a fixed lens, it's okay but hardly a necessity, imo. Maybe it because I see the LCD as being more in the tradition of ground-glass focussing.
 
Nick R. said:
I don't see all the fuss about an optical viewfinder. With a zoom lens, the optical viewfinder is going to be a tough match for what's actually being recorded. For a fixed lens, it's okay but hardly a necessity, imo. Maybe it because I see the LCD as being more in the tradition of ground-glass focussing.
Click to expand...

I really can't explain it. But I like to look in the viewfinder instead of looking at a screen. specially when it's a really bright day. I can't seem to photograph in the same way without a viewfinder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom