ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
Reality check?
Reality check?
Most of the cameras recommended so far sell for over $300 used.
Chris
Reality check?
Most of the cameras recommended so far sell for over $300 used.
Chris
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Agreed. The camera has only six defects:
1. The film wind motor is not silent.
2. The on-off switch can be triggered (and extend the lens) a bit too easily, so not all soft cases are suitable.
3. The GR-1 does not take filters or a hood (the latter is not a huge problem; it's very flare-resistant).
4. Used copies not infrequently have dodgy electronics.
5. No hot shoe.
6. The lens is a 28mm rather than 24 or 35, which I prefer.
That last is a very subjective, personal, and petty gripe.
In every other respect, the GR-1 is simply a perfect little camera with a fabulous lens and the most beautiful body design of any compact 35mm camera ever made — including the small Leica, Contax, Nikon, Minox and Rollei designs, and equalled only by the XA. Unlike some of those others, it is not jewelry, but a ruthlessly functional Bauhaussian camera.
In my opinion, of course.
There's a RFF thread for images taken with GR-1 series cameras.
Lots more useful information here.
Last edited:
Wcarpenter
Established
Another vote for the Contax T2. It documented most of my early childhood and was the first real camera I ever messed with. Needless to say, it got me hooked. The black and white images coming from the Sonnar lens are really stunning.
micromoogman
Well-known
Rollei AFM 35 is affordable with a great lens.
Tzelet
-
Thank you all, I really appreciate it. After some intensive searching around, it seems that the Ricoh is the one I'm looking for.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
You won't be wanting more from the Ricoh.
JohnTF
Veteran
I still have a Leica Mini with an Elmar fixed lens, -- image quality is there and you can buy a few pairs of jeans with the money left over.
J
J
f16sunshine
Moderator
T2/T3
I have the T2 now. Would like to try a T3 at some point.
The sonnar lens in these cameras is off the hook. Very simply to use with excellent metering. Well worth the $250 the T2 usually tops out at.
I have the T2 now. Would like to try a T3 at some point.
The sonnar lens in these cameras is off the hook. Very simply to use with excellent metering. Well worth the $250 the T2 usually tops out at.
nonot
Well-known
I'd go the ricoh route too, I've had the contax t, t2, t3 and they are not a p&s, too big, out of your price range (respectively), if you're not too fussed with size, a t2 is hard to beat though. Also look at some of the other options out there if you don't HAVE to spend $300. Olympus stylus epics routinely pop up for $100 and under, you can get a yashica t4 for $150 or you could get a konica big mini for about $40 give or take...
A gr1 will make you happy though.
A gr1 will make you happy though.
_goodtimez
Well-known
For less than the price of a throw away camera you can buy an old Canon PRIMA on Ebay with a fixed focal lens.
Insert 2 AA batteries and a roll of Tri-X and off you go !
Each of my kids have one (payed 1 € each, the camera not the kids
and I am sometimes jalous.
Truly P&S with just a few adjustments but good picture quality
Insert 2 AA batteries and a roll of Tri-X and off you go !
Each of my kids have one (payed 1 € each, the camera not the kids
and I am sometimes jalous.Truly P&S with just a few adjustments but good picture quality
pagpow
Well-known
+ 1 on the above -- haven't followed prices lately but were recently available for $50 used
As good as that is, I think two other cameras well below your price point beat it.
The Yashica T4 Super D -- prices have been rising there.
The Minolta, Explorer Freedom zoom w 28-70 zoom lens, sequential shooting possible. around $12 new or mint on eBay.
Both the Minolta and the Oly Stylus Epic are inexpensive enough that you can try them and not worry about the choice. If you don't like them, move on up.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
The slightly older Olympus Stylus with the fixed 35/3.5 lens and slightly more rectangular profile is just as sharp and fast as the later 35/2.8 Epics but they sell for peanuts.... I bought one for $8 and another for $13. At these prices I buy them and give them to the kids and friends as needed.
Granted a GR1 or T3 feels nicer in the hand but save your money for a Leica. In the situations where you want a P&S simple camera then why do you need something that fancy? You're shooting pretty loosey-goosey in the first place....
Granted a GR1 or T3 feels nicer in the hand but save your money for a Leica. In the situations where you want a P&S simple camera then why do you need something that fancy? You're shooting pretty loosey-goosey in the first place....
Last edited:
David Hughes
David Hughes
The problem is, as I see it, that smallness and f/2·8 and zooms don't go together.
You have to say f/2·8 and a prime lens in a smallish package or else accept that f/3·5 or f/4·5 is where they (zooms) start. And $300 seems a lot to hand over for what could be had for a fraction of the price and even completely checked , serviced etc by the makers.
Just to make it harder still, you ought to add an "infinity" mode to the list and centre weighted or spot metering. Or else look for something with a +1½EV or +2Ev over-ride for into the sun or snow etc. Being able to switch off the flash in a hurry is also high on my list.
Speaking only of those I've owned and used I'd suggest the Leica C3 or mini* (C3 for zoom and mini for prime); Olympus µ-II and XA (mostly for the lens etc) and the Canon Z70W. And there's the Konica Revio Z2 in APS; it may well surpise you in terms of performance to size.
Sorry I can't suggest more, I don't like offering suggestions about cameras I've not owned and used.
Good luck with the quest.
Regards, David
PS The Leica mini is a lovely little package and highly recommended as a dirt cheap Leica. I don't know what people have against it apart from the fact that it's plastic and was sub-contracted out by Leica. It's one failing is that it's easy to pick up with your finger on the lens... But the lens has a coated, clear (UVa) protective filter in front of it that can usually be cleaned of grubby finger prints.
You have to say f/2·8 and a prime lens in a smallish package or else accept that f/3·5 or f/4·5 is where they (zooms) start. And $300 seems a lot to hand over for what could be had for a fraction of the price and even completely checked , serviced etc by the makers.
Just to make it harder still, you ought to add an "infinity" mode to the list and centre weighted or spot metering. Or else look for something with a +1½EV or +2Ev over-ride for into the sun or snow etc. Being able to switch off the flash in a hurry is also high on my list.
Speaking only of those I've owned and used I'd suggest the Leica C3 or mini* (C3 for zoom and mini for prime); Olympus µ-II and XA (mostly for the lens etc) and the Canon Z70W. And there's the Konica Revio Z2 in APS; it may well surpise you in terms of performance to size.
Sorry I can't suggest more, I don't like offering suggestions about cameras I've not owned and used.
Good luck with the quest.
Regards, David
PS The Leica mini is a lovely little package and highly recommended as a dirt cheap Leica. I don't know what people have against it apart from the fact that it's plastic and was sub-contracted out by Leica. It's one failing is that it's easy to pick up with your finger on the lens... But the lens has a coated, clear (UVa) protective filter in front of it that can usually be cleaned of grubby finger prints.
NickTrop
Veteran
The short answer is - no. And the second question is - why would you want to? If the S90 gives you all you need, then why do you want a film camera? Get off the GAS train. Here's why the answer is no, and I speak from experience. The Fuji F20 is my "S90". I've owned all kinds of rangefinders and other film cameras in search of the "have with me 24/7" camera. This includes the tiny "Konica Auto S3" and the Yashica Electro CC - both fine near-mint samples. Loved using them for a while, they both gave great output - but- The 24/7 camera does not exist in the film world. Give up the search... You will end up disappointed and running back to your S90.
A. Very few film cameras have collapsable lenses. Your S90 does. This is a major reason you take your S90 with you. What film cameras have collapsable lenses? Retinas? Other obsolete film folders that are 1/2-century old? Fine cameras in their time - and smaller than the others but these cameras are significantly heavier and bigger than your S90 - you will be well aware of their annoying presence in your pocket - if they even fit. Digital technology enabled the pocketable camera. This is why your S90 is your 24/7 camera.
A2. See the other cameras recommended here? Fine cameras, sure. They all have lenses that jut out. Forget them, no matter how small they are. These are better options if you don't want to lug an SLR around all day when you're going somewhere. But they're not "27/7" cameras like your S90 and my F20. I've been down this road before, trust me.
B. Film. Your S90 lets you shoot as many pictures as you want. 100's on a fully charged battery. And I bet there are days you took the digital equivalent of rolls and rolls of film. This is film that has to be purchased, carried, processed, and printed. All of which is something else that needs to be carried around with you (in addition to the extra bulk of the camera itself...) and the costs of these consumables (and/or time and effort) is not insignificant if you shoot at any volume. Soon you will have rolls and rolls of undeveloped film lying around. You will also be much more selective in what you want to shoot because of the expense. Eventually you will grab your S90 more and more often for this reason.
C. Filters and Flashes. Your S90 has 1. auto ISO (I'm guessing) all the way up to 1600 ISO. It also has auto white balance. A small zoom lens that covers semi-wide, normal, and short-tele ranges. - In addition (guessing) to macro. It has a small built-in flash. In short, you can shoot in any condition with this camera. Color indoors in tungsten light? No problem - reset the white balance. This would require a filter with film. Loss of f-stop, and something else to carry around (or live with the cast). Some of the cameras suggested don't have a flash. Most that do have flash built-in have slower lenses than the f2.0 on your S90.
In short, you carry your S90 around with you 24/7 because it fits in your pocket without issue, weighs only a few ounces, and is a camera that allows you to shoot unlimited with good quality in any condition. Others will disagree vehemently but NO film camera can give you what the S90 does for the reasons I've outlined. (Don't listen to them - they're zealots. Good folks but film zealots
Digital technology enabled the "24/7 shoot anytime as much as you want" camera. Therefore, film cameras - every single one of them, is precluded from being that camera. So, the answer to your initial question is "No, there isn't a film equivalent of the fine S90 you already own..." The recommendations here are all fine cameras. They're not replacements for your S90 in the film world. Shoot these cameras for other reasons, of which there are many. Don't go down this slippery slope. These cameras - after the initial joy of purchase, will wind up sitting on a shelf (or put up for sale) like a kids "gotta have" Christmas toy 6 months after their elation on Christmas morning unwrapping the box.
Last edited:
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
It is not impossible, and has been done. The Fuji Silvi starts at f/2.8 (of course is not constant aperture, IIRC it is down to f/5.6 at 50mm). But the age of film compacts was pretty much over by that time.
NickTrop
Veteran
Other advice... Digital cameras, especially point-n-shooters, don't give output like a film print if this is your motive for wanting a film "S90". But a little work in Photoshop - basic sharpining, some light noise reduction, some little tricks to get your pics to "pop" and they will look just as good, if not better. So, if the IQ of your S90 doesn't give you what you want, work on your post skills. And, you don't need Photoshop either. Elements, Paint, The Gimp will do just fine.
I'll go out on a limb here and argue that the images below taken with my F20 - technical quality-wise (sharpness, colors, "dynamic range" etc. - not content/composition), are in the same league as any of the film cameras suggested to you and if these images came from any of these film cameras their users would never know the difference looking at a print. These images did not look like this straight out of the camera but took all of a couple minutes in a photoeditor to make them pop a bit:
$80 used cheap-azz Fuji F20:
You're also not "stuck with" the film in the camera. Want black and white of the same image? G'head:
Was it taken with a Leica with a Cron with Trix-X developed in Rodinal - standing dev, blah, blah, blah? Or a cheap azz Fuji soccer-mom silver digital? Well, it was taken with a cheap used digital but if this came out of a Leica film camera - scanned or in print, nobody - trust me, would be able to tell the difference.
... And your camera is newer/better than mine! And know something else? I would never in a million years go on a water park ride with a Leica with a Cron (or most of the other film cameras mentioned above)... but I would with my cheap azz used "24/7" Fuji. So this picture wouldn't have even been taken with my film cameras - even my "slum dog" (by Leica user standards) Konica Auto S3 or Electro CC (my two most compact film cameras...). Think about it... Give up your quest, lad. Before it's too late!
I'll go out on a limb here and argue that the images below taken with my F20 - technical quality-wise (sharpness, colors, "dynamic range" etc. - not content/composition), are in the same league as any of the film cameras suggested to you and if these images came from any of these film cameras their users would never know the difference looking at a print. These images did not look like this straight out of the camera but took all of a couple minutes in a photoeditor to make them pop a bit:
$80 used cheap-azz Fuji F20:
You're also not "stuck with" the film in the camera. Want black and white of the same image? G'head:
Was it taken with a Leica with a Cron with Trix-X developed in Rodinal - standing dev, blah, blah, blah? Or a cheap azz Fuji soccer-mom silver digital? Well, it was taken with a cheap used digital but if this came out of a Leica film camera - scanned or in print, nobody - trust me, would be able to tell the difference.
... And your camera is newer/better than mine! And know something else? I would never in a million years go on a water park ride with a Leica with a Cron (or most of the other film cameras mentioned above)... but I would with my cheap azz used "24/7" Fuji. So this picture wouldn't have even been taken with my film cameras - even my "slum dog" (by Leica user standards) Konica Auto S3 or Electro CC (my two most compact film cameras...). Think about it... Give up your quest, lad. Before it's too late!
Last edited:
btgc
Veteran
There are "flat" film cameras, Yashica 72-E to name any, and I'm sure there are some even more flat. It has zero wake-up time. Sure, it can't do 2.2fps though it's considerably faster to advance because of left-hand thumbwheel. Depress release and keep advancing...it works like a motordrive
.....
Small flat half-frame camera isn't bad candidate for visual notebook, except you NEED instant feedback. One thing is what you WANT, another is what you NEED. People who need instant feedback mostly use cell phones with camera for quick grabshots, and then comes the rest.
To have digicam as a 24/7 camera, one has to have two or three battery spares. Swapping battery takes same or less time than reloading film.
NickTrop
Veteran
There are "flat" film cameras, Yashica 72-E to name any, and I'm sure there are some even more flat. It has zero wake-up time. Sure, it can't do 2.2fps though it's considerably faster to advance because of left-hand thumbwheel. Depress release and keep advancing...it works like a motordrive
.....
Small flat half-frame camera isn't bad candidate for visual notebook, except you NEED instant feedback. One thing is what you WANT, another is what you NEED. People who need instant feedback mostly use cell phones with camera for quick grabshots, and then comes the rest.
To have digicam as a 24/7 camera, one has to have two or three battery spares. Swapping battery takes same or less time than reloading film.
Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope... Misconceptions. I had them too.
1. I have ONE battery for my F20. If you don't use a flash too often and don't chimp too much it will easily last all day. It takes - I dunno, an hour to recharge? One spare costs $20. I don't have one - might pick one up. Battery life is much better than it used to be. A charge lasts - I dunno 100 - 200 pictures? Not an issue so I never paid attention. I used to with digitals I owned years ago but not now. A second battery is smaller - literally, than a roll of film. So, who cares if I have two or three anyway?
2. Start up times - NOT AN ISSUE! It's ready to go faster than I can raise it to my eye. Again - this was an issue with digitals a few years ago. Not n' more.
3. Instant feedback is (a) not a bad thing. (b) not a necessity. Don't like it? Don't chimp.
Melvin
Flim Forever!
How about a Yashica T4? That's what I'd get, hypothetically speaking, if I wanted a film point n shoot.
Archlich
Well-known
The most serious problem of the GR1 series (especially the original GR1) is LCD bleed - take your sometime finding a copy of which the LCD functions well. It is said to be definitely coming for all GR1 cameras, just a matter of time.
Otherwise, I absolutely love the whole line. For your $300 budget see if you could get a GR1s.
Otherwise, I absolutely love the whole line. For your $300 budget see if you could get a GR1s.