paulfish4570
Veteran
... in feel, use, capability?
i am seriously considering the purchase in the next several months of a digital camera. i like the weight size, feel of my IIIf.
i know diddly-squat about digitals. my experience is limited to a couple of small point and shoots. i do know i do not like using the lcd screen. i would much prefer a camera with evf or optical finder that does not look like a wart on the body, or is built in.
i think i could be perfectly happy with a fixed lens with fixed FL as long as it is f2.8 or faster. i don't care for zooms but would consider a shortish one as long as it is compact. i do not care about using legacy lenses, but an interchangeable lens cam might be OK, too. auto focus would be just fine. and something with a sensor less than micro 4/3 might be OK as well.
i realize this is an almost purely subjective query. you guys and your experience are soooooooooo valuable ...
i am seriously considering the purchase in the next several months of a digital camera. i like the weight size, feel of my IIIf.
i know diddly-squat about digitals. my experience is limited to a couple of small point and shoots. i do know i do not like using the lcd screen. i would much prefer a camera with evf or optical finder that does not look like a wart on the body, or is built in.
i think i could be perfectly happy with a fixed lens with fixed FL as long as it is f2.8 or faster. i don't care for zooms but would consider a shortish one as long as it is compact. i do not care about using legacy lenses, but an interchangeable lens cam might be OK, too. auto focus would be just fine. and something with a sensor less than micro 4/3 might be OK as well.
i realize this is an almost purely subjective query. you guys and your experience are soooooooooo valuable ...
zauhar
Veteran
Paul, I have no experience with digital camera, but despite my anti-digital stance I was looking at articles on the Ricoh GRX. It takes M-mount lenses with an adaptor module, and has an accessory viewfinder.
THe VF is not optical, but it looks like a classical accessory VF (fits in a shoe on the camera).
It does not have the form factor of a Leica, but does look small and light, like the the X100.
I was very unimpressed with the X100, but I want to take a look at the GRX.
Randy
THe VF is not optical, but it looks like a classical accessory VF (fits in a shoe on the camera).
It does not have the form factor of a Leica, but does look small and light, like the the X100.
I was very unimpressed with the X100, but I want to take a look at the GRX.
Randy
porktaco
Well-known
you're probably looking at either a GRX or an NEX 5. maybe an x100.
gilpen123
Gil
Paul your criteria seems very near what the X100 is, NEX 7 can also be considered otherwise the RD1 will be a good simulation of what a film camera is.
paulfish4570
Veteran
i would use an lcd if the cam has image stabilization. i likes the looks of the lumix lx5 on my monitor, but have no idea what it actually feels like. it also accepts an evf that doesn't look too bad in pictures. i know that lynnb loves his lx3, which the lx5 replaces.
let me also make clear that the barnack feel is purely subjective. a digi-cam could be lighter and shaped differently if it is something that begs to go anywhere at anytime like my barnack does. coat-pocketable would be ok, too.
let me also make clear that the barnack feel is purely subjective. a digi-cam could be lighter and shaped differently if it is something that begs to go anywhere at anytime like my barnack does. coat-pocketable would be ok, too.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
The real difference (in use) is going for the manual focus road or not... But to have a closer to Barnacks feel, I think autofocus is not the way... So there are three options only, one by Epson and two by Leica...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I've taken lately to using my X100 in manual focus mode and focusing the camera with the AF button instead, keeping half an eye on the focus scale as I do so. It's not manually focusing the camera per se but it does add an element of control to what is a pretty automated device and changes the feel of the process considerably IMO.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
In answer to Paul's actual question ... I would say the Epson RD-1 without a doubt!
T
tedwhite
Guest
Paul - Keith has a good point in terms of how to use the Fuji X100. I don't have one, but I think that's how I'd use it if I did have one. The X100 certainly has the Leica Look.
The Canon S95 takes amazingly good pictures, but it doesn't look anything like a Leica nor does it have its feel. The S95's great advantage - aside from the high quality images - is its diminutive size. It slips easily into a pants pocket and thus you're never without it (unless you aren't wearing pants).
The Canon S95 takes amazingly good pictures, but it doesn't look anything like a Leica nor does it have its feel. The S95's great advantage - aside from the high quality images - is its diminutive size. It slips easily into a pants pocket and thus you're never without it (unless you aren't wearing pants).
astro8
Well-known
An r-d1 with a collapsable lens isn't that big to carry around.
I take the r-d1 over my lx3 as I walk out the door everytime. Although a great little p&s there is not much pleasure in using the lx3 for me.
Although it's smaller to carry around, I just don't bother to get it out of my pocket to use it...there's no fun in it.
For the user experience, the lx3 compared to the r-d1 is like comparing chalk and cheese.
I take the r-d1 over my lx3 as I walk out the door everytime. Although a great little p&s there is not much pleasure in using the lx3 for me.
Although it's smaller to carry around, I just don't bother to get it out of my pocket to use it...there's no fun in it.
For the user experience, the lx3 compared to the r-d1 is like comparing chalk and cheese.
parrot_boy
Newbie
Hands down, I consider the X1 as offering the most pleasing "digital Barnack" experience. I am basing this on my experience using a IIIc with optical viewfinder of course. Side by side both are strikingly similar looking in outer appearance and thus leads to very familiar feel in hand. For me, the only real shooting difference between the X1 over using Barnacks is the X1's fast AE/AF. Of course you can always bypass this and shoot completely manual to truly experience the slower approach feel of the Barnack (sometimes I do this but for the most part I avail of the quick AF/AE....hehehe). I think all Barnack lovers (myself included) who don't mind using a single lens in their photography, fiddling with the controls of a well crafted photo instrument, and composing on a shoe mount bright line viewfinder, will definitely agree, with regards to weight, size, and feel, that shooting with an X1 is as close as you're gonna get to the pleasures of shooting Leica thread mount cameras. The large sensor size and low light performance is just icing on the cake!.....Adrian
paulfish4570
Veteran
keep 'em coming guys. i'm thinking i'd like something somewhat more compact than the barnack. i think i would enjoy auto focus, too.
paulfish4570
Veteran
let's say the x1 and x100 are well out of my price range. let's say $600 max, new.
gb hill
Veteran
Paul, take some gas-x & relieve those gas pains. 
Just kidding...as it's getting silly expensive to have C-41 film processed, a nice digital looks more sweet. AS for myself I'll continue to shop for lower prices on developing. I like using my older camera's & have too much $$'s invested to shelve them.
Just kidding...as it's getting silly expensive to have C-41 film processed, a nice digital looks more sweet. AS for myself I'll continue to shop for lower prices on developing. I like using my older camera's & have too much $$'s invested to shelve them.Ronald M
Veteran
For a first digi for an experienced photog, I recommend a D5100 Nikon, D7000 for a little more and you get the same pic but a magnesium frame and the mechanics to use Ai or later manual focus lenes with meter. Either will make superb images only bettered by the $7000 D3X at low ISO and it hold its own with the D3s up to 400.
I have a 7000 and D3.
Buy the 18/105 VR with it or 35 1.8 normal lens. 40 2.8 is a gem macro and works well close or far.
Mirrorless are the rage today, but they do not impress me. Old folks like a more traditional camera. I hate EVF and live view types.
NOTHING matches a 111F. Sorry.
I have a 7000 and D3.
Buy the 18/105 VR with it or 35 1.8 normal lens. 40 2.8 is a gem macro and works well close or far.
Mirrorless are the rage today, but they do not impress me. Old folks like a more traditional camera. I hate EVF and live view types.
NOTHING matches a 111F. Sorry.
greyelm
Malcolm
Paul
I have a number of Barnacks and there is nothing quite like shooting with them but I have to admit that I almost exclusively shoot digital. I won't get into the argument of film v digital but I am sure that whatever you get you will continue to produce your high standard pictures. My current favourite is my X100 which does give me that Barnack / M feel however I would also recommend a m4/3 (GF1 or Olympus) on which you can fit an optical viewfinder. Judging by the pictures on RFF the RD-1 is an excellent performer but would you want the hassle of an obsolete camera?
I have a number of Barnacks and there is nothing quite like shooting with them but I have to admit that I almost exclusively shoot digital. I won't get into the argument of film v digital but I am sure that whatever you get you will continue to produce your high standard pictures. My current favourite is my X100 which does give me that Barnack / M feel however I would also recommend a m4/3 (GF1 or Olympus) on which you can fit an optical viewfinder. Judging by the pictures on RFF the RD-1 is an excellent performer but would you want the hassle of an obsolete camera?
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Barnacks are timeless; digital cameras are timed.
The EP-2 got quickly outdated, I am told.
Buy any digital camera for $600, and you will be told the same.
Go for what you like.
Maybe the NEX-3 or NEX-5?
The EP-2 got quickly outdated, I am told.
Buy any digital camera for $600, and you will be told the same.
Go for what you like.
Maybe the NEX-3 or NEX-5?
Last edited:
malthusiantrap
Established
How about the new Fuji X10?
http://www.fujifilm.ca/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x10/
A smaller and cheaper X100. I'm considering it because of the built in viewfinder. Btw, I'm using an LX5 and old petri finder combo which works fine as long as I recognize the limitations and capabilities of the camera.
Again, nothing compares to a IIIf, you have to make compromises.
http://www.fujifilm.ca/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x10/
A smaller and cheaper X100. I'm considering it because of the built in viewfinder. Btw, I'm using an LX5 and old petri finder combo which works fine as long as I recognize the limitations and capabilities of the camera.
Again, nothing compares to a IIIf, you have to make compromises.
aad
Not so new now.
I'm a long time IIIf user, and I went through this a year ago. I bought a Panasonic LX5. It cost less than my annual film usage.
I've learned how to use it, so I can make it do everything my IIIf does. I can use my external finders, though I now use the live viewfinder they sell.
I can actually manual focus the thing faster than I can with the Leica. I have preset distances available, too, a la GRD whatever. I have the lens set to step-zoom, so I have instant access to my favorite focal lengths, and I have the camera go to my favorite (50) on startup.
Also, NO shutter lag. Ask me how.
I have auto-review disabled-no chimp problems.
And frankly, I used to work very hard on my film scans to get results like this.
So unless you just want to spend extra money, the LX5 really is the closest to a digital Barnack.
I've learned how to use it, so I can make it do everything my IIIf does. I can use my external finders, though I now use the live viewfinder they sell.
I can actually manual focus the thing faster than I can with the Leica. I have preset distances available, too, a la GRD whatever. I have the lens set to step-zoom, so I have instant access to my favorite focal lengths, and I have the camera go to my favorite (50) on startup.
Also, NO shutter lag. Ask me how.
I have auto-review disabled-no chimp problems.
And frankly, I used to work very hard on my film scans to get results like this.
So unless you just want to spend extra money, the LX5 really is the closest to a digital Barnack.
nickw
Established
If the x100 is out of your price range (you said $600 max), and you want something small, I would wait another few months; Panasonic has announced a pro m4/3 camera for late this year.
I have a GF1 w/EVF and the 14mm & 20mm prime and quite like it. The EVF isn't great but it works. My largest complain is the EVF isn't built in. Like many, I consider the GF1 to be panasonic's best m4/3 camera from a usability point of view. Seems panasonic has heard our feedback, and has decided to build a "pro" m4/3 body. So while the GF3 is geard more towards the average joe, they are also going to make one geared towards the pro/avid shooter.
Here's the article. All the pic's at the moment seem to be using the LC1.
http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-panasonic-double-announcements-gf-pro-coming-but-very-late-2011/
Cheers,
N.
I have a GF1 w/EVF and the 14mm & 20mm prime and quite like it. The EVF isn't great but it works. My largest complain is the EVF isn't built in. Like many, I consider the GF1 to be panasonic's best m4/3 camera from a usability point of view. Seems panasonic has heard our feedback, and has decided to build a "pro" m4/3 body. So while the GF3 is geard more towards the average joe, they are also going to make one geared towards the pro/avid shooter.
Here's the article. All the pic's at the moment seem to be using the LC1.
http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-panasonic-double-announcements-gf-pro-coming-but-very-late-2011/
Cheers,
N.