Digital cameras close to a Rollei 35, Olympus XA, Canonet or something?

[justins7]

I know this has been discussed before, but maybe it needs updating. Are there any digital cameras available that are even REMOTELY similar in use to a simple rangefinder/viewfinder camera for under $800? I just wish there was something simple and low-tech close to a Rollei 35, Olympus XA, Canonet or something. The RD-1 is too expensive. I have a Canon Powershot, but I can't stand having to wait for the lens to poop out (sic), the viewfinder is terrible, etc... I can't take my Leica in every situation, so I wish there was some kind of analogue-digital camera of this type. Everything is zoom- and LCD-screen-oriented. Any ideas?
Thanks.

 

[atelier7]

i had the exact same question...

 

[Beniliam]

Olympus C8080 is a very good compact camera. Try to use it. Have very good qualifications in all the review that I see.

The new C-7070 is ligther than the 8080 have 1 mpx less, but have great quality of image and great TFT oriented

I think the design of the camera is similar to the RF cameras. Have optical viewfinder, no EVF, see the link 🙂

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/C7070/C70A.HTM

 

[Honu-Hugger]

I have similar complaints, especially with the LCD screen. I think this is an area that really needs to be improved. Perhaps the marketing gurus have over-looked the potential for offering "less as more." I am overwhelmed by all of the incorporated features I never use on my digital -- a simple camera would be nice. So far the most appealing model I have found is the Leica Digilux II; it seems relatively straight forward.

 

[justins7]

Kodak used to have a $99 3 m'pixel camera with no zoom that was surprisingly fast and simple, but I wanted more resolution. I was thinking of mounting a brightline finder on the top and turning it into a street-shooter.

Why are camera makers so conservative? All digital cameras seem to be selling briskly, so why can't someone make a camera that we're talking about? There must be a market for a fast, fixed-lens, professionally-simple camera.

 

[Kin Lau]

Oddly enough, how about a 350D/XT + 28/2.8 or 35/2? Should be around US$800-. I don't even bother turning mine off anymore, just let it go "auto-off" after a minute, and wakeup time is almost instantanous.

Otherwise, with all the digicam's, the powerup time is what will drive you nuts. Many models, even the single focal length (non-zooming) models take about 3 secs to powerup. You might look at the Fuji F10 http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/fuji_f10.html , it has a claimed startup time of 1.3secs. This is also the digicam with a useable iso1600 mode.

 

[photodog]

I have a Canon Powershot A310 which is ok. It has a fixed lens, takes two seconds to power up, viewfinder is worthless(use the LCD instead). Almost all consumer digital cameras have a pop out zoom.

 

[hth]

Perhaps Ricoh Caplio GX with an external viewfinder? That was as close as I got when I looked around 6 months ago and eventually decided to stick with film.

It would be interesting to see if Leica decides to make a followup to Digilux 2 with a real optical viewfinder.

But I do not know if I like the idea of having my originals as computer files only...

/Håkan

 

[nemjo]

If you think of the quality of their lenses, I think the leica digilux2/pana lc1 is the only chance. BTW they have very fine manual controls.
If you think of their pocket-size, my suggestion is canon's ixus.
If you think of a fixed lens or all - I have no idea.

nemjo

 

[ZeissFan]

The Sony W series are nice cameras. Extremely fast startup time -- less than a second. They come with nice Vario-Tessar lenses and use two AA batteries. Viewfinder is so-so, but that's symptomatic of this class of cameras.

 

[DougK]

I like my Nikon Coolpix 8700... once I turned off the digital zoom and the auto focus point selection. I don't mind autofocus or autoexposure (basic aperture- or shutter-priority only), but it drives me nuts when my cameras want to decide more than that. I do find that EVFs can be helpful (information display, near 100% view of the frame, etc.) but you really have to trust the camera's autofocus, since it's not easy to focus manually through an LCD screen of any size.

I'd love to see a digital version of any of the classic fixed-lens rangefinders, myself.

 

[XAos]

35mm f/2.8, ISO 800, instant on, 25MP, aperture priority rangefinder for $50-70? There isn't one.

 

[akalai]

...still hoping Ricoh releases a digital GR1 sometime soon....

Fingers crossed!

Akalai

 

[stet]

Olympus C8080 is a very good compact camera. Try to use it. Have very good qualifications in all the review that I see.

I was wondering about that camera after it was mentioned in that Alex Majoli article (link here). Looks like it worked well enough for him, and for Vanity Fair and Newsweek.

Now if a digital Ricoh GR1 (or GR21!) came out with manual controls too ...

 

[Chuck A]

If you think of the quality of their lenses, I think the leica digilux2/pana lc1 is the only chance. BTW they have very fine manual controls.
If you think of their pocket-size, my suggestion is canon's ixus.
If you think of a fixed lens or all - I have no idea.

nemjo

I used a Panasonic LC1 for about a year. The lens is the best part of the package, it is by far the best lens on a prosumer camera, but the camera is seriously flawed. AF lag is poor and shutter lag is also a bit longer than I like. I found myself waiting for the camera way more than I should have. Especially using the EVF. The manual controls were nice but the aperture and focusing ring was too loose and often changed when they were easily bumped. I just couldn't trust the settings without checking them before exposure. It was very annoying. The EVF shows very little detail for manual focusing and the camera was not really useable above ISO 100. It is definitely not a camera worthy of the Leica name, IMHO.

When you pick up and use a Leica M it feels like a precision instrument and does not distract you from the creative process. The D2/LC1 is a distracting camera to use. This is about the same for most of the digitals. The DSLRs are fast but they are loud and large. Most of the viewfinders are small and very poor. The smaller p&s cameras are mostly slower with poor manual controls and manual focusing.

We really need a small digital with a large sensor (smooth high ISO), high resolution (8mp or more), fast SUPERB single focal length fixed lens, large bright viewfinder with parallax correcting framelines, manual and auto exposure, large LCD and either fast AF with fast manual override or rangefinder focusing. Something like the Olympus RC with a digital sensor or a digital Rollei AFM. There are a number of film cameras that could be built upon and converted to digital that would be superb.

Thats my 2 cents.

 

[nemjo]

I only tried to show how difficult to compare "classics" to recent digitals.
But it's not fair to compare an M6 (with lens(es)) to the D2/LC1.
They are definitly not in the same leage - nor regarding to pricees.
The mentioneed classics in the original question all had quite good glasses built on a body planned (and produced) for decades. Look around: the world works in an other way theese days.
BTW however those are still not the cheapests on the (of course used) market, seems to be not on top as succes for the manufactorers.
Is it possible that the real quality is not necessarily a buisiness success?

nemjo

 

[Chuck A]

I only tried to show how difficult to compare "classics" to recent digitals.
But it's not fair to compare an M6 (with lens(es)) to the D2/LC1.
They are definitly not in the same leage - nor regarding to pricees.

nemjo

Even if you compare the D2/LC1 to just its digital brethren its flaws are difficult to ignore. It just wasn't as responsive as I would have liked. I sold mine and moved back to a DSLR.

 

[justins7]

I just can't understand why manufacturers don't see the hole in the market. Surely professionals would love to have this kind of thing. A digital Rollei 35 (http://www.cameraquest.com/rol35se.htm). Is that so difficult? I know this is a really hackneyed subject, but I find using my digital point and shoot (when I have to) a really miserable experience. Contrast that with my Olympus Pen, which takes incredible pictures and is absolutely astounding in its simplicity and small size.

It seems like the consumer electronics industry, while obviously thriving, is insanely conservative and parasitic.

 

[Chuck A]

I think that the R&D costs with digital are the problem. Putting together the digital camera that we are asking for is a much more complicated endeavor than making an equivalent film camera. As digital technology gets more mature I believe that we will see some cameras like this. It may take a few years though.

 

[DerrickC]

...still hoping Ricoh releases a digital GR1 sometime soon....

Fingers crossed!

Akalai

Digital version Of Ricoh GR1 to be announced 🙂