Digital Substitute

[Jason808]

Still waiting for that digital Leica CL...

and if it could be done for under $1500 I'd get one- I'm just not that sure about an Epson yet with getting it repaired and all.

I've still been leaning to the D40/D40x because I find the camera quite compact. I could fit that and a tele lens in the small lunch bag I carry my netbook in for a complete 'shoot and send on the road' experience. The new D5000 also has that similar feel.

Having finally seen an image that gives the sense of scale of the Panasonic G1, that could be the choice, albeit the high ISO is probably more noisy than I'd prefer.

Bill, why not one of the Rebels?

 

[DRabbit]

The Olympus E-420 with 25mm pancake nearly did it for me.

Same here. I recently got the 620 (I wanted the IS) since it's only slightly bigger, but it is still one of the smallest dSLRs around and with the pancake lens it's a tiny package.

Ultimately, I haven't found high ISO to be as big an issue as it seems to be for other people. I used to have a 5D and it was just too big for my liking. I can live with more noise when it means I'll actually take the camera with me. It doesn't do me any good sitting home because it annoys me to carry it, no matter how "noise-free" it is.

 

[emraphoto]

i have been watching those little olympus dslrs for a while now. if they would come out with a compact, wide lens i would be in like flynn!!

wouldn't have to be super wide... maybe a 35mm equivalent. a pancake 35mm (equivalent) and the pancake 25mm and that would be a pretty decent set-up.

 

[kshapero]

For me digital cameras equal clutter and complexity. Takes away from the art. No joy just technically perfect shots. Give me Tri-X or give me death

 

[emraphoto]

ahh yes, the if you aren't using a speed graphic then you can't possibly be "serious" approach.

i suppose for some folks it's about the camera and for others it's about the photograph. fair enough.

 

[Avotius]

For me its about the camera that I will have with me when I get the photograph. Since I find DSLR's ludicrous, its got to be a point and shoot or compact cam. Serious or not for me the editors dont care what I shot it with, they just care if I got something. Image quality is overrated...to a point...

 

[mgd711]

For me digital cameras equal clutter and complexity. Takes away from the art. No joy just technically perfect shots. Give me Tri-X or give me death

I'm 20 years younger than you, done the whole digital thing but now I shoot film and agree with your statement whole heatedly. In 35mm cameras the Leica is just such a pleasure to use, so much so that I have several, and for the guy looking to stir up a fight, I also shoot a Crown Graphic

 

[emraphoto]

i am most certainly not trying to start a fight. the thread is about a compact digital camera... whilst don't for a second understand the division here i can respect peoples choices. what i cannot accept is the thinly veiled attitude that "digital cameras" are bollocks and the people that use them are less than "serious" that seems to appear from the same crowd. it is equally bothersome when the thread itself is specifically about a DIGITAL camera. it would be brilliant if for once a thread of this nature could stay on track and we could avoid the "digital camera misinformation" vitriol that usually follows. i am a working photographer and compact, capable digital cameras are of great interest to me.

 

[Al Kaplan]

There aren't a lot of working photographers on this forum. A lot of the ones that I know would prefer being able to go back to using film if the market would allow it. Many do shoot film for as much of their work as they can.

 

[Bobfrance]

The Olympus E-420 with 25mm pancake nearly did it for me.

The eye piece sticks out too far to the back and I'm sure they could make the prism housing smaller, by eliminating the flash.

I agree with you Richard. The 420 is as close as I've been able to get on a limited budget.

 

[Rob-F]

My most-used digitals for travel, where I want light weight and compactness, are Leica D-Lux 3 and D-Lux 4. These are certainly small and light enough! I can carry both in the pockets of a photo vest. I did so in France recently, and even had room enough for a pair of IIIc. Mostly I kept the 25mm CV on one, and the 35mm CV on the other. One IIIc in the left pocket, and one or both D-Lux in the right.

I have the D-200, but it only goes on car trips. It's a little big and heavy to be a walkaround camera, especially with the 20-35/2.8 I keep on it most of the time. I'll probably get a D700 and go back to using primes.

I also have the Digilux 2. A great, lightweight camera, and the IQ at 5MP is really very good! A good travel camera.

You are right, Bill, I agree that large size and weight are deal breakers for many purposes. I keep a hand-strap on the D200 now. I tried a neck strap, and the doctor had to give me an anti-inflammatory to deal with the neck problems that resulted!

 

[emraphoto]

i have been using a sigma dp1 as of late and although i love the manual/scale focus interface the camera has some strange behaviors that have prevented me from really embracing it so far.
i will be taking it on an assignment to the west coast of africa where a small and discreet camera will be of the utmost importance so we will soon see if it cuts the mustard.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Image quality is overrated?????? Good grief.

 

[emraphoto]

i suppose i can sort of see where he is coming from with that statement. the image quality debate seems out of place in a format that has always been about convenience.

now i suspect Avotius was not saying image quality be damned but when the thread is specifically about a compact digital camera it must be assumed that Mr Pierce is not looking to replace a 5x7 view camera. it is about being in the right place at the right time with a discreet and capable camera. for the working photojournalist it is more often than not a digital one.

i tend to agree with Avotius to a certain point. IQ can often take precedence over subject matter in the internet photo forums and in the working photojournalist world the exact opposite is the case. if you take into context the rest of what he says... that his editors (or pix desk folks) aren't concerned with all that. they want the meat and they want it as fast as possible. so in that working environment absolute picture quality takes a back seat. Again that is not to be mistaken that folks like Avotius (and the other working riff raff) aren't trying to provide the absolute best imagery possible. there's just a different arrangement to the priority list versus the hobby'ist or landscape folks.

 

[Jason808]

There aren't a lot of working photographers on this forum. A lot of the ones that I know would prefer being able to go back to using film if the market would allow it. Many do shoot film for as much of their work as they can.

Respectfully Al, I find that to be a specious argument. The key to being a professional is meeting the needs of the market. I deal with over a dozen clients providing images and not one of them uses film, even to scan. Some of them have been shooting professionally for decades.

If it were true, my guess is that the reason there aren't a lot of working pros on this forum is that they aren't using RF's and they aren't using film. Maybe for personal work, but the bell can't be un-rung. Digital will remain the professional medium. Cite all the Magnum journalists you want, there are probably 10x more workaday pros at newspapers, magazines, commercial studios that have gone digital.

I'm not wanting to go further into a Digi/Film debate. I like film, I like film cameras - I'm shooting one for personal work now, mainly because...it's easier to get that 'film' look without wasting time in front of the computer (I get the film scanned at time of development). But again, it's the shortest path to the look I want.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

emraphoto, I just found it odd that on a forum where people routinely spend thousands of dollars on Leica lenses for their image quality someone would say it was overrated!

 

[shadowfox]

Same here. I recently got the 620 (I wanted the IS) since it's only slightly bigger, but it is still one of the smallest dSLRs around and with the pancake lens it's a tiny package.

Ultimately, I haven't found high ISO to be as big an issue as it seems to be for other people. I used to have a 5D and it was just too big for my liking. I can live with more noise when it means I'll actually take the camera with me. It doesn't do me any good sitting home because it annoys me to carry it, no matter how "noise-free" it is.

Agree with you on both topic.

I am also getting the E-620 (btw, where did you get yours? I want to get it online, but they are all still saying 2-4 weeks).

This will be my second DSLR ever after five years owning the E-300.

In-body IS is important to me because I like to use old manual focus lenses.

As far as noise, like you, I don't get all the hubbub from people who seem to see noise in everything except from Canon or Nikon digitals.

 

[emraphoto]

i totally understand where you are coming from Pickett and i must be IMPLICIT that i don't mean throw IQ out the window. believe me, the only reason i put up with the dp1 is the final file and that very nice lens on the front.

the longevity and impact of cappa's d-day images is testament to this argument.

 

[emraphoto]

i would be interested to hear your thoughts on the 620 Shadowfox, and DRabbit. perhaps you could give us a little intro?

it really does seem like a compelling package for the compact crowd.

 

[mgd711]

i will be taking it on an assignment to the west coast of africa where a small and discreet camera will be of the utmost importance so we will soon see if it cuts the mustard.

Where will you be working in West Africa? I worked there for almost 6 years and was kidnapped twice. A small discrete piece of consumer electronics might not be the best tool for the job. Maybe a film compact like a T3 or a Klasse W might draw less attention to yourself.