From Leicas to digital point and shoot?

[Rob]

I found this about a pro photog who is shooting mostly in Iraq with Digital Olympus point and shoot cameras(the higher end stuff). He used to shoot with Leicas and rather than carry a couple huge digital SLRs and a bag of lenses to change in the desert sand, he is doing pro work with these things...
I have been wanting to do the same thing thing by selling my film EOS gear and getting the new Canon S2. Will still keep a rangefinder film camera around for certain things. interesting photos and reading.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6468-7844

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Yeah, you don't really have to spend an arm and a leg to get a good digital...you just have to know the right ones to buy. To tell you the truth, I don't fancy a digital SLR anymore because I love film and it just seems to be a waste of money when there are tons of nice fixed lens cameras with decent zoom ranges that can come up with photos that are just as good as the big ones.

Panasonic Lumix, anyone?

 

[popitz]

yup, i've also read that article about alex majoli. i always point my friends to that article when they ask me which digital camera to buy and tell them it's not the megapixels or the tag price that counts, it's the eye behind the camera.

my wife started photography with an olympus C-3030 and most of her pictures taken with that P&S are still better than the ones i've taken with our 300D. now i've got her hooked on the rangefinder bug with my Kiev 4a. 🙂

 

[Chuck A]

I have to disagree with you here. I have tried a few of the high end digitals and keep coming back to a DSLR for image quality. My latest was the Panasonic LC1. It was a good camera with above average image quality but it just was not as good as the Canon XT I bought. I really don't care for an DSLR but frankly nothing really touches them for image quality, especially at ISO 200 and above. When I want small fun cameras I shoot film in my rangefinders. Perhaps one day we will get an affordable digital rangefinder.

The only cameras that I am looking at right now is possibly the Epson R-D1 or maybe a Leica Digital M. Both of which I will probably not be able to afford. If it doesn't have a larger sensor I am not happy with it.

I wish that someone would make a fixed lens, single focal length camera with a good optical viewfinder, superb lens and an APS or 4/3 sized sensor. If you made it with a minimum of bells and whistles I imagine that you could keep the price pretty low. If you put a great lens and sensor in it I am sure that lots of people would be interested.

 

[Allen Gilman]

Just depends on the end you're shooting for. Majoli is shooting for magazines.

Also, with the DOF that a digital P&S affords him, he doesn't need a DSLR to get what he needs. He can shoot at a lower ISO where he might need a higher one with a DSLR. He's obviously driven more by the final image than camera specs.

 

[popitz]

i agree with you chuck with regards to image quality. our C-4040 can't beat the image quality of our Kiss Digital N (aka 300D aka Rebel XT) especially at higher ISOs. but i think alex majoli's choice on using the olympus P&S for taking pictures of the wars in Iraq and Africa is just practical. with all the dust and sand flying around and all the movement he was doing, DSLRs wouldn't be as convenient. and if ever you have to ditch the camera, would you rather have a P&S or an expensive DSLR in your hands?

and with post-processing being a major part of digital photography. the output of the camera is, in most cases, not the final output. a photoshop professional can make the image output of a high-end P&S look just as good as that of a DSLR.

now if only someone would release an affordable digital rangefinder and make it like the bessa with different rangefinder mounts...now that would be heaven for us here at RFF.

i wonder if there would be an FSU camera equivalent if Leica comes out with it's Digital M or Zeiss Ikon comes out with a digital RF? Zorki Digital, anyone?

 

[kuvvy]

I read the article about Alex Majoli a couple of weeks ago and was impressed by his work...and jealous of the quality he achieves from his cameras. I've never tried one of the Olympus models so i can't comment on how good or bad thaty might be. I have a Canon G5 and have yet to achieve success at street shooting...curse that shutter delay.
One of my favourite cameras is the Hexar Sliver. Now if they prduced a digital version of that with the same high quality lens then that would really be something.

Paul

 

[Kevin]

Majoli fired a 3-shot burst with one camera, dropped it, grabbed the other and shot a burst with it. The first camera wrote its images to the card, thereby clearing its buffer, while Majoli shot with the second. He just kept rotating from one to the other for as long as the action in front of him continued.

His next purchase will probably be a mini-dv video camera, thereby allowing him to simply snip out the frames that capture the moments.

 

[jaapv]

Erwin Puts' most recent article argues why "small is better" regarding sensor size:


http://www.imx.nl/photosite/comments/c014.html

Btw, I disagree about the Canon 300D picture being better than the Panasonic aka Leica Digilux2 I have a Canon 10D and a Leica Digilux and I find the Leica pictures superior, far more film-like. The 10D ones, although smoother, have that artificial, digital look.(for the not-so-digital: Canon 300D=10D electronically)As for the higher noise at high ISO, the Leica by virtue of its fast lens and better handling gains at least three stops over most Canon lenses and I for one don't dislike noise, as long as it lookes like grain, which it does in this case. The Leica lens throws a far more subtle picture than any Canon lens.That is why I for one
eagerly await the digital M.

 

[Chuck A]

I agree that the Leica lens adds a nice quality to the D2 photos and alot depends on how large you want to print. But I found that the XT gives me a better detailed 11x14 than the D2. I am also talking about using decent lenses on the XT. An photo taken with an L lens on the XT looks really nice. The shadow noise of the D2, even at ISO 100 bothered me. Plus I really didn't like the huge DOF.

Don't get me wrong. While the XT gives me a cleaner and more detailed photo, I really liked the 3D like photos that I got from my LC1. They did have a special quality. I sold it mainly for other reasons. Slow AF, poor MF and no RAW buffer were the main reasons. It is tough to beat a DSLR for performane in these areas. I too am looking for a better performing digital camera that takes Leica lenses.

 

[jaapv]

I guess we'll both be shooting our digital M by this time next year! 🙂 🙂 🙂 I agree with your assement on the Digilux2; that is why I use it full manual, JPEGmax. I feel that is what is was designed for and in that mode it is unbeatable.