Quinn Porter
Established
I haven't used the G2 or the G10, but the G7 and G9 had meaningful lag after the half press. For this reason, there are better compacts for shooting candids.
leicashot
Well-known
Today on a side project, which will be published, my Leica M8 battery died. I used my GR III as a backup because my DLSR is too big and not suitable for this particular project.
Now while I was happy with the results on the GR, it was being used at ISO 64 in bright light, but it would (just like any G series) suffer if the light dropped to levels where ISO 400+ is required.
So while my GR did the job, I still wouldn't compare it to a Leica M just because it can do the same job. I wonder what the PJ's did when the light dropped in Afghanistan....use flash?
I know plenty of PJ's capanble of carrying equipment more suitable to the job in areas like Afghanistan. Sure some may feel that it's better cause it's lighter, but it cannot substitute a large sensor DSLR, especially for low light.
Now while I was happy with the results on the GR, it was being used at ISO 64 in bright light, but it would (just like any G series) suffer if the light dropped to levels where ISO 400+ is required.
So while my GR did the job, I still wouldn't compare it to a Leica M just because it can do the same job. I wonder what the PJ's did when the light dropped in Afghanistan....use flash?
I know plenty of PJ's capanble of carrying equipment more suitable to the job in areas like Afghanistan. Sure some may feel that it's better cause it's lighter, but it cannot substitute a large sensor DSLR, especially for low light.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I think the only viable compact out there is the Ricoh GRD series (GRD III), simply because it is the only one of the bunch that has the ergonomics and feature set of a serious photographic tool. To be specific it is the only camera of the group that has extensive controls for scale focusing, which is the make or break feature in my book.
Take the LX3 / Dlux-4 for instance. Great image quality, great lens, compact size.
But you can't set the zoom to a specific focal length (24,28,35,50,60mm),
which makes it impossible to use external viewfinders, except at the widest and longest range of the zoom.
The zoom rocker is quite sensitive, making it difficult to adjust framing.
Also the camera shuts itself off after a set period of time, thus resetting where you had set the zoom.
The screen has a certain amount of lag, so it is no good for decisive moment shots. That's why these cameras need a bright-line finders or good optical viewfinder. Of course you can't see what the AF is aiming at with the brightline finder, which brings us to the next point.
Prefocusing at a specific distance is very limited. After 2 meters the focus indicator jumps to infinity. This makes scale focusing very difficult or impossible, limiting the usefulness of the camera, when it comes to making action shots.
The aperture / shutter speed controls are handled by a single, tiny joystick. It works well if you are not in a hurry, but otherwise forget it.
I spent about a week with the LX3 and it's the best digital P&S I've ever used, if all you wanted to do was take pictures of static subjects, the family standing in front of landmarks on vacation etc.
Yes, people have made some great street shots with this camera, but it is a little something of a crap shoot. You never feel like you have instant control and a certain amount of luck is needed to make anything but a static shot.
I have similar feelings about the G10.
Again, the scale focusing options are limited. I don't think you can set the zoom to a specific focal length. At least it has an optical viewfinder, but it's coverage is 77%, which makes it difficult to accurately compose a shot. Like all LCD screens and EVF there is a certain amount of lag, making it difficult to make shots, where split second timing is vital.
The Sigma DP2 also seems to get the scale focusing part right, but by most accounts it is quite quirky in many other areas. I've heard nothing but bad things about the AF system and apparently the screen is mediocre at best. The GUI is improved from the DP1, but still something of a mess.
The Oly EP-1 has many of the same problems as the other cameras. Again the scale focusing setup is not as good as that of the Ricoh and the LCD display is sluggish.
The Ricoh GR-D series (now in it's 3rd incarnation) on the other hand was designed for serious photographers.
For starters it has extensive options for scale focusing, including a very clever DOF display. Very nicely done.
Because it uses a fast prime lens you only need one bright-line finder. Obviously you still don't get the AF indicator with the bright-line finder, but the scale focusing modes are so sophisticated that with the extra DOF of the reduced size sensor it's a totally useable setup.
Aperture and shutter speed are on dials, like a DSLR.
The list goes on and on. I highly recommend downloading the manual for the GRD III and examining it's feature set.
The biggest problem with the GRD III is price and sensor size.
With the optical viewfinder you're looking at a lot of money (close to $1000?) for a small sensor camera. That's a lot of cash. You can get a low end DSLR or M4/3 for that money.
Above 400 asa it falls behind M4/3 and any upcoming APS-C camera in this category.
Ricoh also dropped the teleconverter (28mm -> 40mm), but it may resurface.
Scale focusing really is the Achilles heel of almost all of these cameras.
Think of the old LTM bodies. These were very basic cameras and in many ways similar to these digital compacts. Leica got a specific set of features right that made them viable tools for a certain type of shooting.
- Full control over scale focusing in light of the absence of a combined RF or mirror box etc.
- Good brightline viewfinders for realtime, reasonably accurate framing.
- Fast access to shutter and aperture controls
- Crisp shutter release
The EVF or LCD has too much lag for work where timing is critical, but to compensate for that you need to use an external finder. But if you don't have extensive control over scale focusing you are out of luck, because you can't use the AF with the external finder.
I hope Panasonic figured this out with the upcoming GF1 and Oly with their more advanced M4/3 model. They really need to take a look at just how right Ricoh got the interface and feature set on their GRD series.
Ultimately what we need is a digital Leica CL. Or a cheaper Leica M8... Compact cameras with real viewfinders. EVF and LCD is not going to cut it. The shutter release on many of these cameras is quite crisp, but that's a mute point if the LCD display has a 1/8th of a second or worse lag time. I would love a M4/3 camera with the spinning mirror viewfinder from the analog PEN.
But don't hold your breath. According to the fanboys optical viewfinders are for geezers and therefore we're going to be stuck with sluggish LCD and EVF finders for a long time. As is often the case in the age of digital photography, the serious shooters are at the mercy of the hordes of amateurs and weekend warriors.
Take the LX3 / Dlux-4 for instance. Great image quality, great lens, compact size.
But you can't set the zoom to a specific focal length (24,28,35,50,60mm),
which makes it impossible to use external viewfinders, except at the widest and longest range of the zoom.
The zoom rocker is quite sensitive, making it difficult to adjust framing.
Also the camera shuts itself off after a set period of time, thus resetting where you had set the zoom.
The screen has a certain amount of lag, so it is no good for decisive moment shots. That's why these cameras need a bright-line finders or good optical viewfinder. Of course you can't see what the AF is aiming at with the brightline finder, which brings us to the next point.
Prefocusing at a specific distance is very limited. After 2 meters the focus indicator jumps to infinity. This makes scale focusing very difficult or impossible, limiting the usefulness of the camera, when it comes to making action shots.
The aperture / shutter speed controls are handled by a single, tiny joystick. It works well if you are not in a hurry, but otherwise forget it.
I spent about a week with the LX3 and it's the best digital P&S I've ever used, if all you wanted to do was take pictures of static subjects, the family standing in front of landmarks on vacation etc.
Yes, people have made some great street shots with this camera, but it is a little something of a crap shoot. You never feel like you have instant control and a certain amount of luck is needed to make anything but a static shot.
I have similar feelings about the G10.
Again, the scale focusing options are limited. I don't think you can set the zoom to a specific focal length. At least it has an optical viewfinder, but it's coverage is 77%, which makes it difficult to accurately compose a shot. Like all LCD screens and EVF there is a certain amount of lag, making it difficult to make shots, where split second timing is vital.
The Sigma DP2 also seems to get the scale focusing part right, but by most accounts it is quite quirky in many other areas. I've heard nothing but bad things about the AF system and apparently the screen is mediocre at best. The GUI is improved from the DP1, but still something of a mess.
The Oly EP-1 has many of the same problems as the other cameras. Again the scale focusing setup is not as good as that of the Ricoh and the LCD display is sluggish.
The Ricoh GR-D series (now in it's 3rd incarnation) on the other hand was designed for serious photographers.
For starters it has extensive options for scale focusing, including a very clever DOF display. Very nicely done.
Because it uses a fast prime lens you only need one bright-line finder. Obviously you still don't get the AF indicator with the bright-line finder, but the scale focusing modes are so sophisticated that with the extra DOF of the reduced size sensor it's a totally useable setup.
Aperture and shutter speed are on dials, like a DSLR.
The list goes on and on. I highly recommend downloading the manual for the GRD III and examining it's feature set.
The biggest problem with the GRD III is price and sensor size.
With the optical viewfinder you're looking at a lot of money (close to $1000?) for a small sensor camera. That's a lot of cash. You can get a low end DSLR or M4/3 for that money.
Above 400 asa it falls behind M4/3 and any upcoming APS-C camera in this category.
Ricoh also dropped the teleconverter (28mm -> 40mm), but it may resurface.
Scale focusing really is the Achilles heel of almost all of these cameras.
Think of the old LTM bodies. These were very basic cameras and in many ways similar to these digital compacts. Leica got a specific set of features right that made them viable tools for a certain type of shooting.
- Full control over scale focusing in light of the absence of a combined RF or mirror box etc.
- Good brightline viewfinders for realtime, reasonably accurate framing.
- Fast access to shutter and aperture controls
- Crisp shutter release
The EVF or LCD has too much lag for work where timing is critical, but to compensate for that you need to use an external finder. But if you don't have extensive control over scale focusing you are out of luck, because you can't use the AF with the external finder.
I hope Panasonic figured this out with the upcoming GF1 and Oly with their more advanced M4/3 model. They really need to take a look at just how right Ricoh got the interface and feature set on their GRD series.
Ultimately what we need is a digital Leica CL. Or a cheaper Leica M8... Compact cameras with real viewfinders. EVF and LCD is not going to cut it. The shutter release on many of these cameras is quite crisp, but that's a mute point if the LCD display has a 1/8th of a second or worse lag time. I would love a M4/3 camera with the spinning mirror viewfinder from the analog PEN.
But don't hold your breath. According to the fanboys optical viewfinders are for geezers and therefore we're going to be stuck with sluggish LCD and EVF finders for a long time. As is often the case in the age of digital photography, the serious shooters are at the mercy of the hordes of amateurs and weekend warriors.
Last edited:
charjohncarter
Veteran
Very, very good, Harry; I like especially the comment about a 'crap shoot' that is what we used to call in the USA 'fire hose photography' when the frame per second wars started (and have not finished).
You also say: "But don't hold your breath. According to the fanboys optical viewfinders are for geezers and therefore we're going to be stuck with sluggish LCD and EVF finders for a long time. As is often the case in the age of digital photography, the serious shooters are at the mercy of the hordes of amateurs and weekend warriors."
I general, I totally agree, but not completely (maybe it isn't your opinion, but a fanboy's); as I am a geezer. No offense, there are always exceptions to the rules (I hope that I am one of them).
You also say: "But don't hold your breath. According to the fanboys optical viewfinders are for geezers and therefore we're going to be stuck with sluggish LCD and EVF finders for a long time. As is often the case in the age of digital photography, the serious shooters are at the mercy of the hordes of amateurs and weekend warriors."
I general, I totally agree, but not completely (maybe it isn't your opinion, but a fanboy's); as I am a geezer. No offense, there are always exceptions to the rules (I hope that I am one of them).
Last edited:
Fraser
Well-known
As a press photographer working in the UK I use canon dslrs for work but do have a canon g9 when I'm not at work, I think its ok and I feel I would not benefit in spending more money on an M8 which would be used for the same purpose. I have yet to meet a full time professional newpaper/press photographer who uses an M8 but I know a lot of photographers who keep there little G9, G10 etc in the bottom of there bags!
newspaperguy
Well-known
Kris (Leicashot) wrote, "...This is how a PJ needs to operate in difficult situations, where a toy camera will only complicate the situation."
I really think you need to get out more. Way back in the dark ages (1999/2002) before I retired from the Washington DC daily scene, I can remember the photog from one of the slick-paper trade mags shooting the White House press conferences with a Nikon 990. Got stunning results in print (and a lot of dirty looks from the rest of us), so professional use of P&S digis in no new thing.
Anyway, just a thought from another guy whose sole earnings came from the results of his cameras. Oh yeah, I still use a Canon G5 & an Oly C-3030, when a DSLR is the wrong camera... or not the one at hand.
I really think you need to get out more. Way back in the dark ages (1999/2002) before I retired from the Washington DC daily scene, I can remember the photog from one of the slick-paper trade mags shooting the White House press conferences with a Nikon 990. Got stunning results in print (and a lot of dirty looks from the rest of us), so professional use of P&S digis in no new thing.
Anyway, just a thought from another guy whose sole earnings came from the results of his cameras. Oh yeah, I still use a Canon G5 & an Oly C-3030, when a DSLR is the wrong camera... or not the one at hand.
newspaperguy
Well-known
newspaperguy
Well-known
Sorry... lost the caption: When a P&S in hand is worth a dozen DSLRs,
or even (gasp) a good RF.
or even (gasp) a good RF.
Jason808
Established
Stills won't die. The still-only device however...
Stills won't die. The still-only device however...
No, they'll be using small HD (and higher-res) video cameras. Think future developments of the RED Scarlet form-factor. I'm not sure the video-capable DSLR will be the instant go-to choice.
Stills won't die. The still-only device however...
No, they'll be using small HD (and higher-res) video cameras. Think future developments of the RED Scarlet form-factor. I'm not sure the video-capable DSLR will be the instant go-to choice.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I think you're right. I shoot documentary projects and street photography and there have been many times when I'm working in a not so good area that I wish I had relatively cheap and compact camera that produced acceptable results.
The D700 is just too flashy and while my film M bodies look like antiques, they are very expensive to replace if I got in trouble. They also draw attention. If I had a good M4/3 camera that I could stick in my pocket I would be in heaven.
The key phrase here is "acceptable quality". A 4/3rds body is never going to produce images like a D700, but they are of acceptable quality.
Remember when just recently that airline pilot made a perfect water landing in New York (I think?)?
One of the most published picture I saw was a shot someone made with their iPhone. No one cared that it was soft and odd looking. It was a good shot that showed the event.
For news and documentary work getting a good shot is the priority. Technical perfection is the icing on the cake.
Last edited:
BillBingham2
Registered User
Go back a bit further. Lots of photographers in NYC carried around the early 135 P&S cameras for quick breaking stuff that they were too close to use the lens they had mounted on thier F3s. Now that was in early/mid 1980s so P&S in professional hands have been around for many years.
The stuff about not being of a high enough quality is bunk, it's a question of demand for the shot. If all you have of an event is an old Super 8mm frame or two and it's important enough (read people want to use it and buy it) they will take it. Would it be better had it been on a full frame 4x5 kodachrome yes, but if you have the only shot and someone wants it, the houses will take it.
B2 (;->
easyrider
Photo addict
Assignment Afghanistan with a G9
Assignment Afghanistan with a G9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv5OW1oiVVc&feature=email
My buddy Colin Perkel, to whom i referred earlier, put together a personal video shot with a Canon G9.
He had two of them along during his two-month Afghanistan assignment.
Assignment Afghanistan with a G9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv5OW1oiVVc&feature=email
My buddy Colin Perkel, to whom i referred earlier, put together a personal video shot with a Canon G9.
He had two of them along during his two-month Afghanistan assignment.
Last edited:
Ducky
Well-known
Fantastic footage. Do they still call it footage?
The G9 provided great images and that piece it a testimony to the camera.
The G9 provided great images and that piece it a testimony to the camera.
mawz
Established
Scale focusing on the m43 cameras is not an issue if you're willing to give up AF. The problem is that you can only have one option in a compact system. You either use M or LTM lenses and get easy scale focusing (the DoF markings are just about perfect for m43) or you use an AF lens and have to rely on AF or manual focusing via the EVF/LCD.
I shoot a fair bit of scale focused work with the G1.
I shoot a fair bit of scale focused work with the G1.
Chuck Albertson
Well-known
Well, the picture I've seen of the S90 doesn't appear to have a hot-shoe on the top, which nixes the use of an external rangefinder. Bill posted some advice on setting up a G9/G10 for use as a street camera, and Gary Knight has a YouTube clip floating around on the same subject. Use an external viewfinder, don't worry about the electronic one. If I could bury my other misgivings about digital imaging, I might give the G10/G11 a go that way. But if I did that, I might just as well go whole hog and get the M8.
Ranchu
Veteran
Just wanted to note, there are two positions for custom settings on the mode dial of the G10, C1 and C2, they will save zoom positions, as well as all the settings in the menu, and will resume on startup. Very handy for use with external finders. Manual focus on the G10 doesn't work with the display off (I mean doesn't work, not just that you can't see it). It does default to 10 ft when you turn it on. Not very useful...
Personally, I've never had any trouble with shutter lag, it seems very responsive, but people are different in their needs, I guess.
Last edited:
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I've been facing a similar dilemma to many on this thread. I've tripped over the need for the convenience of a digital camera for some situations. I have yet to buy my first "serious" digital (as opposed to a 6MP Canon Ixus I carried for work). I too looked at the LX3 (no viewfinder), then the G10/11 (no decent viewfinder), the Olympus E-P1 (no viewfinder) and after toying with the idea of of a Nikon D300s (now why did I give up using my Nikon SLR kit, I wonder?) I'm pretty much decided on the Panasonic GF-1 (with optional viewfinder). M43 sensor, a couple of neat lenses and I find that with an adaptor I can fit any of my six M-mount CV and Leica lenses and if I want to get really serious all seven of my old Nikkor SLR prime lenses can be fitted with another adaptor.
Not quite pocketable, and it's not full frame, which would have been nice but it's pretty well featured and still bearing some resemblance to an RF and without the bulk and weight of a DSLR.
Not quite pocketable, and it's not full frame, which would have been nice but it's pretty well featured and still bearing some resemblance to an RF and without the bulk and weight of a DSLR.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I've been looking at the S90 recently and noticed the lack of a flash shoe.
For a moment I thought about adding one with some epoxy glue, so I could use an OVF.
Then I noticed that Canon put the power switch where the hotshoe would go.
Bast**ds. ;-)
For a moment I thought about adding one with some epoxy glue, so I could use an OVF.
Then I noticed that Canon put the power switch where the hotshoe would go.
Bast**ds. ;-)
john_s
Well-known
I think they offer an external flash for it. I don't know how it works.
Gary Sandhu
Well-known
It's small, yes-- but only the M offers interchangeable lenses, fast manual focussing, easy controls, and for the film M, durability and battery independence. The film M was never challenged by the film contax T series, the stylus, etc etc : photogs still used the M and the same will happen with digital. Even less of a competition now, given the huge sensor size differences.