Which P&S would you most like and why?

muf

muf

Well-known
Local time
11:36 PM
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
360
Ok, lets pretend money is no object or the next shop you walk into has that elusive rare camera you have been looking for forever.

Which P&S/Compact would you most want to get your hands on?

Mine would be the Leica CM. Because it's the only high end one I've never owned.

Paul
 
I wouldn't go for any other P&S camera as I already have. No point. Maybe I'm just tired after 5 days. Maybe I've got cured.
 
Skip the CM. The lust is undeserved. It has a nice lens, but the viewfinder makes using it quite uncomfortable. And the camera itself really isn't that small.

I've had a Contax T2, T3, Leica CM, Fuji Klasse W, [Hexar AF] and now an Olympus Stylus Epic, Rollei 35, and Leica Mini II.

I would go back to the T3 in an instant.
 
GRD III.

I bought an old GRD I for a good price from an RFF member and it's a seriously delightful little camera - I really love the way it works and it's IQ. The GRD III would be nice, as I'd love to be able to shoot at iso 400 and f1.9

It's also tiny and light which makes it the perfect travel camera.
 
Can't be bothered with a film P+S, so the I expect the X100 to more or less tick all the right boxes. If I were to dish out dough for a film P+S, it would be a Klasse W, its just so beautiful I could look at at all day.
 
CK Dexter Haven said:
Skip the CM. The lust is undeserved. It has a nice lens, but the viewfinder makes using it quite uncomfortable. And the camera itself really isn't that small.

I've had a Contax T2, T3, Leica CM, Fuji Klasse W, [Hexar AF] and now an Olympus Stylus Epic, Rollei 35, and Leica Mini II.

I would go back to the T3 in an instant.
Click to expand...

In terms of rendering, the CM's summarit is superb. It manages to capture high contrast subjects with a lovely gradation of shades of gray compared to the T3's excessive contrast from the Sonnar. The highlights are superb from the CM and its summarit has more coatings than its predecessor, the Minilux. But each to his own.

The T3 may have a better finder (the CM's is NOT poor by any stretch and a vast improvement on the Minilux) but it sure loses out with its cheapish plastic button interface. For off centre subjects having to navigate those buttons in short time periods is not worth the effort - I tried to do this for three months and just got a CM instead.

The CM has that lovely dial for distances, just like the Minilux does. Just a quick flick is all that is required. Actually, coincidentally enough, the Contax T2 also employed that distance dial, which was very strangely dropped for the T3 - the worst mistake in my books.
 
Jaans said:
In terms of rendering, the CM's summarit is superb. It manages to capture high contrast subjects with a lovely gradation of shades of gray compared to the T3's excessive contrast from the Sonnar. The highlights are superb from the CM and its summarit has more coatings than its predecessor, the Minilux. But each to his own.

The T3 may have a better finder (the CM's is NOT poor by any stretch and a vast improvement on the Minilux) but it sure loses out with its cheapish plastic button interface. For off centre subjects having to navigate those buttons in short time periods is not worth the effort - I tried to do this for three months and just got a CM instead.

The CM has that lovely dial for distances, just like the Minilux does. Just a quick flick is all that is required. Actually, coincidentally enough, the Contax T2 also employed that distance dial, which was very strangely dropped for the T3 - the worst mistake in my books.
Click to expand...

So in nutshell, the CM lens is just as just as the T3's but it has the T2's ease of use. It's on my radar, just the price that is the issue. Need to get it to a more sensible level. The one I passed on was £350 but now they seem to all be over £500. I'll just have to be patient.

Paul
 
I don't want to argue, but the CM's finder is, indeed, wretched. I sold the camera on that basis alone. Doesn't matter much if it IS better than the Minilux in that regard. In fact, i think the old Leica Mini II's finder is much better than the CM's. That's NOT progress..... You could put a 35/1.4 Summilux-ASPH lens into a CM and i wouldn't want one. If the camera makes it uncomfortable and just unpleasant to look through, it's just no good. I don't presume to speak for everyone, obviously. There are a lot of happy Minilux users. I just had a very strong reaction to the CM. I owned one for a few years and never shot more than a couple of rolls with it. Just the idea of using it and the memory of the previous time made me put it down.

And i didn't buy the CM sight-unseen. I examined it in the store first. I initially felt the viewfinder was small, but i thought i could ignore that. And, after the first film came back, i was encouraged a bit by the results. But, over time, it just became more and more intolerable. The final straw came when i took the CM out to use it and when i raised the camera to my eye, i couldn't FIND the viewfinder. I know that sounds silly, but when you're struggling to locate the viewfinder and THEN when you do, the view of the beautiful subject matter makes the subject matter look less interesting, it's time to reevaluate things.

I appreciate that some people have different experiences and expectations. I'm just sharing mine. And, as i said, the lens is quite nice. But, if you look at what pros are shooting, it's almost invariably the T3 and never the CM. Take a look at Mario Testino's books. Or, this fellow on flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=T3+APX&w=13935845@N00&ss=2&s=int

More importantly, though, for anyone interested in buying now, i suggest you check to see if the camera is still being serviced. Last i heard, Leica had abandoned the CM (not really even very old!), while ToCAD was still servicing Contax products including the T3 and G.
 
Last edited:
I'm starting to think that I ought to have Contax Tsomething simply because of your posts. Or a Rollei X90 because I've not seen one for sale and wonder about it. Neither answer has anything about photography in it, just curiosity.

I expect it will be like the Leica C3 - Pentax ESPIO 928M - Konica Z-up 110 - Minolta Riva Zoom 90 saga in that I'll not notice any real difference on screen or as prints... But the prices I paid were really widely different.

Regards, David
 
Olympus XZ-1


* Fastest (brightest) zoom lens of any current compact [F1.8-2.5!]
* Really useful 28-112mm lens range
* Lens impressively sharp with generally good corner sharpness at wide apertures
* Reliable exposure metering and great color response make it easy to get good images
* Good high ISO capability for a small-sensor camera (and rarely needed thanks to the bright lens)
* AF illuminator helps in low light
* Simple control system still gives high level of manual control
* Low light mode makes it easy to make the most of the camera's strengths, quickly
* Art Filters are good at encouraging creative photographic thinking
* Ability to control flashes wirelessly a major plus
* USB charging is convenient (but makes it awkward to keep a second battery charged)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusXZ1/page12.asp
 
Greyscale said:
David, if you mean the Rollei Prego 90, I have one for sale in the classifieds here.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I guess you've sold it because I couldn't find it and had to log in 3 or 4 times whilst doing so. That's normal imo: one day I'll type to the end of a sentence and still be logged in...

BTW, I'm not sure if the X90 and Prego 90 and Giro 90 are one and the same and there seems to be a lot of different lenses available but very little information on them. Not finding anything about a camera on the www often spurs me on to buy one.

Regards, David
 
CX Dexter, my wife had an Olympus P&S in the 1990s. It had a terrible viewfinder. I had the same experience in which I lifted it to my face but couldn't find the viewfinder. Nice lens -- terrible viewfinder. It didn't break my heart when it was stolen in China. I hope that person had just as much trouble with it.

The one P&S that I might still like is the Rollei QZ 35 W -- mostly because I'm curious about the lens and how it performs. The price on these came down slightly but now remain high -- mostly because they're uncommon.
 
Hexar AF.

1. Can be used in real Manual Mode with spot metering.
2. Manual ISO override.
3. Best AF system I've used.
4. Special Aperture Priority Program mode considering lowest desired shutter speed and variable aperture.
5. Traditional Auto mode too.
6. Great bright and wide viewfinder.
7. Easy, fast aperture dial with half stop clicks.
8. Filter thread.
9. Collapsible hood.
10. Lens moves inside a solid barrel.
11. Very light.
12. Wonderful f/2 lens: sharp and contrasty wide open, sweet bokeh. 0.6m MFD.
13. Compact enough (6cm thick).
14. AE and AF lock half depressing shutter.
15. Fix distance prefocus option.
16. Silent operation.
17. Tack sharp focus even in very low light or darkness.
18. ISO 6-6400.
19. Compensation in thirds up to +-2 stops.
20. Focus confirmation on VF.
21. Focused distance info on VF.
22. Instant moving framelines on VF.

If there's anything even close, I'm interested...

Cheers,

Juan
 
What Juan said. And this afternoon I dropped mine in a bag. It pushed the Zeiss cap back by one thread of the filter mount but the fixed lens barrel saved it from anything dreadful and it's still working fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom