Why no digital Street-Shootin' Iron?

[bmattock]

I was thinking about this, but lost the thread where it was earlier today. Sorry!

Shutter lag-time would be one problem.

Low ISO would be another.

And most of the digicam breed have very small sensors. Not a problem in and of themselves, but a 9mm lens, even if it is 'equivalent' to a 28mm lens in the 35mm film world, still has the DOF of a 9mm lens. Kind of hard to do any creative DOF effects with one (yes, I know, you can do it with macro).

Anyway, I think to be a good street-shooter, a digital camera would have to have an optical viewfinder, a decent-sized sensor (for the DOF factor), high ISO settings (for low-light) and manual focusing (for no shutter lag).

Dang. When I get done describing the requirements, I have the answer before I even come up with a 'use case'. I believe we're back to the Epson RD-1 again.

I guess we have to work on getting that price point down. I sure can't afford one!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[JoeFriday]

Bill, maybe if you and I get together, and several thousand of our best friends, we could get a group buy deal that's almost affordable

the R-D1 is a nice camera, but isn't it about the same price as a M7? and when it's all said and done, you've got a 6MP camera.. whereas any 35mm camera will turn into a 25MP unit with the addition of a decent slide/film scanner

yes, I know all about the advantages of digital cameras (I own two).. it's just the quality vs. price that I'm not buying into

 

[Fred]

Brett is right, the RD-1 is a splendid camera but at the end of the day it is not a Leica.

It has all the advantages of most digitals plus the advantages of an RF thats very good. Bottom line is that the overall quality from either negative or positive film the rederred image using arguabley finest glass is much better.

Combime this with the more involved feel of film (load, develop, wet print etc) the average RF film user feels much more of the part of the overall process, not just the taking. Well I do anyway and like Brett have two digital cameras, one Olympus with manual overide and Nikon D70. Since I got the M7 they are both resting.

There are many very good advantages of using digital but for me it is not quite the panacea.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

At this point, I'd still buy the film Leica first if I had the money, no question. I won't be buying a digital rangefinder until they're made full frame and suitable to be used in low light situations.

 

[Kin Lau]

With a few of the digicam's, manual focus is a possibility (my A70 has this), so you could set it at the hyperfocal distance, then no AF slowdown, and shutter lag is way down.

Selective focus is much harder, but consider at at F2.8, focused at 5ft, DOF is about 16ft, from 3ft out to 19ft. That's not too bad for a 35mm equiv FOV and with f2.8 you can pretty well use iso 100.

 

[bmattock]

Folks,

Sorry about the delay in responding - just got settled from work.

OK, I agree that film is superior to digital in nearly every way - but let's examine it from the premise that we *want* digital, about 4 to 7 mp, as a 'semi-serious' snapshotter - a street camera and we understand that it's no film camera.

True, it is possible to set a few of the modern digicams at a particular focal distance - at least I think so. Never tried it myself, and I am pretty sure my semi-functional Olympus D40 doesn't have that capability.

Presuming we can set the focus and use hyperfocal distance, that should help with the shutter delay, right?

But referring to Kin Lau's comments - I don't think that a f2.8 digicam lens has the same DOF as a 28mm lens on a 35mm camera. In fact, I suspect that at f2.8, a 9mm focal length has so much DOF it is kind of a waste of time focusing at all?

Anyway, I'm just wondering if there is anything out there, anything at all, that might do the job as a grab-n-run digital street camera.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[phototone]

That Leica/Panasonic 5mp with the Summicron design zoom lens that looks sorta like an "M" Leica would be a good choice, as it has good pixels. The pixel quality of it is better than most 5 mp cameras. And, the controls are most like a standard 35mm RFDR like camera. But, if you wish you can have auto focus, and auto exposure.

 

[Trius]

Stephanie: I think the jury is still out on the value of a full frame sensor. Wide angle lenses are a problem unless redesigned for the digital sensor to deal with the sensor's problem at the edges. I'm not taking a position on the whole telecentric design debate, just relating some of the theory and what's been observed by sticking WA lenses made for film on a digital full frame camera.

Personally, I don't care about sensor size if the camera can give me film-like results for the size of final prints I want. There's more than MPs involved: dynamic range, colour fidelity, etc. If I could have a full frame sensor in an RF and well-corrected WAs at a reasonable (to me) price, I'd be happy. If I get the same results in a smaller sensor (with lenses that give the same FOV), then that's OK, too. DOF control remains a wild card, at that point.

Trius

 

[atelier7]

That Leica/Panasonic 5mp with the Summicron design zoom lens that looks sorta like an "M" Leica would be a good choice, as it has good pixels. The pixel quality of it is better than most 5 mp cameras. And, the controls are most like a standard 35mm RFDR like camera. But, if you wish you can have auto focus, and auto exposure.

Is that the FZ5 or it's big brother the FZ20?

 

[Kin Lau]

But referring to Kin Lau's comments - I don't think that a f2.8 digicam lens has the same DOF as a 28mm lens on a 35mm camera. In fact, I suspect that at f2.8, a 9mm focal length has so much DOF it is kind of a waste of time focusing at all?

Actually, the figures I quoted are exactly what you get at f2.8 (rounded to whole numbers), 35mm FOV equiv (that's the widest on my A70), focus at 5ft and DOF is from 3ft to 19ft. No a guesstimate, I used the DOFMaster online DOF calc that already had the specs for my A70.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

My best, cheapest, quietest, fastest digital solution to this problem: the Canon Digital Rebel. No, not the XT, although the XT does great at ISO ratings of 800 and 1600, the Digital Rebel (aka 300D) has exactly the same sensor as the 10D, is much quieter, although not as quiet of course as a Leica M, or a Rolleiflex or some P&S that won't go "beep!" when you shoot it (and won't have the abominable shutter lag).

It is so quiet that I've been able to use it without anybody noticing the shutter, and even those that are close enough to me are either not bothered by it or do not care.

Unfortunately, the $60 50mm f/1.8 MII lens is too noisy, otherwise, paired with this camera it would be the cheapest digital street solution to the P&S "shutter lag" problem (when stealth is your concern). At ISO 400 it is surprisingly clean, and at ISO 100 it is beyond reproach (for $500, that is).

I don't know whether a full-frame Canon 5D vs. the Epson RD1, in the same price range, are two options that can be compared and weighed equally. They are meant for different applications.

In the meantime, at least for me, this is a good alternative. And it definitively doesn't have a puny sensor.

 

[bmattock]

Actually, the figures I quoted are exactly what you get at f2.8 (rounded to whole numbers), 35mm FOV equiv (that's the widest on my A70), focus at 5ft and DOF is from 3ft to 19ft. No a guesstimate, I used the DOFMaster online DOF calc that already had the specs for my A70.

Beg pardon, you're absolutely right. I would say that 3-19 ft DOF is not enough to give anything resembling traditional DOF effects in a portrait, etc. I'm talking about DOF of a foot or less. But you are absolutely right, and I stand corrected.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Stephanie Brim]

For those of us who shoot wide, sensor size is a big, big deciding factor. Wide lenses tend to be expensive anyway, but trying to buy a decent one on a budget for a 1.6x crop digital SLR is horrible.

 

[JoeFriday]

Is that the FZ5 or it's big brother the FZ20?

neither.. that would be the Digilux 2 (or LC-1 in Pana-speak)

here's some info about them

 

[bmattock]

My best, cheapest, quietest, fastest digital solution to this problem: the Canon Digital Rebel. No, not the XT, although the XT does great at ISO ratings of 800 and 1600, the Digital Rebel (aka 300D) has exactly the same sensor as the 10D, is much quieter, although not as quiet of course as a Leica M, or a Rolleiflex or some P&S that won't go "beep!" when you shoot it (and won't have the abominable shutter lag).

It is so quiet that I've been able to use it without anybody noticing the shutter, and even those that are close enough to me are either not bothered by it or do not care.

Unfortunately, the $60 50mm f/1.8 MII lens is too noisy, otherwise, paired with this camera it would be the cheapest digital street solution to the P&S "shutter lag" problem (when stealth is your concern). At ISO 400 it is surprisingly clean, and at ISO 100 it is beyond reproach (for $500, that is).

I don't know whether a full-frame Canon 5D vs. the Epson RD1, in the same price range, are two options that can be compared and weighed equally. They are meant for different applications.

In the meantime, at least for me, this is a good alternative. And it definitively doesn't have a puny sensor.

I'd go along with that, and in my case, it's a Pentax *ist DS with a 50mm 1.4 M42 screw mount lens that does it. But, it is hardly a stealthy camera - even quiet, it ain't tiny. Of course, there's also the 1.5 crop factor to consider. My 50 acts kind of like a 75mm. Good for portraits, bad for general street stuff. Of course, I could use my 35mm f2. Still, not small.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Kin Lau]

My 350D w/ 35/2, it's a bit noiser than my 300D but quite a bit smaller. Here's a shot comparing it with the Leica IIIa.

 

[James Burton]

With a few of the digicam's, manual focus is a possibility (my A70 has this), so you could set it at the hyperfocal distance, then no AF slowdown, and shutter lag is way down.

Selective focus is much harder, but consider at at F2.8, focused at 5ft, DOF is about 16ft, from 3ft out to 19ft. That's not too bad for a 35mm equiv FOV and with f2.8 you can pretty well use iso 100.

I would like to second the use of this method. My Panasonic FZ-20 works brilliantly.
Zoom set to widest, auto-focus off, single shot focus on my feet, aperture on f/2.8,
I can hip shoot all day like this. Actually over 400 largest jpegs will fit on a 1gb SD card, but the battery only lasts for about 4 hours. It's relatively easy to aim and hold still. I usually have it set at ISO200, but outside it can run out of shutter speed (1/1000th max) so I sometimes set it back to ISO80. I have some cool shots at max zoom extension as well, but that's a different story.

 

[atelier7]

neither.. that would be the Digilux 2 (or LC-1 in Pana-speak)

here's some info about them

Oooo... that's the expensive one... drool...

 

[bmattock]

My 350D w/ 35/2, it's a bit noiser than my 300D but quite a bit smaller. Here's a shot comparing it with the Leica IIIa.

LOL! Great cameras, both of them - but you can't serious claim your 350D is anywhere near the size of your IIIa! You put that in your pocket, do you?

Best Regards,

Bill Mattock

 

[James Burton]

Shutter lag-time would be one problem.

[...deletia...]
Bill Mattocks

Umm, I forgot to add that with auto-focus off shutter lag is insignificant
(Panasonic FZ-20). You do have to leave the camera on and you can't
let it fall asleep (mine has a 10min sleepy setting) which might mean
half pressing the shutter button every few mins. I also leave it in
'A' shooting mode rather than 'M' since the metering is superb. Even backlighting which usually fools my EOS-30 doesn't bother it much.

And these things are REALLY quiet.

Thanks,
James