.
  Lightstalkers
* My Profile My Galleries My Networks

Point and Shoot Suggestions?

Hi all,

I am looking for a new / used Digital point and shoot… something I can just carry around on hand to take snapshots with. Last year, I had Canon PowerShot SX110 IS, which I loved (it went missing in Afghanistan). Only set back is that it did not have a traditional viewfinder (only a large LCD) and it did not shoot Raws. I’ve been looking at used Canon G9s, but I’ve heard they have a slight shutter lag. So basically, here’s the criteria that I am looking for:

-A Digital point and shoot, new or used
-NO shutter delay / lag
-A traditional viewfinder (not just an LCD)
-Shoots RAWs
-light, easy to carry around

Any suggestions? Thanks!!

by [a former member] at 2010-05-14 21:38:10 UTC | Bookmark | | Report spam→

My best solution so far: Canon G11 + a Hoodman Hoodloupe worn around your neck. You hold the Hoodloupe over the camera’s LCD screen. Instant huge EVF whenever you need it. You can reduce shutter lag by pre-focusing and an intelligent combination of depth of field calculation + custom settings on the camera. The G9 was good but the G11 is better. The S90 will give you a stop more at the wide end of the zoom but no hot shoe or pivoting LCD.

by DPC | 14 May 2010 21:05 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
People swear by the Panasonic Lumix GF1 but I haven’t tried it personally. Not sure if 4/3 is considered a Point & Shoot.

by Nacho Hernandez | 15 May 2010 02:05 | Manila, Philippines | | Report spam→
Ricoh GRDIII, the best

by Livio Mancini | 15 May 2010 04:05 | Mumbai, India | | Report spam→
I believe the Ricoh GRD III, the Canon G11 and S90 all share the same Sony sensor.
I’ve looked at the Micro 4/3 cameras but, frankly, they’re not much smaller than a consumer DSLR.

by DPC | 15 May 2010 07:05 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
really dont think it matters….richohs nice, sure the canon is cool and my eight year old gets killer stuff with the lumix…..

by Ed Leveckis | 15 May 2010 08:05 | New York, United States | | Report spam→
have / love Panasonic Lumix GF1

by [former member] | 15 May 2010 12:05 | on the road, United States | | Report spam→
Probably you could buy one with the latest advanced features every few months. I have tried a few but have never really been happy with any of them.

by Barry Milyovsky | 15 May 2010 12:05 | lost in the, United States | | Report spam→
Leveckis works magic with his Ricoh! :))))))))))))))……

I’ve played with G9 and G11 (dont own one/digital yet, but soon)….

in the end Erin, i dont think it matters much….Richo GRDIII, G11 and Lumi9x are all working magic if you be the sorcerer…

i want to see Ed L’s daughters’s pics! :)))))))))))))))))))))))))

bring them out mr. L…see u late in summer

have fun Erin!
hugs
b

by [former member] | 15 May 2010 16:05 | Toronto, Canada | | Report spam→
Thanks everyone for your suggestions. The Panasonic GF1 looks great (and fits almost all of my criteria), but I am really searching for a camera with traditional viewfinder, not just an LCD screen. The GF1 looks as though it only has an LCD screen. So far the Canon G series is looking the most promising. Please keep the suggestions coming, Thanks!!

by [former member] | 15 May 2010 16:05 | New York City, United States | | Report spam→
From what I can tell the big problem with the GF1 and EP1/2 is that there is no real provision for scale focusing. You can’t preset focus to something like 2.5 meters like with the Ricoh or Canon bodies.

The Leica X1 is a nice little camera that is worth looking at, but it costs an arm and a leg.

If you can live with a 28mm the GRD III is hard to beat. Ricoh is supposed to release a 2.5/28mm module for the GXR some time this year.

I played around with the S90 in the store and was very impressed. It will scale focus, the zoom can be set in increments (28, 35, 50…). The camera is tiny, about the size of a deck of cards and a little on pricey side.The biggest problem is that there is no hotshoe for an optical brightline finder, but I have heard of someone who mounted one on the base and shoots the camera upside down…

I have mixed feelings about the Panasonic LX3. Image quality is excellent for a compact, but there seems to be no provision for scale focusing and last time I checked the zoom doesn’t set in increments (24,35,50 etc)

Supposedly Nikon is about to release a ‘G11 killer’. Hope we don’t have to wait until Photokina in September… Also the Panasonica LX3 replacement is supposed to arrive at the same time.

by Harry Lime | 15 May 2010 18:05 | | Report spam→
There is the question of why you want a p&s in the first place. If it is because you want to work with it on a given subject, because of its own qualities, then, Bob’s example of Leveckis p&s magic is a very good one. However, if you want to use it as a substitute for a dslr (because the dslr is to big and heavy to carry around everywhere, etc.) then you have to accept that the p&s files you produce will also be substitutes for dslr files.

by Barry Milyovsky | 15 May 2010 18:05 | lost in the, United States | | Report spam→
just to give you an idea about Ricoh GRDxxx, have a look to my web site: www.liviomancini.com

the Scylla series was made with a Ricoh GRDII.
the two series from India both with canon 5DMKII and Ricoh GRDIII (according to the aspect ration you can see which one I used)

best,
L.

by Livio Mancini | 15 May 2010 18:05 | Mumbai, India | | Report spam→
I’m using a Ricoh GRIII now. I specifically chose the Ricoh because unlike the G11, Lx3 etc, it has virtually no shuttter lag. The new fixed 28mm 1.7 lens is tack sharp as well. The down side is that it has no viewfinder, although Voiglander make a nice external optical finder for it. If you really must have a built in viewfinder then go with the G11 despite the crappy shutter lag.

Cheers

….great pictures Livio :)

by [former member] | 15 May 2010 22:05 (ed. May 15 2010) | Washington D.C , United States | | Report spam→
I’m out in my backyard testing my GF1 right now. Basically you can’t zone focus with the AF lenses without some jiggery pokery (find hyperfocal distance, af on an object that far away, switch to mf). The AF is super fast though. I’ve been testing a Voigtlander 15mm lens using an adapter. The lens is mf only, pretty slow (f/4.5 max aperture and 4.5 is very soft, borderline at 5.6), and I’ve been having some issues getting it sharp at infinity at any aperture. I’ll post some results later today. But using the 20mm lens and AF is very sharp – I’ve made 13×19 prints at iso 200-400 and they’re comparable to my 5dmkii. ISO 1600 is usable, similar to 6400 on the mkii. 3200 is pretty noisy, though I’m hoping with some creative noise reduction it might be usable. I use it with a 35mm optical finder which is much better than the electronic finder (I’m told the Panasonic EP-1 is better, and just as fast AF with the firmware update). There’s no indication in the finder (because it’s purely optical) of when it locks focus, but you can feel a slight vibration when the camera is focusing, and when it stops it’s focused. And the focusing as I said before is super fast.

by Jonathan Lipkin | 15 May 2010 22:05 | Brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
I’m not sure if the 28mm Voigtlander finder uses the same aspect ratio as the GRD III captures. The Voigtlander finder is 3:2.

by Harry Lime | 16 May 2010 09:05 | | Report spam→
For a very usable pocket camera I’m still loving my LX3. I put a viewfinder from an old Yashica rangefinder on it, cost me $20 on E-bay, and when you manually prefocus the shutter delay is negligible. Also the video is surprisingly good.

by Jonathan Castner | 16 May 2010 16:05 | Denver, United States | | Report spam→
Feli,

The GRIII has three aspect ratio formats: 3:2, 3:4 and 1:1 which is square format.

cheers

by [former member] | 16 May 2010 18:05 (ed. May 16 2010) | Washington D.C , United States | | Report spam→
I think the sensor is 4:3 native and crops the image to 3:2 and 1:1

by Harry Lime | 16 May 2010 21:05 | | Report spam→
If you want good and cheap check out the Canon Powershot SD 1200. It costs les than $200 and does a very respectable job. It’s not an S90 but it’s less than half he price.

by James Colburn | 17 May 2010 00:05 | McAllen, Texas, United States | | Report spam→
Canon G11. Beautiful camera.

by Patricio Murphy | 19 May 2010 12:05 | Buenos Aires, Argentina | | Report spam→
Canon G10. The G11 has smaller files, and the G10, like the G9 before it, recorded sound-G11 doesn’t. You can still find a few new if you look. I’ve gone through 2 (both stolen), but am about to get another. It’s a great save-your-ass camera too on assignment-multimedia. Eyeholes for a camera strap, viewfinder (although tiny), and old school look.

by Michael Barrientos | 22 May 2010 14:05 | maputo, Mozambique | | Report spam→
You lost another camera?

Lumix LX3, has full manual, sharp as a tack, amazing macro and still looks touristy enough.

It’s exactly the same as the parallel Leica (made by the same Panasonic factory) just without the sticker and the price.

by [former member] | 23 May 2010 09:05 | Bangkok, Thailand | | Report spam→
i have used a few of the g’s (g9, g10) now and truthfully i found the shutter delay/lag maddening. even fully manual and scale focused there is lag. the other bother i had with them is the top lights up like a bloody christmas tree! nothing some carefully placed gaffers can’t fix but what is up with that Canon? 3 lights?!? i fumbled about with the s90 for a few days and couldn’t get over the lag on that one either.

the only cameras i have used with no lag are the grd series and the sigma dp1/2. the latter being a pain in the arse camera to use BUT it has a decent scale focus interface and both can sport hot shoe finders. the files from the sigma cameras are mighty fine! both make great b+w cameras in my opinion.

the gf1 is a pretty nice set up but the evf (external finder) is bollocks really. tried it with a vc 40mm finder and while it pumps out beauty files the scale/manual focus interface is sad. being a scale focusing luddite at times it failed the test.

i will second the “save your ass” bit though. last year i was overseas and having a small, discreet shooter in a region unfriendly to western cameras was a real ass saver!

by john d | 23 May 2010 11:05 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Hi Erin,

I’m currently testing PVA’a Micro 4/3 Panasonic GF-1…following thoughts:

1) poor high ASA performance…640 is the edge for me…800 is falling apart. With that size sensor there may not be an easy solution. Christian has taught me some good noise-reduction tricks in Photoshop, but obviously it’s starting from a bad point.

2) great lens — the 20mm f/1.7 (40mm equivalent) focuses quite fast in AF mode (forget about scale or manual focusing) and has that nice big aperture — and to my eye the lens/sensor combo produces a color palette I actually like more than Canon’s defaults.

3) however there is no fast wide-angle lens as of yet, like a 28mm f/2 or even a 24mm f/2.8. This is the BIGGEST flaw in the whole system for me.

4) there is no fast or professional long lens yet either, either zoom or prime. There is a 90mm f/2.8 (45mm) macro, but it’s $900 and that’s a LOT of money to pay for a lens you would use very occasionally. All the longer zooms are slow beyond endurance.

5) lack of traditional viewfinder as you mentioned. You could put an accessory brightline viewfinder, and trust the AF while you use the finder to frame. Voigtlander makes a 40mm finder. There is also that video-finder that attaches, I’m going to test that out and see how it feels.

6) shutter is fast and responsive. No shutter lag that I could notice.

by [former member] | 23 May 2010 18:05 | Brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
>Lumix LX3, has full manual, sharp as a tack, amazing macro and still looks touristy enough.
I had a D-Lux4 (LX3) on loan for about 10 days and came away with mixed feelings about it. Ultimately I passed on buying my own.

Right off the bat, the lack of these two features killed the camera for me:

- The zoom is step-less and I found it difficult to control. I’m not sure if in the meanwhile there has been a firmware update that allows you to zoom to 24/28/35/50/60mm, but I don’t think so.
- Scale / Zone focusing is primitive at best.

Other observations:
- It’s well made and relatively small.
- AF was good for a compact.
- The camera powers off after a while and resets itself.
- IQ was impressive for such a small sensor.
- The lens is fast and sharp. Distortion is removed via software.
- The finish on the D-LUX 4 is as slippery, as a wet bar of soap.
- No optical viewfinder
- Hot shoe for optical finders and flash.
- You control aperture, hutter speed etc with a tiny joystick. It works, but is not as good as a dial.

Ultimately I think it’s a ‘tourist camera’ with exceptionally good IQ for a compact.

by Harry Lime | 23 May 2010 18:05 | | Report spam→
You can use the LX3 in 3:2 aspect ratio with the Voigtlander 24mm optical viewfinder in the hot shoe. Works very well so long as you keep the zoom at 24mm. The camera is much easier to hold if you get the panasonic case for it and just use the bottom part.

by Pablo Delano | 24 May 2010 02:05 | Hartford, Connecticut, United States | | Report spam→
canon g9…I am a Nikonist for all the reflex stuff but I’ve found out that the g9 is absolutely a great camera to keep always in the pocket (big pocket, anyway). Raw are just fantastic, jpegs are jpegs…

by Federico Caponi | 24 May 2010 08:05 | Warsaw, Poland | | Report spam→
I’d say go for the Canon G11, I got one last year and absolutely love using it. I normally use is at 28mm (eqv) with my Ricoh GRD finder attached to the top. I’ve also got the GRD MKI which is almost as good, if you don’t push the ISO up above 200-400. I’ve got 15×12 out of them with ease. The only downside in the GRD is it takes forever to shoot in RAW, but the G11 is alot better in RAW.

by Mark Bullimore | 02 Jun 2010 15:06 | Diss, England, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Anyone tried the Ricoh GXR? On paper it sounds good.

by Marcus Adams | 02 Jun 2010 21:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
>The only downside in the GRD is it takes forever to shoot in RAW, but the G11 is alot better in RAW.

I was under the impression that the GRD III was pretty snappy shooting RAW

by Harry Lime | 02 Jun 2010 23:06 | | Report spam→
I agree with Federico about the G9, but to put my money where my mouth is about my earlier comment, I just got my third G10 which was hard as hell to find without overpaying. It’s just in time to take on a weeklong assignment with me: not only is it a “save my ass” camera, but I’ll use it for multimedia (it records sound like the G9-the G11 does not). I’m guarding this one with my life, so it won’t get stolen like the two before it.

by Michael Barrientos | 11 Jun 2010 12:06 | johannesburg, South Africa | | Report spam→
i second Alan Chin’s take on the GF1. i use it with a 40mm OVF Voigtlander and it’s perfect for a walk-about tool.

by [former member] | 11 Jun 2010 14:06 | New York, United States | | Report spam→
Does the 40mm Voigtlander OVF get in the way of the flash popping up? No flash no problem? And, can you easily hear the focus locking on while looking through the OVF? Thanks.

by Joel Sackett | 11 Jun 2010 16:06 | Puget Sound, Washington, United States | | Report spam→
>>Does the 40mm Voigtlander OVF get in the way of the flash popping up?
No
>>And, can you easily hear the focus locking on while looking through the OVF? Thanks.
I can’t so much hear it as feel it – there’s a slight but noticable vibration.

by Jonathan Lipkin | 11 Jun 2010 17:06 | Brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
i am messin with an ep-1, hot shoe finder and 17mm (35mm) right now and it handles better than the gf-1 in my opinion. i found the gf-1’s rear control wheel very difficult to operate while the camera was up at the face.

either camera is great IQ wise for me but i’m pretty low-fi.

the g’s (g10, g9) were really great cameras but that damn lag thing was maddening. the only other quibble is that they light up like christmas tree’s on top. some tape is definitely in order if your are trying to be discreet.

by john d | 11 Jun 2010 20:06 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
G10 has more megapixels but G11 has much lower noise. I had a G10 it died a slow and horrible death after a dunk in the Pacific Ocean. Replaced it with a G11. At low ISO (80-100) G10 was nice because of all the extra megapixels, but IMO, the G11 kicks the G10 around the block at ISO200 or above. I really like the G11. jack

by Jack Kurtz | 12 Jun 2010 05:06 | Phoenix, Arizona, United States | | Report spam→
I love my g11. can easily attach external viewfinders in the hotshoe and have 35mm and 50mm equivalent settings on the custom dial for them to match the lens and viewfinders. if shot with scale focusing, virtually no shutterlag. internal viewfinder is…okay as backup …but external preferred. try it for a weekend :)

by marius sortland myklebust | 13 Jun 2010 03:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
I own both the S90 and G11. Both are awesome cameras and perform brilliantly in low light. ASA 800 is very usable in such a small sensor camera. I shoot everything in raw and the images require minimal post processing. The ergonomics on the G11 are better than the S90, being that the G11 is larger and feels like a small rangefinder with external controls. I just order a Ricoh GX1. It has yet to arrive. I found a great price on the CX1 and could not resist purchasing it.

Coincidentally, I read somewhere back that the G10’s resolution was better than a digital Hasselblad.

by Frank Becsi | 13 Jun 2010 16:06 (ed. Jun 13 2010) | St Louis, United States | | Report spam→
Looking at the G11 performance, wonder if shooting with a heavy DSLR is always a must. OK, on P&S you can’t change lenses but let say in daytime where I took 90% of my photos, is a D3 would really make a difference for online magazine? Maybe P&S will do the job more than 50% of the situation? Looking at big ego photographers around me on assignment, they are kind of proud of carrying 2 or 3 D3s, huge f2,8 lens. They look at my D300 with a sigma 18-200 ( I just love this lens) and make a sarcastic smile at me. Ya the bigger the better with them. They probably have bigger chiropractor bills then me too.

Looking at Barry’s blog, he took some of the photos with a G10, I would never guess. The pictures are very good.

It is posible that we would be ashamed to go on assignment with a P&S? I mean, we would feel unprofessional because with we don’t cary a ton of equipement?

by Yves Choquette | 13 Jun 2010 17:06 | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
I shot for almost two months throughout the Niger Delta with a g10. I have absolutely NO problem rockin the point and shoots.

I don’t think we should forget that a LOT of the BIG camera crowd may be working on pool cameras.

by john d | 13 Jun 2010 17:06 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Hey, look at the bucks Terry Richardson pulls in using an analog Yashica T4 and/or a digital Ricoh GIII? How about Alex Majoli from Magnum using point and shoots almost exclusively?

by Frank Becsi | 13 Jun 2010 20:06 | St Louis, United States | | Report spam→
Franck, I just give a look at Alex work, it’s amazing and very interesting, especially reaction of other photogs about his little cameras.
So he’s doing very well with P&S and fantastic results but looking at the photos in the article, all lack of contrast. Even Alex mentioned it in the article. But, look like this is not a problem for Magnum or his other clients. When the scene is very strong, technical imperfections are normal “collateral damages” I guess.

by Yves Choquette | 13 Jun 2010 22:06 | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
Seems like P&S is good for reproduction, even double pages, given good light and compelling image. But the problem with P&S is making large prints. Anyone go beyond 13X19 with a G9/10/11?

by Joel Sackett | 14 Jun 2010 00:06 | Puget Sound, Washington, United States | | Report spam→
@Joel Sackett – I’ve recently printed Laserlab prints (=305 dpi) 70 × 93cms from my Canon S90 and they look great. Inkjets (where I could get away with a lower pixel resolution per inch) would probably look even better. The key to these cameras is that you need better post-production technique than for larger formats.
@Frank Besci – the famous “Alex Majoli Points and Shoots” article is pretty old now. Terry Richardson has been using a Ricoh GRD III recently.

by DPC | 14 Jun 2010 18:06 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Hi Erin,

you want take a look at my blog http://journalismforless.blogspot.com/ . I write down my experiences with the G11 in a more “professional” working environment and what kind of problems ( or surprises ) I run into while using it in the field.

by marc hofer | 15 Jun 2010 04:06 | Kampala, Uganda | | Report spam→
@Joel Sackett – thanks for your kind comments! I’ve got a lot more to say on the subject that I’ll write about when I have time. I’ve just finished a 10 day reportage job using only a Canon G11 and an S90 so the amount of hands-on experience has increased recently. I’ve also been teaching a couple of small camera workshops for a group of people equipped with the G11.

by DPC | 15 Jun 2010 06:06 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Erin-did you get a point and shoot camera yet? My advice is to just get whatever works for you and work around the flaws in the design.

Years ago I shot regularly with a Canon G5. Terrible shutter lag, but I regularly got photos published from it and Picture Editors tend not to ask what camera you used. Other photographers are the problem-but if you are like me then you don’t give a sh*% about their opinion! Let them take the piss all they like while you go ahead getting better photos with your unobtrusive little lightweight camera. As far as I’m concerned it’s always the image that matters-not what gadget you used to take the photo or how ‘professional’ you look.

by JR, (John Watts-Robertson). | 15 Jun 2010 06:06 | rothwell, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
I have a great book of images taken on 9/11 by Magnum shooters who happened to be in NYC on that day.

One set is from one of them who was staying with a friend and did not have his cameras with him. He grabbed the friend’s P&S (well, you would, wouldn’t you?) and went out to shoot with that.

His are amongst the best in a book of mind-blowing images. Not technically, perhaps, if you want to pixel-peep, but certainly in terms of “the moment”.

Just goes to show….

by Marcus Adams | 15 Jun 2010 07:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
But what about the noise issue? Are you shooting only outdoor or inside with flash, with the P&S ? Is the G11 or the Ricoh effective at high ISO like 3200?

Thank you

Yves

by Yves Choquette | 16 Jun 2010 00:06 | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
@ Yves Choquette – Well, they’re obviously not going to be anywhere as clean as a 5D MK II or another DSLR in low light. Noise depends on sensor size, the smaller the noisier. That said, you shouldn’t forget that to get the same depth of field with a full frame DSLR as with a G11 etc you need to stop the lens down more, thus requiring more light or a higher ISO. You can do the exact calculations easily yourself with a depth of field calculator. I think it was about four stops difference. I delivered some shots yesterday made with next to no light on a S90 (1/2 sec at f2, 3200 ISO). They were “grainy” as hell and needed careful noise reduction and sharpening but perfectly useable in a reportage context.
Anyway, lack of noise isn’t everything – http://bit.ly/bO01nw – I don’t know if the link will work but it’s a Thomas Dworzak picture of Chechen fighters dragging a fallen comrade at night. Film or early digital, I don’t know, but it’s all grain and still works…

by DPC | 16 Jun 2010 07:06 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
@DPC Yes the link work, thank you. Effectively, the photo is extremely noisy and taken at low shutter speed. It is understandable as I guess you don’t want to use a flash in those particular situation. But the photo work like you say, it deliver the message. For noise reduction, I start use Topaz Denoise4 and really like it. It remove heavy noise with minimum blur.

by Yves Choquette | 16 Jun 2010 13:06 | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
Leica M digitals! I found the G11 unusable. Digital is great but it gets annoying when the best digital point and shoots available don’t come close to their film counterparts. . . Yashika T4, Contax T3.

by Davin Ellicson | 16 Jun 2010 17:06 | Bucharest, Romania | | Report spam→
I have found Nik Software Dfine good for NR.

by Marcus Adams | 16 Jun 2010 21:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
People swear by the Panasonics, but an option would also be the PEN series by Olympias. Personally, I think the ILC (as I’m hearing them called now by my students) is a good covert camera to use in field when you don’t want a Mark III or D3 to be seen or draw any unwanted attention. As with anything in photography there is always going to be trade-offs.

Of course, if you really have to have a used P&S, with no shutter lag\, (to which there will always be some, granted some cameras are better than others in this field) I’d suggest the Canon G-series like everyone else. Or if money is no issue a Leica M8.2 rangefinder.

by Aaron J. Heiner | 17 Jun 2010 13:06 | Washington, DC, United States | | Report spam→
Has anyone used the Leica X1? Haven’t read much about it. Looks very promising and tempting (if it were not for the price).

by Nacho Hernandez | 17 Jun 2010 14:06 | Manila, Philippines | | Report spam→
The Leica M8.2/M9 is what I recommend since Erin already has an M6. A typical commercial shoot will pay for one in a day or two. This is not rocket science.

by Davin Ellicson | 17 Jun 2010 23:06 | Bucharest, Romania | | Report spam→
Any news on the M10?

by Barry Milyovsky | 17 Jun 2010 23:06 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
That’s very naughty, Barry!!

That is the worst thing about all these – you buy the latest one and 2 months later out comes one twice as good and 10% cheaper….! (Well OK, 10% more expensive if it’s Leica).

The M9 in NZ is the equivalent of 25% of the average annual salary. Amazing.

by Marcus Adams | 17 Jun 2010 23:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
Sorry Marcus, I lost control. But isn’t the obvious solution to increase the average annual salary in NZ.

by Barry Milyovsky | 17 Jun 2010 23:06 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
I agree entirely.

However they seem wedded to the idea of being poor but noble….!!

I hear that the M11 is already in the design phase, btw…

Vaguely related to the OP, I have ordered a Sigma DP2s. Not the fastest compact or the most sophisticated, but oh that image quality from the Foveon sensor has to be seen to be believed.

Downside is it will take 5 or 5 weeks to come from Sigma to NZ…despite the fact that Adorama or B&H can do that in 4 days.

by Marcus Adams | 18 Jun 2010 00:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
Konstantin Eduardovich Tsiolkovskii never invented a camera.

Rocket science is easy to those who understand it.

Actually the Leica M8.2 is not P&S shoot in real terms.

But any camera with a lens becomes a P&S if you stop it down to F16.

That’s math but not rocket propulsion equation.

by [former member] | 18 Jun 2010 00:06 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Ok. An M8.2 with a 28mm at 160 ASA and f./11 on the street is pretty point and shoot to me.

by Davin Ellicson | 18 Jun 2010 00:06 | Bucharest, Romania | | Report spam→
How the M8.2 is doing at higher ISO like 2600 or 3200?

by Yves Choquette | 18 Jun 2010 00:06 | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
:) 640 ASA is max, but who says the Canon G11 does better over 400 ASA?! BTW it doesn’t! I mean it is all relative: if you want to have a house and drive a new car then, yes, maybe a Leica is too expensive for you. But if you can deal with a small apartment and a sleeping bag sometimes, and if photography is your life, then a Leica digital is not so hard to get. A normal commercial job for me would pay for an M9 within the week.

by Davin Ellicson | 18 Jun 2010 01:06 | Bucharest, Romania | | Report spam→
I mean it is all relative: if you want to have a house and drive a new car then, yes, maybe a Leica is too expensive for you. But if you can deal with a small apartment and a sleeping bag sometimes, and if photography is your life, then a Leica digital is not so hard to get.

Sadly not a view shared by my wife…!! ;-)

by Marcus Adams | 18 Jun 2010 01:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
ok Marcus. . . happily it is a view shared by my girlfriend.

by Davin Ellicson | 18 Jun 2010 01:06 | Bucharest, Romania | | Report spam→
Well, Marcus and Davin, this brings up the subject of photography and romantic relationships. Sometimes it is best to go solo. But, as St. Paul said, “…it is better to marry than to burn.” (I Corinthians 7:9) This statement is often translated by modern, techno-biblical scholars as, “…it is better to marry than to point and shoot.”

by Barry Milyovsky | 18 Jun 2010 01:06 (ed. Jun 18 2010) | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
Of course if your companion is a fellow photographer things will be much easier. She/he will understand what a Canon L lens or Leica or Imacon actually means and why it is important to buy them.

by Davin Ellicson | 18 Jun 2010 02:06 | Bucharest, Romania | | Report spam→
So right.

I usually get “ANOTHER camera/bag/lens/filter/software program/etc – why do you need ANOTHER one? You already have (insert number) so why do you need one more?!”

Of course if your empire entirely consists of ice cream like Barry it may well be less of an issue!

by Marcus Adams | 18 Jun 2010 02:06 | Wellington, New Zealand | | Report spam→
Yes, Davin, I think that is what St. Paul was getting at.

by Barry Milyovsky | 18 Jun 2010 02:06 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
Ok Barry, again, it is all about what photography means to you—how far you want to go. If it really is your passion then you will end up being with a companion who understands the expenses. That is my experience.

by Davin Ellicson | 18 Jun 2010 02:06 | Bucharest, Romania | | Report spam→
No offense, but spending 7 large for a camera needed for point and shoot purposes is utterly ridiculous. Kinda gross even..

by Jethro Soudant | 18 Jun 2010 03:06 | Buffalo, NY, United States | | Report spam→
“is utterly ridiculous. Kinda gross even.. "

unless you’re into showing off jewelry

by Ed Leveckis | 18 Jun 2010 03:06 | New York, United States | | Report spam→
“But any camera with a lens becomes a P&S if you stop it down to F16.”

If it can be scale / zone focused… Unfortunately the vast majority of P&S cameras don’t support this feature.

Hell, most companies have taken off or crippled the DOF scales on their SLR lenses. Good thing Zeiss is still turning out high quality manual focus lenses for the mainstream brands.

And a zoom that works in increments (24/28/35/50/75/etc).

Oh, and a hotshoe for a brightline finder . (Damn you Canon S90)

As for the M9., yeah it’s what a lot of people want, but who can afford one, let alone two bodies?
There is some chatter on the net about a cheaper camera for Photokina. But cheaper is a relative term with Leica.

by Harry Lime | 18 Jun 2010 06:06 | | Report spam→
Yes it is all relative.

An expensive camera is not going to make a better photographer.

It’s all meaningless unless you make something meaningful.

by [former member] | 18 Jun 2010 08:06 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Absolutely correct Mark, but photographers will always be outnumbered by ‘camera operators’. Nowadays that seems to be the case more than ever.

But a photographer still needs a camera that provides certain basic functionalities in order to hopefully produce something meaningful. It doesn’t have to be expensive. If you can’t see, the most expensive camera on the planet won’t cure your blindness. But it does have to do the job and not get in your way.

by Harry Lime | 18 Jun 2010 09:06 | | Report spam→
Feli, you bring back all the concept of if we don’t have a ton of equipement, we look like tourist.
Looking like a tourist might save your life anyway as some people are targeting more and more
the media guys. I gave a look at Alex Majoli work for Magnum. He did it all with 6 small P&S so I
guess he does not bother of looking like a tourist. If it is for online purpose, why would you bother
carrying $8 000 of equipement with you and be a thiefs magnet?

by Yves Choquette | 18 Jun 2010 11:06 | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
Hey Yves

I think you may have misread my post or I wasn’t being very clear in what I was trying to express.

I am huge proponent of small, unobtrusive gear and prefer to look like a tourist myself for all the reasons you mentioned.

My standard outfit consists of an M6TTL with 28/35 and an old Nikon F2 with 1.4/50 stuffed in a simple gray waist pack from Eagle Creek ($14.99), along with a pile of film. If I’m going out of town I may cram an extra M body in there as a backup, but that’s it. Oh, wait. I also have a Sekonic 308 light meter.

Over the past few years I’ve watched with dread as DSLR bodies have grown to ridiculous proportions. A D3 with 24-70 zoom is almost the size of a Speed Graphic and screams ‘MUG ME!’ in all but the best areas of town.

I even found my D700 too big and too flashy looking to the point that I sold it, because more often than not I left it at home.

I would like an M9 (or M8,2) for two reasons and neither of them have to do with bragging right or because I think it will make me a better shooter. First of all I’ve been shooting with rangefinders for more than 10 years and prefer them over an SLR. Second most people mistake the M8/M9 for an old film camera and therefore don’t pay much attention to it.

But since I can’t afford an M9 and still need to take pictures, I’ll probably end up with something like the G11 or at the most a consumer D5000. Nice, small and cheap.

I suspect that something like a D3 or 1Ds could be a lot more compact, but unfortunately I think marketing often overrules the design department. The vast majority of these pro bodies are bought by well heeled amateurs. To many of these buyers, these cameras are a penis extension, in which case bigger is better.

What I was trying to get at is that I am frustrated by the direction manufacturers have taken with P&S cameras.

Take something like the G11. Great image quality, small, cheap, unobtrusive. But there are virtually no controls on the camera for scale focusing and that is a pity given the huge DOF the small sensor provides at any given stop.

The only company that seems to understand this concept properly is Ricoh. With most of their cameras you can set what they call ‘snap focus’ to lets say 2.5 meters and then just shoot to your hearts content. With a small brightline finder in the hotshoe the GRDIII is an astonishingly versatile camera that is about the size of a pack of cigarets.

That’s what I want to see more of.

For me personally the image quality obtained from a good P&S is totally acceptable. I’m not really hung up on noise, megapixels, purple fringing or any of the other things the dpreview crowd likes to obsess about. For me it’s the image that counts. I’m just wishing for a P&S with good controls. That’s all I’m asking for.

by Harry Lime | 18 Jun 2010 14:06 (ed. Jun 18 2010) | | Report spam→
@Feli – you can easily create a “snap focus” setting (at a distance of your choice and two in the case of the G11) by using the “save settings” custom function on the G11 and the S90.

by DPC | 18 Jun 2010 15:06 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Feli- I agree with you on your points and the preference for rangefinders. Just curious why carry the F2 with 50mm if size matters? Seems like a small 50 on a second M body would keep it all rangefinder and smaller? Its hard to mix, I think.

by Joel Sackett | 18 Jun 2010 15:06 | Puget Sound, Washington, United States | | Report spam→
I’ll look in to that custom setting got the G11/S90. thanks

by Harry Lime | 18 Jun 2010 16:06 | | Report spam→
Well, for some strange reason I simply can’t get the 50 to work for me on an RF camera. I tried it for a few years and we just didn’t get along. Some odd personal quirk. What’s even stranger is that I really don’t like shooting the 28 or 35 on an SLR…. In a pinch I’ll shoot the 50 on an M2 or M4, but for some odd reason I simply compose much better, when it’s sitting on an SLR. I really don’t have a good explanation.

The F2 is not really that much bigger than an M body, although the Planar ZF 1.4/50 is roughly the size of the f1 Noctilux. But in the big picture it’s not a big deal. If I’m just wandering around I’ll have one camera in hand and the other in the waist pack. Most of the time the pack hangs across my chest like a bag. It also holds my iPhone and some other small junk.

There’s still plenty of room in there for a nice P&S…
;-)



by Harry Lime | 18 Jun 2010 16:06 (ed. Jun 18 2010) | | Report spam→
yawn!

move on guys.

:-D

j.

by John Robinson | 18 Jun 2010 16:06 | Durban, South Africa | | Report spam→
i promise i will move on as-soon-as-i-say…

check out the samsung EX-1. the oly finder for the EP-1 handles the 24mm (full finder view) and 35mm (built in framelines) focal ranges. same sensor as s90/g-11.

the autofocus is as fast as i have ever seen on a P&S. really fast…

seriously, it’s fast.

no raw support for mac yet?!?! (insert WTF here)

by john d | 19 Jun 2010 21:06 (ed. Jun 19 2010) | Paris, France | | Report spam→
The Panasonic Lumix DMC LZ7 has served me well the past couple of years. I’m sure it’s much cheaper now then when I bought it. Quick shots, great zoom. Only drawback is sometimes pics are blurry, but a steady hand and a switch of camera setting can work wonders.
Good luck!

by Hannah Douglas | 20 Jun 2010 10:06 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
If you get the G10/G11 you will probably love how it looks and hate how slow it is! I would go for Ricoh instead. Maybe the GXR series?

by Matthew Richards | 20 Jun 2010 11:06 | Bangkok, Thailand | | Report spam→
I own both the S90 and G11. Both are awesome cameras, however both are slow. Last week, I purchased a new Ricoh CX1. The images do not compare to the images produced by the Canons. However, the CX1 is blazing fast and great for street photography, etc. It does not produce raw images and the jpegs are pretty good when shooting at ASA 400 and below

by Frank Becsi | 20 Jun 2010 15:06 | St Louis, United States | | Report spam→
I wrote a piece on this topic last year (http://www.bluefilter.co.uk/2009/11/ill-tell-you-what-i-want-what-i-really-really-want/) and was met with derision from people who suggested that the idea of a basic digital P&S with a viewfinder was a non starter. I still don’t see why.

I suspect that if a manufacturer came up with a fixed lens, good low-light capable P&S with a viewfinder, for a modest price, everyone on LS would buy it. None of us “makes do” with the failings of SLRs – we bitch about them incessantly until the manufacturers deliver us what we want, and then we bitch about someother problem that we probably didn’t no existed before hand. Why not do the same for compacts?

Yes the Leica M range fits the bill… except in price.
Yes the GF1 fits the bill… except no viewfinder.
Yes the G11 fits the bill… except too much gadgetry and not really pocketable.

As a rule, I hate cameras – they get in the way of a perfectly good picture, and this is especially true of point and shoot. If one of the manufacturers ditched the new rule book that says a camera has to be able to do a million things (only one of which is take pictures) and decided to create a compact with basic features we could all get back to being photographers again. Why is that such a radical idea? Because compacts are not aimed at photographers, that’s why.

by Michael Cockerham | 24 Jun 2010 13:06 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
This is how you solve the viewfinder problem >

http://danslaglace.com/some-thoughts-on-small-cameras-6/

(see photo at bottom of page)

by DPC | 24 Jun 2010 15:06 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Ok guys,

I’m pretty much have my eye on the Lumix GF1. I went to a local camera store here in Austin and tried it out along with the EPL-1, and the EP-2. I ignored the Canon G series because of their size, the fixed lens, and the shutter lag (which I can’t live with).

The EPL-1 seems like a pretty good deal for its price, I found the EP-2 to be too expensive, esp seeing how it has almost all the same features as its less expensive sister camera, aside from having an all metal body (the EPL-1 is metal mixed with plastic).

On the Lumix, I liked how the gears are aligned on the back of the camera body. Comprehensible and easy to use.

My only reservation is: I can’t handle the digital viewfinder. Its awful, and its comparable to looking through an old school video camcorder. Therefore, I am thinking about buying the Voigtlander OVF 40mm viewfinder. Just a few questions before I purchase:

-Does this Viewfinder work pretty well with this camera? Is the parallax pretty bad? And if not, how do you even focus??

-Is this the only Viewfinder available that fits on the Lumix? New, they are going for about $180. However, someone mentioned earlier in this post that they have used an old Yashica viewfinder and it works great. Any thoughts?

Thanks all for the helpful feedback!!

by [former member] | 10 Aug 2010 01:08 (ed. Aug 10 2010) | Austin, United States | | Report spam→
Erin, all sorts of new cameras have entered the market since you began this thread several months ago.

by Barry Milyovsky | 10 Aug 2010 01:08 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
Barry,

Please share some insight. I just went to the camera store yesterday and my understanding is that the Lumix GF1, the Olympus EP series, and the Ricoh III are still the top-of-the-line cameras that are a hybrid between P&shoots, and DLSRs. If there are more out on the market, I’d love to know which ones. Thanks!

by [former member] | 10 Aug 2010 01:08 | Austin, United States | | Report spam→
There was a comment about this on TOP the other day.
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/08/the-panasonic-gf1-an-essential-accessory.html

Cheers

by Nacho Hernandez | 10 Aug 2010 01:08 | Manila, Philippines | | Report spam→
Wow, Nacho, I was just reading that article a few moments ago. Its a good one, I’ll post it below:

Great article by Mike Johnston from “The Online Photographer”:

Talking about cameras and lenses the other night reminded me of something I meant to post but had completely forgotten about. Before leaving on vacation, I decided to try to revive my on-again, off-again love affair with the only digital camera I currently own*, the Panasonic GF1. I like the GF1 overall, but I get frustrated with the viewfinder. Although live view on the screen is actually great for indoors and low-light situations—I actually like it better than a viewfinder sometimes—shooting in bright sunlight can be very frustrating.

So, as a fix—and thinking it would be a kludge (because you can’t see where you’re focusing)—I took the advice of TOP reader dkreithen, in a comment posted last July 11th, and had my friend Stephen Gandy overnight me a 35mm Voigtländer optical viewfinder (the page is here, but you’ll have to scroll down; B&H also has them, although they’re temporarily out of stock so there would be a short wait; lastly, here it is from Amazon).

I’m always amazed by this, but even after years of shooting with many different cameras—years as a camera reviewer, for cryin’ out loud—I constantly have it reaffirmed to me that you can’t make decisions about how cameras are going to be to use from secondary sources, like reading, thinking about it, or guessing. You think you can, but you can’t. You have to actually use them. Hands on, for real shooting, putting some time in.

Somewhat to my surprise, the optical viewfinder transforms the experience of using the GF1. I really liked it. Now I almost think it’s what completes this nice camera-and-lens package. It makes the shooting experience more free, and more confident. And, for me anyway, a lot more fun.

The big rap against optical viewfinders is that you lose the focus information. And it’s true that when you’re using the Voigtländer optical viewfinder on the GF1 you lose the focus indication—you can’t see what you’re focusing on. But here’s what I discovered. (This is, obviously, true for me, but might not hold true for you.) When I use the optical viewfinder, I set it to FYYSLC** Mode and just go for it. Without me riding herd on what the focus is doing, I miss my preferred focus on a few shots every now and then. Either the camera doesn’t grab focus where it should, or it guesses where I want to put the focus and guesses wrong. Nothing bad, just occasionally. Most shots are still in focus.

So why don’t I mind? Here’s the thing. When I’m focusing with live view, I use only the single central focus point set fairly small, and set the focus deliberately for each shot. When I use the camera that way, I also miss focus on a few shots occasionally. Also to be expected, and also no big deal. But those misses are more frustrating because I expect to be in complete control. With the Voigtländer viewfinder, I don’t worry about it. I just shoot. I expect to lose a few frames to incorrect focus, so, when I do, it doesn’t bother me. (Note that you can still focus and recompose when you know it’s critical, even without referring to the live view.) If anything, I’ve been consistently pleased that the camera does so well on its own. The important thing is that I don’t worry about it when I shoot; it just flows. Nice.

Fun.

I’m going to continue to use the live viewing screen for focusing and composing in many situations. I might even sometimes switch back to single-zone focus when I do, I don’t know. But the optical viewfinder makes this camera about three times more fun to shoot with. I recommend it to others, and thank dkreithen for recommending it to me.

Mike

*Not counting loaners or my old semi-broken K-M 7D.

**Focus Yourself, Ya Stupid Little Camera. Real name: 23-AREA focusing.

ADDENDUM: To answer the question from Joe Cameron and others in the comments, I just did a few quick and dirty trials. With the camera set on 3:2 ratio, I’m finding the 35mm finder (rather than a 40mm finder) is almost perfectly accurate at middle (say, 20 feet) and farther focusing distances. Up close (1–2 feet) it shows a little more than you’ll record on the sensor, and of course as you get closer you have parallax issues as well. So that’s where a 40mm finder might be more accurate (at the sides, that is—at the top and bottom edges, at 1 foot, parallax has a large effect. I’m speaking of the camera held normally in “landscape” orientation). But for most shooting the 35mm finder is very accurate, as long as the camera is set to the proper aspect ratio.

ADDENDUM #2: To those of you who asked about the lenshood, I’ve been wracking my brain to try to remember where I got it and doing lots of Google searches to little avail, but Thomas Risberg seems to have found it—it’s being sold by “heavystar” on Ebay, as “New Metal 46mm Screw-in Wide Angle Lens Hood + Cap E46.” Item #360282330477 will also get you there. He says he has three to sell. Hope this helps, but thank Thomas, not me.

by [former member] | 10 Aug 2010 02:08 | Austin, United States | | Report spam→
PS- speaking of point and shoots, there are ups and downs to being seen either as more touristy / professional, depending on the camera you decide to use.

Last fall during my embed in Afghanistan, I shot with a Holga for 6 weeks straight. None of the soldiers took me seriously because of this camera, and some even thought that I was a college student doing a project on the military for fun, even though I protested that I actually was a professional photographer. I found it hilarious that none of them knew how expensive 120 color film was to process!

The down side was that I got made fun of a lot, and because of my “silly” cameras I had a hard time getting many of them to take me seriously and received a lot of skepticism. The up side to this is that I walked away with a lot of images that I otherwise might not have captured if I had a larger, more serious looking camera. Just some food for thought.

by [former member] | 10 Aug 2010 02:08 | Austin, United States | | Report spam→
Erin, don’t forget as human we go with what we are use to see. Me too when I see photographers with small cameras, first thing that come to my mind is ha! they must be students or citizens journalists or else especially if I never saw the person before.

And yes, with a situation like been embed with the army, I would not only bring small camera but the big one too, just to impress them even if I don’t plan to use it at all. I have a friend here and he got a project with the Canadian army as he want to shoot their training for some purpose. He show up with a Leica (M8 I think). They virtually kick him out saying that they don’t work with amateur.

by Yves Choquette | 10 Aug 2010 02:08 (ed. Aug 10 2010) | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
http://www.dpreview.com/

by Barry Milyovsky | 10 Aug 2010 05:08 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
@ Erin: somethings I don’t understand:

You talk about the Canon’s “fixed lenses” but they’re actually zooms. You are interested in the optical viewfinder but if you use one it will only correspond to a single, fixed, focal length. Plus, you aren’t going to get any feedback in an optical viewfinder. The electrical ones aren’t that good, perhaps, but I would gladly sacrifice display quality for real-time exposure correction feed-back and instant eye-level review.

by DPC | 10 Aug 2010 07:08 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Wait, hold on…the Canadiens said they don’t work with amateurs? You must be kidding.

by [former member] | 10 Aug 2010 08:08 | Kabul, Afghanistan | | Report spam→
I am a nikon guy for all the srl (film and digital) but I am really happy with my CANON G9 as a point and shoot. Long life battery, nice raw files if needed, very good jpegs, traditional viewfinder and really cheap if you can find it used! It really worths!

by Federico Caponi | 10 Aug 2010 09:08 | Warsaw, Poland | | Report spam→
Erin you already have the best P&S. The Holga is much more fun than any of the other suggestions. Totally unpredictable.

I think Teru Kuwayama has shot some nice stuff on a Holga in Afghanistan.

Yves it is disingenuous to say that soldiers are stupid. Some of these guys use some very Hi-Tech equipment. I imagine if you said they were stupid personally you would be on the receiving end of a low bulb style beating.

by [former member] | 10 Aug 2010 10:08 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
don’t overlook the Samsung EX1. i went to buy an s90 and wandered out of the shop with the Samsung? really, Samsung.

same sensor as s90, g11. optical finder from the ep1 fits the 35mm view as well as the 24mm (whole finder). 24mm f1.8?!?! and a blazing fast autofocus.

Samsung… who would have thunk?

by john d | 10 Aug 2010 12:08 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Well said Mark. I have spent the entire last year with infantry soldiers in Fort Drum, NY…Some of the smartest kids I’ve met, and most without a college education.

DPC, I misspoke when I said “fixed” lens. I meant that with the Canon G series the lens is not interchangeable, despite the fact that it zooms. I would like to have interchangeable lens capabilities with my new point and shoot. I don’t mind the lack of feedback with the optical viewfinder. I think it might even be a bit liberating to not see any exposure measurements while shooting. Like the Holga…

Love this camera! I had a blast in Afghanistan shooting with the Holga. I would actually use this camera exclusively, but getting my film through the airports almost makes it not worth it. I had a 2 hour argument with the chief of security in Qatar before he decided that he’d let me go without putting my film through the giant x-ray machine. But in this process I had to unravel several rolls of exposed film to show him that I was not trying to smuggle drugs back into the states.

And on a completely different topic… what is it with photographers being repeatedly mistaken for terrorists these days?? That’s for an entire different thread… :)

by [former member] | 10 Aug 2010 17:08 | Austin, United States | | Report spam→
Eros, I was not talking about hockey team.

by Yves Choquette | 10 Aug 2010 19:08 | Montreal, Canada | | Report spam→
Add’l info on what Marcus was talking about in June in reference to Magnum photogs shooting 9-11 with P&S. I believe that was Larry Towell who was staying with Susan Meiselas. The great quote was when Larry asked Susan about how to find where the explosion was, she said, “follow the smoke country boy, follow the smoke.” BTW, he was shooting with a P&S that used FILM, not digital. All above from the 9-11 book Magnum published, altho I don’t have the book in front of me so it’s what I remember reading in the book.
Hi, Erin, I hope all’s going well.

by John Robert Fulton Jr. | 11 Aug 2010 02:08 | Fort Worth, Texas, United States | | Report spam→
I am using a GF with the Voigtländer 40 viewfinder with the 20 and 45 lenses
did the following projects/essays with just that using the 20mm 99 percent of the time.
http://www.detroitphotographic.org/blog1/
These were produced and played for our local NPR web site

by Roy Feldman | 12 Aug 2010 13:08 (ed. Aug 12 2010) | Detroit, Michigan, United States | | Report spam→
@ Roy Feldman : I like the deli story!

by DPC | 12 Aug 2010 13:08 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Maybe the greatest point and shoot is our: SIGHT & MEMORY.

by Barry Milyovsky | 13 Aug 2010 00:08 (ed. Aug 13 2010) | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
Hmmm….Memory…memory…no wait…ah memory…yes yes memory… no no no…maybe…of course Memory…almost almost it’s coming to me now…damn it!…I can’t remember shit anymore! At least I’m not blind. :)

by Gregory Sharko | 13 Aug 2010 00:08 | Brooklyn, New York, United States | | Report spam→
When I was 26 years old my grandmother died. Shortly afterward my mother showed me a snapshot of my grandmother. I said, “No, that is not how she looked. That is not the way I remember her at all.”

by Barry Milyovsky | 13 Aug 2010 01:08 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
Don’t know, Romadog. I’m just doing this stream of consciousness thing.

by Barry Milyovsky | 13 Aug 2010 02:08 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
No suggestion

by Imants | 14 Aug 2010 00:08 | " The Boneyard", Australia | | Report spam→
I think Samsung EX-1 perfect choice as pocket camera: 24-70/1,8-2,4, metal body, dual control ring. Same sensor as G11 and LX3….

by Genya Savilov | 14 Aug 2010 11:08 | Kiev, Ukraine | | Report spam→
Drumroll please…. I decided to go with the Lumix GF1 with the pancake 20mm 1.7 lens and a Voigtlander OVF that suits 40 mm lenses. Online you can find both the Camera body and Lens at both B and H and Amazon for $724 (its actually gone down in price by about $150 since I started this post!). The Voigtlander I found also on Adorama via Amazon for $150 (B and H not only was out of stock on this viewfinder but it was also higher priced on their website), which is lower than most leading prices on this viewfinder.

I talked with Alan several times about this camera / lens / VF combo and he is very happy with it, his only complaint being that he wishes Panasonic made a wider lens (in which case they are suppose to debut one in the coming months) and that image quality is compromised above 640 ISO. But I will try it out for myself and see… its in the mail as we speak!!!

by [former member] | 15 Aug 2010 20:08 (ed. Aug 15 2010) | Austin, United States | | Report spam→
I’ve been eyeing that one up myself and I’ve seen some great images out of it. There’s a 7-14 out there, but I think we’re going to see some nice glass native to the m4/3 sometime soon.

I’m hoping that will satisfy my M9 lust for now.

Can’t wait to hear what you think of it, Erin.

by Jason Muelver | 15 Aug 2010 21:08 | Chicago, United States | | Report spam→
Also @Erin, I was searched by police dogs in Warsaw having 12 rolls of 120 on my way to the Baltics.

On my way back, I asked for a hand check of the exposed film in Riga. He was kind enough to check them by hand, then proceeded to run it through the xray when I was collecting my gear on the other side. Grrrr…..

by Jason Muelver | 15 Aug 2010 21:08 | Chicago, United States | | Report spam→
there is a 14 mm aka 28mm coming out soon ……….. but then again I know jackshit

by Imants | 16 Aug 2010 05:08 | " The Boneyard", Australia | | Report spam→
I use a voigtlander 15mm leica M-mount with an adapter. Not as fast as I’d like (f/4.5) and you can’t really focus with the EVF, but the DOF makes up for it. Good outdoor lens.

by Jonathan Lipkin | 16 Aug 2010 16:08 | Brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
I love the Canon S90. Does everything the G11 can do and it’s tiny.

Cheers,
GuessTheLighting.com

by Ted Sabarese | 01 Sep 2010 15:09 | NYC, United States | | Report spam→
Since a couple of weeks i’m using the Leica X1 (with grip and viewfinder) as point an shoot camera, it’s just like the rest of the Leica products (M6-M9) a perfect camera. Everyday i’m enjoying working with the X1, i don’t go out without my X1!

by Mischa Rapmund | 07 Sep 2010 16:09 | Bologna, Italy | | Report spam→

Yes, I realize that this has nothing to do with the point of this thread, but Erin must have bought a P&S by now and I thought we could all use a break.

by Akaky | 07 Sep 2010 20:09 | New York , United States | | Report spam→
and just in case erin didn’t…

nikon’s “G11”

http://www.pdngearguide.com/gearguide/content_display/news/e3i5d86cb3297fb74c51bb0ed81d4dff25d

by John Robinson | 09 Sep 2010 19:09 | Durban, South Africa | | Report spam→
Erin,

No doubt about it. Canon G10 if you can find one. But it depends on how you like to work. It’s great at low ISO (80-100) which is how I like it, lots of meggapixels and very smooth all round. The G11 has the marvel of its flip-screen which I am totally crazy about but it is not half as robust and isn’t quite the biz in your hand. Canon needs to sort this issue out! ; )

Alternatively, those guys at Leica need to fix a flip out screen to a Leica M9, scrap the viewfinder and call it a Leica M10. Then, I’ll be over the moon! A viewfinder gets to feel so limiting once you’ve lived and breathed and moved without one!

But for a compact with a viewfinder and a screen, it HAS to be the Canon G10!

Jenny

PS C’mon Leica! Full frame, flip out screen…. call it the M10 – the ultimate in cameras for the street shooter – then I’ll come home… pretty please!

by Jenny Lynn Walker | 13 Sep 2010 18:09 | on the road, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
i’m thinking about a sony nex with a pancake 16mm.
with a pancake its really small, and the autofocus is pretty fast… but the only dissappointing thing about this camera is a lack of a viewfinder.
i’ve just read and article about the new features in a nex 0.3 firmware, and it seems like they fixed problems with interface.
yes, the focal length is fixed (and with 18-55 it’s not really a pocketable device), but it gives a user good image quality and small size, which allow user to keep a camera in a pocket.
as for me, i really think the nex3(5)+16mm is a good combination for an everyday use (i prefer using wide angle lenses).
but there’s another interesting thing from fuji coming next march. finepix x100 looks like a real killer of all other mirorless cameras (especially olympus pen2, which costs about 1100$ in russia). if they launch it at a price of 1000$ as they promise and make good specifications, it will be a great choice for a second camera and a camera for street photography.
but till march nex looks like a good substitution for a dslr.

by alexander aksakov | 12 Oct 2010 11:10 | Syktyvkar, Russia | | Report spam→
Has anyone given any serious thought to the new and upcoming Fuji X100. I had hoped it would be released in time for my shoot in Burma, but oh well. Here’s the link for it, due out in early 10. http://www.finepix-x100.com/x100 While it isn’t FF, or have changeable lenses, it is more than workable, and a lot cheaper than the X1 or any of the Leica rangefinders. I love rangefinders, but not the cost of them. I’m also partial to the PEN, but with the new Fuji coming out, not sure I need both. BTW, Erin congrats on the new camera.

EDIT: didn’t see the comment above.

by Aaron J. Heiner | 23 Oct 2010 10:10 (ed. Oct 23 2010) | Washington, DC, United States | | Report spam→
Olympus EPL1 all the way. It kicks ass. It’s a delight to use. I use the Olympus 14-42 zoom thing when I need to travel light but mostly use my Nikkor primes on it. It’s brilliant. The files are gorgeous and it’s as fast as you’ll need shooting raw. Excellent up to 800 iso.

I’ve shot films with mine.
Example 1
Example 2
Example 3

PaulTreacy.com

by Paul Treacy | 24 Oct 2010 17:10 (ed. Oct 24 2010) | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Im happy with my Ricoh GRD3, purchased it 10 days ago… They updated their firmware couple of days ago, Cross Process and Daido Moriyama’s Black and White function.

Im very happy with it.. You can see some of my images here.

by Flanegan V Bainon | 27 Oct 2010 03:10 (ed. Oct 27 2010) | Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia | | Report spam→
Played with a Nikon Coolpix P7000. Had all the right buttons.. and I mean buttons. Not hunt thru screens to find stuff.

Anyone used this yet?

by Jason Muelver | 27 Oct 2010 22:10 | Chicago, United States | | Report spam→
Another vote for the Ricoh GRD III. Still getting to grips with it, but ideal size, solid and shoots RAW. I put a soundslides together of 8 shots of bee keepers in southern Rwanda

http://kigaliwire.com/2010/10/06/the-bee-keepers-of-mayange/

by Graham Holliday | 29 Oct 2010 07:10 (ed. Oct 29 2010) | Kigali, Rwanda | | Report spam→
I haven’t really given it much of a road test, but my GF1 seems good so far.

Sample

Sold the G10, never liked the files.

by Ian Taylor | 30 Oct 2010 11:10 (ed. Oct 30 2010) | Guangzhou, China | | Report spam→
Does anyone have experience between the Ricoh GR Digital iii vs Canon s95. I am curious about the final image IQ comparison shot at f/2.0 and 28mm. And yes, I agree that Livio Mancini’s http://www.liviomancini.com/ “Scylla” series shot with the Ricoh GRDII shows that it is the photographer not the camera that counts.

by Erik Annis | 31 Oct 2010 16:10 | | Report spam→
All this talk of digital p&s cameras depresses me. With all the awesome and unique and cheap film cameras out there peeps are going for un-unique and expensive digitals that will be obsolete in a year. Guess we’ve crossed a threshold here and that’s disappointing.
I for one refuese to give in. I will continue to shoot film, Tri-X, for all of my non-paying just walking around work.
Peace!

by Bill Putnam | 01 Nov 2010 02:11 | Washington, D.C., United States | | Report spam→
I’m with Bill on this one! ;)

HP5 still going strong… but maybe i’m addicted to the smell of fix…

by Adrian Jones | 07 Nov 2010 18:11 | Strasbourg, France | | Report spam→
I am now holding out for the Fuji x100. yes, only a fixed 35mm (equiv) lens, but boy does it look cool.

by Andrew Brinkhorst | 07 Nov 2010 23:11 | Lexington, KY, United States | | Report spam→
@Andrew Brinkhost: Overpriced, though it is a beautiful camera.

by CS Muncy | 08 Nov 2010 00:11 | New York City, United States | | Report spam→
Fooling around with g12…very satisfied.. though have heard the Lumix LX5 is a great one too….

by Udit Kulshrestha | 02 Dec 2010 22:12 | Gurgaon, India | | Report spam→
Hi CS…yes, $1000 seems high….but hopefully price will drop or I can pick up a used one. It might also push the price on the Gf-1 down even more, making me unable to resist….

And…if the image quality is there on the x100…it’s still less than a 35/1.4L for my Canon, and most definitely more street-friendly.

by Andrew Brinkhorst | 08 Dec 2010 17:12 | Lexington, KY, United States | | Report spam→
I’m a big fan of the Ricoh GR digitals, but the limitations of small sensors (dynamic range/tonality etc are a pain). Had a Sigma DP1, great image quality, resolution ok, but a bit (very) slow, and it died. So have recently bought a Sony NEX 5 with kit zoom and 16mm pancake. Very impressed. Files far better than any other compact and I would say better than the M4/3 competition, (I’ve never been happy with the M4/3 high iso/highlight performance).
It has a few annoying quirks, not as good at locking on focus with moving subjects as a dslr, takes a sec to wake up if powered down, shutter is a tad noisy, but it’s the best option currently for my needs. Very good manual focus option too, put it in manual mode, then with the Sony lenses it detects when you have started to turn the focus ring and automatically enlarges the view on screen, and because it’s such a good high res screen you can actually clearly see what you’re focusing on.

by John Carolan | 08 Dec 2010 22:12 | Shetland, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Anyone tried the Samsung NX100?

by DPC | 08 Dec 2010 22:12 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Another vote for the Panasonic GF1 + 20mm f/1.7 lens and the 17mm optical finder from Olympus. I also use an Olympus 14-42 kit lens for video with this.

by Erik Annis | 08 Dec 2010 22:12 | | Report spam→
@Andrew Brinkhorst

A friend of mine just picked up the Nikon P7000, and so far I’m impressed. Like John Carolan, I’m not impressed by the 4/3 system…without a larger, more light-sensitive sensor, I think they’re just oversized and overpriced point and shoots.

by CS Muncy | 08 Dec 2010 23:12 | New York City, United States | | Report spam→
I agree that the m4/3 are similar to a point and shoot in the sense that they are about the same size and price as the G12 and P7000. The GF1 has a crop factor of 2 therefore the 20mm f/1.7 lens would look like a 40mm f/3.5 lens on a full frame. The crop factor on the 1/1.7" sensor on the G12 and P7000 is 4.55 so the 6.1mm f/2.8 lens is like a 28mm f/13 lens at the widest setting. From a depth of field standpoint f/3.5 is much different than f/13, meaning you can get blurry backgrounds and sharp focus areas in that is your thing. If it wasn’t for the 20mm f/1.7 lens I wouldn’t bother.

by Erik Annis | 09 Dec 2010 00:12 | | Report spam→
Erik,

I might be wrong but crop factor only apply to lens size not to it’s aperture.

Yves

by Yves Choquette | 09 Dec 2010 00:12 | Montreal, Canada, Canada | | Report spam→
That is true for the aperture’s light gathering abilities (how dark you can shoot) but not in respect to the Depth of Field: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html key in the subject distance and aperture for different lenses and see the near and far depth of field. The m4/3 the 20mm f/1.7 lens is equal to a 40mm f/3.5 lens on a full frame. The G12 and P7000 6.1mm f/2.8 lens is like a 28mm f/13 lens on full frame. With a 28mm f/13 lens everything is always going to be in focus and that is also true of the G12 6.1mm f/2.8 lens.

by Erik Annis | 09 Dec 2010 00:12 | | Report spam→
I see… But does that only apply to the P&S or also to the APS-C format like Nikon with the 1.5 crop factor?

by Yves Choquette | 09 Dec 2010 01:12 | Montreal, Canada, Canada | | Report spam→
And then there is the “crap” factor. Always keep that in mind.

by Barry Milyovsky | 09 Dec 2010 01:12 | Manhattan, United States | | Report spam→
The Depth of Field calulation: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html applies to all formats; from iphone up to 8×10 view cameras.

by Erik Annis | 09 Dec 2010 02:12 | | Report spam→

Get notified when someone replies to this thread:
Feed-icon-10x10 via RSS
Recommended
Icon_email via email
You can unsubscribe later.

More about sponsorship→

Participants

DPC, Photographer DPC
Photographer
Paris , France
Nacho Hernandez, Photographer Nacho Hernandez
Photographer
(Philippines)
Manila , Philippines
Livio Mancini, photojournalist Livio Mancini
photojournalist
Havana , Cuba ( HAV )
Ed Leveckis, Ed Leveckis
New York , United States ( LGA )
Barry Milyovsky, totally unprofessional Barry Milyovsky
totally unprofessional
(emperor of ice cream )
New York , United States
Harry Lime, Photographer Harry Lime
Photographer
[undisclosed location].
Jonathan Lipkin, Professor, Photographer Jonathan Lipkin
Professor, Photographer
Brooklyn , United States
Jonathan Castner, Photojournalist Jonathan Castner
Photojournalist
Denver , United States
James Colburn, Photographer/Photo Editor James Colburn
Photographer/Photo Editor
Omaha, Nebraska , United States ( OMA )
Patricio Murphy, Musician, photographer Patricio Murphy
Musician, photographer
Buenos Aires , Argentina
Michael Barrientos, Photojournalist Michael Barrientos
Photojournalist
Guayaquil , Ecuador
john d, retired hooligan john d
retired hooligan
(whats a tagline?)
Istanbul , Turkey
Pablo Delano, photographer Pablo Delano
photographer
Hartford , United States
Federico Caponi, Photographer Federico Caponi
Photographer
Warsaw , Poland
Mark Bullimore, Freelance Photographer Mark Bullimore
Freelance Photographer
Thetford , United Kingdom
Marcus Adams, Photographer & Guide Marcus Adams
Photographer & Guide
(Guide, Photographer & Fixer)
Singapore , Singapore
Joel Sackett, photographer Joel Sackett
photographer
Puget Sound, Washington , United States ( AAA )
Jack Kurtz, Photojournalist Jack Kurtz
Photojournalist
Bangkok , Thailand
marius sortland myklebust, design/photo-aficionado marius sortland myklebust
design/photo-aficionado
Wellington , New Zealand
Frank Becsi, Frank Becsi
St Louis , United States
Yves Choquette, Photojournalist Yves Choquette
Photojournalist
Montreal , Canada
marc hofer, Photographer marc hofer
Photographer
Kampala , Uganda
JR, (John Watts-Robertson)., Photographer JR, (John Watts-Robertson).
Photographer
Rothwell , United Kingdom
Davin Ellicson, Photographer Davin Ellicson
Photographer
New York , United States
Aaron J. Heiner, Photojournalist Aaron J. Heiner
Photojournalist
(Sleeping his life away)
Baltimore, Md , United States ( IAD )
Jethro Soudant, Photographer Jethro Soudant
Photographer
Buffalo, Ny , United States
John Robinson, Photographer John Robinson
Photographer
(works with light)
Pigeon Club , South Africa
Hannah Douglas, Journalist/Editor/Writer Hannah Douglas
Journalist/Editor/Writer
San Francisco, California , United States ( SFO )
Matthew Richards, Photojournalist Matthew Richards
Photojournalist
Nakhon Ratchasima , Thailand
Michael Cockerham, Documentalistic Bystander Michael Cockerham
Documentalistic Bystander
London , United Kingdom
John Robert Fulton Jr., Photographs John Robert Fulton Jr.
Photographs
Spring Lake, Michigan , United States
Roy Feldman, Editorial Photographer Roy Feldman
Editorial Photographer
Detroit, Michigan , United States
Gregory Sharko, photographer Gregory Sharko
photographer
Brooklyn, New York , United States ( JFK )
Imants, gecko hunter Imants
gecko hunter
" The Boneyard" , Australia
Genya Savilov, Photographer Genya Savilov
Photographer
Kiev , Ukraine
Jason Muelver, Photographer Jason Muelver
Photographer
Chicago , United States ( ORD )
Ted Sabarese, Photographer Ted Sabarese
Photographer
Nyc , United States
Mischa Rapmund, Photojournalist Mischa Rapmund
Photojournalist
Helmond , Netherlands
Akaky, Contemptible lout Akaky
Contemptible lout
New York , United States ( AAA )
Jenny Lynn Walker, Homo Sapien Jenny Lynn Walker
Homo Sapien
London , United Kingdom
alexander aksakov, documentary photography alexander aksakov
documentary photography
Syktyvkar , Russia
Paul  Treacy, Photographer Paul Treacy
Photographer
(Photohumourist)
London , United Kingdom ( LGW )
Flanegan V Bainon, Photographer Flanegan V Bainon
Photographer
(Flanegan B)
Kota Kinabalu , Malaysia
Graham Holliday, journalist Graham Holliday
journalist
(kigaliwire.com)
Kigali , Rwanda
Ian Taylor, Photographer Ian Taylor
Photographer
Bangkok , Thailand
Erik Annis, Photographer Erik Annis
Photographer
[undisclosed location].
Bill Putnam, Producer. Bill Putnam
Producer.
(Video-Photo)
Washington, D.C. , United States
Adrian Jones, Freelance Photographer Adrian Jones
Freelance Photographer
Strasbourg , France
Andrew Brinkhorst, photographer Andrew Brinkhorst
photographer
Lexington, Ky , United States
CS Muncy, Photojournalist CS Muncy
Photojournalist
New York , United States ( JFK )
Udit Kulshrestha, Photographer Udit Kulshrestha
Photographer
(Independant Photographer)
Gurgaon , India ( DEL )
John Carolan, Photographer John Carolan
Photographer
Shetland , United Kingdom


Keywords

Top↑ | RSS/XML | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | support@lightstalkers.org / ©2004-2014 November Eleven