Hey Folks,

Wondering, I've been looking for a camera like the Lumix that Michael discussed previously. A point and shoot with a wide 28mm 35 eqivalent. One that has raw and jpeg and produces clean, relatively noise free files...6 megapixels would be fine as long as the files are clean and dont need a lot of noise work. the panasonic looks perfect for what I want but reading about the noise level of the images has turned me away.

Does anyone think, or, know if any of these companies are going to get on the ball and introduce something soon?

Comments, please...secrets, even better.

Thanks all.

Pentax K100D with the 21mm pancake prime lens (31.5mm with the crop). 6 Megapixels, shake reduction, a tiny body with a tiny and great lens.

Pom,

I read a few reviews of that camera and it sounds great but Im thinking along the lines of compact designs, rangefinder styles, like the panasonic I mentioned.

It's significantly smaller than the panasonic equivelent SLR the L1, if you are looking for a point and shoot then I'm afraid I know nothing other than shutter lag and lots of noise!

Yep,

I guess Im hoping for something to pop up as a new release at Photokina that will satisfy my needs and probably lots of other folks needs as well.

It's a significant gap in the digital lineup. The cameras with big and decent chips are big (SLR-Sony R1) or very expensive (M8). The point and shoots are very noisy, display shutter lag and are slooow to use. The bridge cameras beloved by MR are.....well that pentax I mentioned with the 21mm pancake prime is not that much bigger while being an SLR...

In the old days film was the big equaliser. Fuji NPH was a great 400 speed portrait film whether you put it into a EOS 1V, a F5 or a Yashica T4/Konica Kexar AF (small very sharp P&S's). Now the digital juggernaut is steamrolling over the genres of photography and saying, 'this is what there is, take it or leave it because I'm killing film but not replacing it for the smaller genres!'

It still remains to be seen whether the M8 will be a dying gasp from Leica or a revival. I've seen a lot of Leica-philes being rather wary of a camera which will be out of date in a couple of years (when we have foveon type, super DR, far more highlight latitude, far better tonality, etc) being sold under the banner of the 'last for ever' leicas. You could put the most modern film in your M3 and get the same results as someone shooting with the most advanced electronic everything SLR. The same will not be true comparing the M8 to a consumer level DSLR 5 year from now and that is a promise.

So where does that leave the street shooter or travel photo journalist? The recent article on new fiber based inkjet papers is spot on. People are forgetting how it used to be, the latest digital P&S's are better than the last lot but they are nowhere near what they need to be to replace the quality, compact rangefinder/carry anywhere camera of the film era. And they probably will never bother.

Yep again Pom,

I still shoot film across all formats. Im slow to embrace the all digital thing. I've shot with a lot of the digital cameras via rental, some experience with a few point and shoots. I have never had one in my hands that I thought I would be able to keep for more than a couple of years and abso;utely hate that feeling. Im foolishly looking for one the will stay with me for a while and produce images that dont have leave me wanting. the images only come once and having unsatisfactory files just plain sucks. So, for now, it's film or lug around an anvil of a Canon mark XII ds123eos. forget it, Id rather carry my 4x5 or med format stuff, any day. Right now im considering a leica m of some sort for my carry around cam. This thread was hopeful probe for some sort of new camera that would work well and be smallish.

I suspect this will turn out to be not correct. For the past year or even two, most "advances" in consumer digitals has been churn, rather than real movement. if you have one of the popular Canon or Kodak home snapshot printers (which are really quite good for what they do) or if you take your memory card to a Kodak Kiosk, it quickly becomes evident that it doesn't matter how many megapixels you have, as long as it's more than five, or whether the lens is made by Leica or Kodak -- the pictures look the same. Over the next five years, I expect more churn, like the chrome on a new Pontiac, and slowly falling prices, but not much real improvement.

The M8, on the other hand, while primarily an enthusiast camera, will, I think, shoot photos that are quite adequate for most high-standard magazine journalism even five years from now, because the prints will be better than the printing presses used in the magazines. (But this may not be true with fashion shoots or car shoots or other high-gloss advertising photography which may be printed separately, and which will remain with MF.)

So -- I think the M8 will hold up quite well, because I think the basic functions of digital are now reaching a price/utility plateau.

More interesting to me is the Canon/Nikon question. Where is Canon going? I don't see that it'll really make inroads on MF (in which, five years from now, 33 or 39mp cameras willl be standard, along with big fat juicy pixels and much better software.) In the meantime, if Nikon sticks with the 1.5 format, you'll have a camera that will do everything pj's need, and will be smaller across the board, and cheaper, and, focal-length for focal-length, faster. Will Canon find itself squeezed, rather than Nikon?

JC

The Canon S80 if it hadn't dropped RAW would have done the trick, a lovely camera if JPEGs are sufficient. Though it's now runoured to be discontinued and not replaced at all. I use a [very battered S60] which produces great pics but is almost unusable at 400ISO and you don't even get the option of 1000 or 16000ISO like you got with film. If you can still find an S60 or S70 they'll fit your needs pretty well.
There is the Ricoh GR D a lovely little camera with a fast wideangle lens and aimed at the serious amateur/profesional. Except for the crippling 13 secs write time for RAW! Which kind of undermines the enire point of the camera.

My ideal camera to replace my Olympus XAs would have the 5D chip in it, a 28mm f2.4 lens and be the same size as an XA/S80/GR D. 2 fps would be nice too for RAW.
I find the cumbersome size of decent quality digital somewhat infuriating. My old OMs are a fraction of the size of my 20D and 5Ds yet produce fantastic results. The Pentax K1000d is hardly pocketable even with a 21mm lens. And compared to the superior quality Olympus XA......

[quote=jjj,Sep 5 2006, 11:45 PM]
Hi the Best 35mm camera I ever had(still have) was my contax g1. + 3lenses.Everything fitted into my little billingam pola bag. The contax was sharp at all apertures and right into the corners too. I usually used xp2 rated at 200iso set the camera on auto and never had a problem! Quality is far better than my 20d. Really easy to process xp2 at the labs and scanning on the epson produced superb A3+ prints. No shutter lag or noise (definately grain, but to my mind thats what 35mm should have) compact and unagressive. The 20d is big and ugly! and very plasticy. But for 18 months thats all I used for my commercial work. Quick turnarounds, instant gratification and once published you couldnt see the difference between film, med format and digital.
I definately am going to start using the contax again once I have it serviced. Any suggestions where I could send it to for a rliable service? A couple of years ago I tried contax usa but had to return it twice for the same problem. Living in RSA that takes quite a long time!
thanks Ivan

What I would give for a 'real' digital Contax G camera (not a P&S with the name but not much else)!

All over this forum, for as long as I can remember, people have been clamouring for a decent pocket camera. I myself have spent sleepless nights swearing at the manufacturers for not making the tool I want and because I'm sad. I don't have a pocket camera at the moment, my Ricoh GR! packed up again and I'm loathed to have the thing repaired for the 4th time - it costs a fortune. My Olympus XA has disappeared somewhere and the smallest camera is now a Canonet - hardly pocketable! I'm a fully subscibed chlld of the digital generation and I'm bored of processing film and no longer have access to half decent scanners - what am I meant to do?! I'm seriously considering getting one of those Nokia phones with the zeiss lense, if I'm going to end up with a flawed product, I might as well get it for free, right?

I've often idolly dreamt of setting up a company to make these hitherto undesigned cameras and it's occured to me that there is the expertise on these forums to do this....Ray knows about optics so we've got a lens designer, Richard Chang is working on a black and white digiback so I guess he knows about sensor design stuff and I'm sure somewhere I read Michael held patents for things and you get those for designy inventy type stuff right? I'll be the dolly bird in the adverts since I can contribute precisely nothing technical to the designs.

I would want to initially see two cameras introduced, available with either colour or black and white sensors, 5-10 noise free MP with high ISO capabilities and APS sensors. One would be very similar to an Olympus XA in size. I want AV and P modes, a 24-50mm eqv lens and RF focussing with option of AF and a small accessory flash. The other would be slightly larger to accomadate a 24-150 lens, M and TV modes, again RF focussing with AF possible and a built in bounce flash. Both would have considerable RAW buffers, dials for adjusting important things (including ISO) big optical VFs and an absence of beepy flashy gimmicky crap.

Stuff the manufacturers and their megapixel wars, lets have photographers designing cameras for photography rather than bragging rights in the pub!

situ,

yes.

I am basically the same, but would prefer the chip to be an APS D80 or Rebel 400 10 MP chip with a 18 mm f1.4 DX VR/IS lens (equiavelent to a 27 mm).

The camera would be more compact thanks to the APS sensor, with an image quality very similar.

Regards,
Bernard

That is the other version I'd like!
Though I'd like the 35mm size sensor too for the DoF characteristics. The images from the 5D are way nicer than a 20D as a result. Bar the dreadfull vignetting you get at times. At least it's easy to sort out in ACR. Though f1.4 would help, but would whack size of lens up. Manual focus would be ideal as well. AF on the little cameras is fine as DoF is large enough to cover errors, but up the chip size, widen the aperture...

Why do you need IS on such a lens? I can hand hold certainly 1/8 and I reckon 1/4 on a wide angle range finder.....I suffer more problems with motion blur that camera shake at WA/ lowlight

A new S70 can still be had from sources through Amazon.com. I have one and for a pocket camera I love it.

Clearly not mandatory to have IS/VR. I would still buy without it!

VR would further expand the enveloppe of usage though.

Cheers,
Bernard

I am still hoping an S90 will be announced with RAW or the GR D gets it RAW file writing speeds sorted out. I spoke to the Ricoh reps at a trade show in March and they admitted that it was the camera's Achilles' heel. I like my S60 but it's just that little bit too bulky for my liking. The S80 improves on the S60/70 in many ways bar the dropping of RAW.
Found an S70 for sale here in UK on Amazon.co.uk - £500!!! They were just over £200 in June for last few in UK.

Oh yes, the ideal small high quality camera also needs a hot shoe.

Nice idea and thanks for the flattery, but Ray wouldn't have a clue how to design a lens . I've never used the software and I've never even read a book devoted to lens design. All my knowledge of lenses is of the general type; the relationship between f stop and DoF; the relationship between diffraction and resolution etc.

However, I agree that the choice amongst P&S digicams is bewildering. It seems that almost every model has a least one advantage over another, whether it be merely price and weight, but so many disadvantages it's almost impossible to make a decision.

The ideal P&S would be one that incorporates all the good points that already exist in the hundreds of different models, but that really wouldn't be possible because of patents, I presume. The Canon S70 mentioned here, for example, has a lot of noise at ISO 400, much more than the lighter and more compact FinePix F30.

Image stabilisation is now a must. If the compact P&S is to be your main camera for all purposes, then a RAW mode is also very desirable. For my purposes, lack of a RAW capability with its long write time is not such a big issue and, if given a choice between RAW and image stabilisation, I'd choose IS. In fact, for all shots where freezing subject movement is not a priority, an IS capability is the equivalent of a low noise, high ISO, as in the FinePix F30.

At the moment, my ideal 'ultra' compact P&S would be the Sony DSC T30 with the low noise of the FinePix F30 and the aperture and shutter priority modes of the F30. RAW would be icing on the cake.