Jump to content

Mini M? [MERGED] AKA X-Vario


digitalfx

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The thread is now all about compromises. Pretty much everything in life involves a compromise somewhere along the line, but digital compacts seem to be an area where new technology can't catch up with film.

 

My Minox camera is the size of a cigarette packet, yet it's still 'full frame' and has a high quality lens which means when I want to carry a small camera, I don't have to sacrifice image quality (compared to an M or SLR).

 

I wonder if digital compacts can ever catch up?

 

James,

 

It seems strange how such a small lens on the Minox and Rollei compacts could be f2.8 and still cover a full frame in a tiny body. You would have thought that something similar would appear in digital.

 

It's certainly not the current digital Minoxes. I have just been using the latest pseudo Leica DCC 14.0 and the results were pitiful. The images were considerably worse than those taken by a five year old iPhone. Thank god it broke after a day (LCD backlight failed) and I could in all good conscience, send it back for a refund.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Don't want to rain on your parade James but your Minox has a mere 11x8mm film IIRC which means that its DoF is still huge compared to an APS-C camera (23.7x15.6mm). Kind of Digilux 2 with grain sort of. :D

 

You're confusing Minox spy cameras with Minox 35mm compacts

 

dunk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want to rain on your parade James but your Minox has a mere 11x8mm film IIRC which means that its DoF is still huge compared to an APS-C camera (23.7x15.6mm). Kind of Digilux 2 with grain sort of. :D

 

This is a full frame 35mm camera not the 'spy'camera you're thinking of.:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be possible to make a full frame digital version of the Minox or Olympus small 35mm cameras once digital sensors can accept light from a more extreme angle. The Fuji/Panasonic press release about their new sensor technology alludes to this.

 

However I also think that the current compacts do a better job than those full frame film compacts in many ways. They certainly are much more versatile. I am not sure if there is that big a need to make them much better. And tiny cell phone cameras do a much better job than the Minox sub-miniatures do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be possible to make a full frame digital version of the Minox or Olympus small 35mm cameras once digital sensors can accept light from a more extreme angle. The Fuji/Panasonic press release about their new sensor technology alludes to this.

 

However I also think that the current compacts do a better job than those full frame film compacts in many ways. They certainly are much more versatile. I am not sure if there is that beig a need to make them much better. And tiny cell phone cameras do a much better job than the Minox sub-miniatures do.

 

Leica's CMOSIS sensor on the M240 already does this as described by Stefan Daniel in Thorsten's Photokina interview last September. Leica was and is ahead of the game as regards using non-telecentric lenses on ILCs.

 

dunk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The thread is now all about compromises. Pretty much everything in life involves a compromise somewhere along the line, but digital compacts seem to be an area where new technology can't catch up with film.

 

My Minox camera is the size of a cigarette packet, yet it's still 'full frame' and has a high quality lens which means when I want to carry a small camera, I don't have to sacrifice image quality (compared to an M or SLR).

 

I wonder if digital compacts can ever catch up?

 

You make a very good point, and it's a great thought, but a long way off if ever. The 35 series MInox's are great cameras and as you said so convenient to carry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica's CMOSIS sensor on the M240 already does this as described by Stefan Daniel in Thorsten's Photokina interview last September. Leica was and is ahead of the game as regards using non-telecentric lenses on ILCs.

 

dunk

 

I'm thinking of quite a bit more of an angle than that. I don't think the demand for small full frame cameras is universal since smaller sensor cameras are pretty good and inexpensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging by the prices that Contax T3's and T2's are fetching on EBay at the moment I'm convinced that if somebody bought the rights and produced a real high end miniature 35mm film compact with a 35mm prime lens, out of the finest materials they would sell without any problem . In the same way that there is interest again in vinyl records, and things that are just very well screwed together . Of course digital has a whole host of advantages, but when the frames count, you think more about what you're photographing and how best to expose it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You make a very good point, and it's a great thought, but a long way off if ever. The 35 series MInox's are great cameras and as you said so convenient to carry.

 

For years I travelled on business with a Minox 35GT in my shirt pocket. They were a bit plasticy but that resulted in a much lighter weight than the all metal Rollei 35S I used before. I agree with Alan, the results from the 8 x 11 (I have two C's, a chrome and a black) leave a bit to be desired but if you stick to 100 ISO black and white film, they are not too bad. However the cost of getting an 8 x 11 film processed and printed nowadays is prohibitive (around £55 per 36 exposure cassette)

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging by the prices that Contax T3's and T2's are fetching on EBay at the moment I'm convinced that if somebody bought the rights and produced a real high end miniature 35mm film compact with a 35mm prime lens, out of the finest materials they would sell without any problem . In the same way that there is interest again in vinyl records, and things that are just very well screwed together . Of course digital has a whole host of advantages, but when the frames count, you think more about what you're photographing and how best to expose it.

 

If that was the case then Leica would still be making limited edition Minilux cameras. To start up a production line from scratch for this type of camera would not be an economical proposition. The vinyl record industry and audiophile quality transcription record decks are totally different kettles to cameras. If you want quality film images then buy a Leica rangefinder camera or a Rolleiflex TLR. Leica M film cameras including the CL will produce better images than any Contax compact especially when used with a late Summicron lens.

 

dunk

Link to post
Share on other sites

You make a very good point, and it's a great thought, but a long way off if ever. The 35 series MInox's are great cameras and as you said so convenient to carry.

 

If that was the case then Leica would still be making limited edition Minilux cameras. To start up a production line from scratch for this type of camera would not be an economical proposition. The vinyl record industry and audiophile quality transcription record decks are totally different kettles to cameras. If you want quality film images then buy a Leica rangefinder camera or a Rolleiflex TLR. Leica M film cameras including the CL will produce better images than any Contax compact especially when used with a late Summicron lens.

 

dunk

 

I think the market changes, I had a Minilux and sold it, but then just became interested again for whatever reason. It was just that bit big to be "pocketable" unlike the Contax T3 . I think it was the materials that proved to generate the success over the MInox's that with I think one exception were plastic as opposed to metal/titanium. Anyway just a thought

Link to post
Share on other sites

For years I travelled on business with a Minox 35GT in my shirt pocket. They were a bit plasticy but that resulted in a much lighter weight than the all metal Rollei 35S I used before. I agree with Alan, the results from the 8 x 11 (I have two C's, a chrome and a black) leave a bit to be desired but if you stick to 100 ISO black and white film, they are not too bad. However the cost of getting an 8 x 11 film processed and printed nowadays is prohibitive (around £55 per 36 exposure cassette)

 

Wilson

 

I've got a Minox enlarger for you. I think I sold the tiny developing stuff. I had pretty much everything they made (sub mini) at one time. I still have a C somewhere.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I ordered this a few days ago for my Ricoh GXR.

 

APS-C. 24-85mm mechanical zoom. F3.5 to F5.5. Less than $500. the optics are superb.

 

GXR / Digital Cameras | Ricoh Global

 

i cannot imagine spending $3k on an X-Vario....it boggles my mind. How in the world does Leica claim to be unique with this type of offering? Do they think we are that stupid?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like my GXR very much. Don't like the colours it produces, though. Have never been a fan of Ricoh colours since the GRD (original model). The B&W images I made with the GXR with my 90mm Summicron in B&W were superb, on the other hand... Ricoh still makes one of the Top 3 out-of-the-camera B&W jpegs, to my eyes.*

 

That's the thing about digital cameras: you're not just buying a light tight box with a lens screwed on; it also includes a lifetime supply of a particular film.

 

*The other two are Leica and Olympus, both of which also have the advantage of having pleasing colour as well as B&W jpegs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...