Jump to content

Really, really small back up for M8


wlaidlaw

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I think these look really great. Sadly I am guessing that behind the great looking facade, they have exactly the same tiny lens/sensor as the DSC.

 

Certainly they aren't intended as serious picture taking tools.

 

A few years ago I bought a Pentax Optio S5! and carried it around quite a lot. A lovely little package, twice the size of a Minox C, half the size of a GX100, a comfortable 5MP and even a usable OVF - but IQ was never quite good enough for anything but snapshots and documentation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My take everywhere camera is the new Pany fx-37, the equivalent of the new generation clux2. Very small and goes to 25mm wide. Not M or dl4 quality but surprisingly good for web or 4x6 photos. I often forget it's in my pocket.

 

My wife has one, great little camera. About US$200 in Hong Kong. It is essentially a C-Lux 3, right?

 

If you are prepared to consider 35mm film, I have an Olympus Mju-II that I always have in my briefcase that cost me about US$75 new. The lens is more than decent, it doesn't need a case, it's water resistant and if you accidentally lose it, it really does not matter. Image quality is outstanding. Sample (a little grainy - it's Fuji 800)

 

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/2535958283_ab0077640f_b.jpg

 

G.

Edited by gylee
Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife has one, great little camera. About US$200 in Hong Kong. It is essentially a C-Lux 3, right?

 

If you are prepared to consider 35mm film, I have an Olympus Mju-II that I always have in my briefcase that cost me about US$75 new. The lens is more than decent, it doesn't need a case, it's water resistant and if you accidentally lose it, it really does not matter. Image quality is outstanding. Sample (a little grainy - it's Fuji 800)

 

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/2535958283_ab0077640f_b.jpg

 

"Outstanding" to me implies holding up well alongside Leica or Nikon primes, which my Rollei 35 (Tessar) does and my Mju-II didn't. But it was very good considering the price and size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really would not want to go back to film. In the earlier days of digital up to about 2004, I used film for my higher quality work, using Contax G2, RTSII and RX cameras. I got very bored with poor processing. Sadly from being careless with chemicals over 40 years, I became very sensitive to photochemicals in the mid 90's and had to give up my own processing, even after trying latex gloves, masks etc.

 

I had some dreadful experiences in the early 'noughties' with films being totally ruined by so called professional processors and occasionally even lost. The skills to process film well (and I don't mean just running it through a Fuji Frontier machine) seem to be dying, quite understandably, given the lack of demand.

 

I already have a mid size back up, the Ricoh GX200, with which I am very satisfied, even though I am a little frustrated by the continuing absence of a C1 RAW conversion profile for it. It was just the thought of occasionally being able to sneak a camera into those places that I should not and being able to throw a tiny camera in my bag with no weight/space penalty, that gave rise to my Minox purchase. I am guessing with current technology, I was hoping for something that is not technically possible.

 

I went to a Vernissage (opening) of an exhibition of photographs by Jacques Renoir (Jean Renoir's grandson) yesterday evening at Villa Aurienne in Fréjus. The photos I took with the Minox are complete garbage with not a single usable one. The only upside is that Jacques was very amused by the Minox, as he like me, used to use a film one.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

For really, really small back up, the Ricoh GRD II is a good choice. I don't think the LX3 and similar are really that small. The GRD II fits in a trouser pocket, courier bag, or brief case with very little size/weight penalty. It has an alloy body so is very light and very tough, and as the lens retracts completely it has a very thin profile. Given the camera's other features I have never seen this small size mentioned in the reviews, so it may not be obvious unless you stop and consider it. I have a 28mm optical viewfinder attached to mine, and it is still small enough to take anywhere with no real penalty (other than the small sensor IQ, of course, which they all suffer from!). Worth considering.

 

Robert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here is a picture from the Minox Spy Cam. You can see that the WB is miles off with a strong blue tint. My chair is charcoal grey, and the iMac screen is a proper Monaco Optix Pro calibrated grey. The end of the HP paper box in the shelf is a soft sky blue. There is no WB adjustment or setting. The picture is very soft as well.

 

Wilson

 

Wilson, now you could actually use that iSight integrated into your iMac...

it would probably work as a backup better than your minox... :D:D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

For really, really small back up, the Ricoh GRD II is a good choice. Worth considering.

 

Robert

 

The RAW write speed has improved I understand from the GRD I which I own, it was painfully slow. I have also had mine back twice, under warranty, for switching on itself in the ubiquitous pocket and thus breaking the lens extension motor/gear. The fixed focal length is a limitation if you are used to zooms but like most/all primes the quality improvement is clearly visible. It does allow full control and has been a good camera for me so yes "Worth considering". Take care with an external viewfinder my Leica one blocks the pop up flash which you may or may not deem a fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris, I use the recommended Ricoh viewfinder which clears the pop-up flash. Speed/responsiveness is quite good (I only shoot raw). Never had a problem with the on/off switch; sorry to hear of your difficulties.

I did not think particularly about the size of the GR II when I bought it, but since then I have noticed that it really is quite small, even by p&s standards.

Cheers

Robert

Link to post
Share on other sites

The RAW write speed has improved I understand from the GRD I which I own, it was painfully slow. I have also had mine back twice, under warranty, for switching on itself in the ubiquitous pocket and thus breaking the lens extension motor/gear. The fixed focal length is a limitation if you are used to zooms but like most/all primes the quality improvement is clearly visible. It does allow full control and has been a good camera for me so yes "Worth considering". Take care with an external viewfinder my Leica one blocks the pop up flash which you may or may not deem a fault.

 

I would assume the RAW write speed of the GR-D II has increased along the same lines as the GX200 did from the GX100. RAW was not really usable on the GX100 due to about 8 second write delay to next shot. I use nothing but RAW/DNG, on the GX200, other than when I want to take web/eBay shots, where I have JPEG fine on the My1 setting on the settings dial. Ricoh have done a superb job on improvements on this camera from the GX100, particularly on the user interface, which is now great. The only limitation is sensor noise above ISO 200. I would have preferred that they had left the Pixels at the already adequate 10MP and improved the noise, rather than increasing the Pixels to 12 MP.

 

Ricoh sadly do not recognise that Macs exist and provide no RAW conversion software for Mac. I have made a stab at a profile on C1 but it is far from perfect. The best Mac RAW converter for the Ricoh images I have found, is the beta version of ACR 5.3 (it seems to be taking a long time to go from the beta of this, which has been out for ages, to the final version of ACR 5.3). Batching images from Bridge to ACR is a less than seamless process and not nearly as nice as C1.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely understand the desire to carry around a camera whenever possible. I also want that camera to be able to take stellar photos. And by stellar I do not mean render ever detail. They just need to produce photographs that will look decent when printed, and usually that requires some form of exposure control.

 

For years that camera was a Nikon 35ti for me. Then it was a series of analog, then digital Elphs. But I think I've found the sweet spot with the D-lux 4.

 

Sure, it's a little fiddly (the joystick controls are strange and unnatural to me). But I'm consistently amazed by the images that come out of this thing, and I love the 16:9 frame. It also doubles as a decent video recorder for impromptu movies of my son.

 

So when the M8 doesn't come out--and very often even when it does--the D-lux 4 is in the bag too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wilson. My vote is with the DLux. Like you, I have a medium sized backup (a Canon G-10) and like you I also want something smaller sometimes. I am still stuck in the dark ages of a D-Lux 3 but it is just fine for the occasional use, and does slip into a pocket. I'm not enamored of LCD only cameras (the reason I have a G10) but for a once and a while shot its perfectly usable. YMMV. I haven't looked but I'm guessing that used DLux 3's (or the Panny equivalent) have to be pretty inexpensive now. You'll get RAW too, which for me was a prerequisite. The Dlux 4 looks even better, but I have resisted the temptation so far; the other posters commenting seem to give it thumbs up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot of answers on here suggesting the GRD as a backup and until 3 months ago I would have agreed with them.

 

In Dec I managed to pick up a new Sigma DP1 for £299 + viewfinder and hood and must admit it blows all my other compacts away for quality.

 

Ok it is not the fastest to focus (unless you use manual focus then you also get instant shutter release ), it is also not the quickest to write Raw images at around 5 sec (faster than the GRD1 though) but it is well made and not much larger than the GRD.

 

This is a camera that will serve you well IQ wise as a M8 backup.

 

You can see some of my DP1 images here:

 

Iansky Photosite: Sigma DP1

Link to post
Share on other sites

For really, really small back up, the Ricoh GRD II is a good choice.

 

Wilson's already made it clear that he's looking for something much smaller than the Ricoh GX or GRD.

 

A classic Minox is about a quarter the size of my GX100: I'd like to find the digital equivalent. Are there any 5MP telephones with manual focus and parallax-corrected optical viewfinder?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilson's already made it clear that he's looking for something much smaller than the Ricoh GX or GRD.

 

A classic Minox is about a quarter the size of my GX100: I'd like to find the digital equivalent. Are there any 5MP telephones with manual focus and parallax-corrected optical viewfinder?

 

Exactly - I already have a GX200 and for most of the time that is an excellent back up for the M8. I had hoped (in vain as it turns out) that Minox would only put their name to a product that produced at least as good results as a film Minox, from say 1938! I am obviously thinking of the Minox that was owned by Leica and not the current bunch, who seem happy to put their logo on any piece of tat made in the PRC, as long as they can make a buck on it. A friend, who had previously bought my Minox 35GT, bought one of their mainstream digital cameras and it was dire. You could have measured the shutter lag with a calendar. I should have been forewarned.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

You haven't said whether you rank small over quality (apology in advance if I missed it)

 

Seriously, if you want small size, then you are looking at our Chinese, sorry, Texan friends

 

Zippo Lighter Digital Camera

 

SPY CAMERAS AND DIGITAL CAMERAS!

 

Small as can be.

 

Frankly, I wonder if discussions like this ever have an answer. Small cameras are cheap enough aren't they?

 

I remember, back in the 70's and 80's, most people had one camera for 20 years. The tiny fraction of amateur enthusiasts bought one pro-level camera and expected to get 5 years out of it. Only true amortisation pros bought more frequently. They barely fretted about it.

 

Now many people change camera once or twice a year. And....

Edited by markgay
Link to post
Share on other sites

You haven't said whether you rank small over quality (apology in advance if I missed it)

 

Seriously, if you want small size, then you are looking at our Chinese, sorry, Texan friends

 

Zippo Lighter Digital Camera

 

SPY CAMERAS AND DIGITAL CAMERAS!

 

Small as can be.

 

Mark,

 

I wanted both small and quality but I am going to be disappointed. Please see the attached photo below to give everyone an idea of the relative sizes. The Minox is tiny and in theory a good idea. I just wish they had not used a lens and sensor, which I suspect is designed for a cheap mobile phone. Please excuse the quality of the photo but the only imaging device I had left was my iPhone, However I can assure you that the picture is better than the Minox would be capable of taking in that light.

 

Wilson

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

You haven't said whether you rank small over quality (apology in advance if I missed it).

 

It's a trade-off, of course. The "Zippo" camera is plenty small but its VGA sensor and fixed focus lens place it beneath consideration. Conversely cameras such as the GRD II have more than adequate performance but are too big to share a trouser pocket (especially if you want an optical viewfinder). At the risk of sounding like a cracked record, the classic Minox is the reference: performance is well below a decent 35mm camera, but it's the best possible given the size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...