Best tiny, quick response digital point and shoot?

Hi folks, I'm <em>strictly</em> a casual photographer, I'm probably

not nearly as serious as most of you. Currently I'm still using a

Ricoh GR1s 35 mm point and shoot. Nice little camera, the controls

and UI are great (except for the protruding on/off button which I

fixed by covering it with a taped on piece of old credit card). But,

I'm tired of messing with film and want to switch to digital.

 

<p>

However, I just can't seem to find the information I need on the net

to decide what digital camera I want. I'm just not serious enough

about photography to spend days or weeks researching this. What I

need is the advice of an expert, or rather, a bunch of Reasonably

Knowledgeable Individuals - in short, you.

 

<p>

Here's what I want:

 

<ul>

 

<li>Must be <em>small</em>. I want to be able to carry around with me

everywhere.

 

<li>Compact Flash storage would be nice, but it looks like the smaller

cameras usually use memory stick or something instead. Oh well.

 

<li>Must be ready to go as soon as I turn it on, and have fairly low

down time between sucessive shots. I've used other peoples' digital

cameras and waiting 5 seconds for them to boot up or whatever it is

they do drives me nuts. My standard of comparison here is my Ricoh

GR1s, which is about 1 or at most maybe 1.5 seconds from pushing the

on button to taking the shot.

 

<li>Should have relatively high resolution, I'm guessing 2.5 so

megapixels at least, more is of course better.

 

<li>Good optics, good UI, etc. etc.; in short, all the usual criteria

that I'm sure all of you care about!

 

<li>Price is only a moderate concern. Inexpensive would be nice, but

I'm definitely willing to pay more to get what I want, if that turns

out to be necessary.

 

</ul>

 

<p>

Any suggestions and advice greatly appreciated. Thanks!

I think that the majority of people who come to this board are primarily film people. Digital is quick and dirty, and offers fantastic opportunities for changes and retouching, so it's popular with print media photographers. Digital storage keeps changing (reel to reel tape, cassette, floppy disc, CD, DVD), plus all those different "film" cards used in cameras. The inks used for printing aren't stable, the paper base for the most part isn't either.

 

Film cameras fire when you push the button. B&W negatives and prints last well over a century. Storing your family memories with digital is like writing your autobiography in the frost on a window. Buy a good scanner if you want digital output, but shoot film.

Andrew,check out the Canon Ixus V3,which i have and enjoy using,apart from my film cameras,EOS 1,3,and 5,and a few collection of non L lenses.this may sound like an ad,but since you asked: canon digital elph S230/ V3,has 3.2 megapixels,and is exactly the same size as a pack of cigarettes,which of course means you can have it with u all,,well almost all the time,like i do.

 

i used to have a Ricoh GR 1v,sold it tho,to buy some lenses that i needed/wanted.it's a great little camera,good 28mm fastlens,takes warm sharp pics.

 

my advice is (i'm no expert on anything,just an enthusiastic,amateur photographer)try out the Ixus V3,even if you bought it,i think you should keep your film camera,or if you sell your P&S , if $$ is not a problem, get yourself an SLR,then and only then will you be able to experience looking at a scene you wanna capture, thru your lens. cheers,,pc

<p>Al,</p>

 

<p>I must respectfully disagree with your estimation of digital media's archival qualities. You are correct that any given medium, floppy disk, zip disk, CD has a life shorter than a black and white negative or print (though a CD should last a good 30 years). But I think you misunderstand the nature of digital media. Digital images are essentially permanent (as in millions of years). Any given physical digital medium has a finite life but digital images can be copied to fresh media at regular intervals with absolutely no degradation in image quality. This cannot be said of analog images. Of course to reap the benefits of perpetual preservation of digital images requires that someone actively transfer data from physical respository to physical repository over time, but then considerable care must be taken with analog images to maximize their lifetimes.</p>

 

<p>Now as to the original question take a look at the nikon and canon ranges of P&S digital cameras. You should be able to find one that meets your criteria for price and performance. Do consider also a 35mm film point and shoot and a decent film scanner. For the same price as a digital camera alone you'll be able to have a system that gives you 6-8Mpixels (and those pixels more accurate than those from a digital camera).</p>

 

<p><a href="http://www.sciencething.org/photos/photos.html">Blatant Plug</a></p>

I will be getting a good negative film scanner at some point to scan

all my old 35 mm negatives. However, I <em>know</em> that I want to

get a digital camera, all I need is advice about which one. It'd be

nice if people stayed on topic...

Andrew,

 

unfortunately you won't find quick response in any point-and-shoot digital camera... you'd have to go to D-SLR but then of course compact size is gone for sure. So expect those 5 seconds to warm up and 1 second between shots (assuming you're not close to the end of a large memory card, otherwise it'll be pretty longer).

 

If you're resigned to the shutter lag, then the Nikon 4500 might be a good deal for you. It's pretty small, not the smallest around but certainly the smallest within its category. It uses CF (or microdrive). It is a 4 mp camera. I am not very happy with its optics but then again it's not a fault of this camera alone but of all consumer (or even "prosumer") digital cameras. And it has several nice features that are useful mainly to an enthusiast like you, like a broad selection of scene modes (16 i think), or a best shot selector feature that allows you to take reasonable sharp pictures in low light without a tripod. You should be able to get it for $600 or less.

 

I'm not saying that there aren't better options around, but except for the shutter lag I think this comes close to what you're looking for.

You're third requirement of being ready to go after turning on is a big issue. You could get around it if there were digicams that you could just leave on, and that didn't periodically go into sleep mode that destroyed any operational parameters you may have set. The web reviewers don't seem to address this way of using a camera, or at least I haven't spotted any mention of it. I used to own a digicam that shut itself after 5 minutes of non-use to conserve power. I got rid of it as this made it useless for me. Every time I needed it, it took many seconds and much ridiculous menu usage to bring it back. What nonsense, it's a camera, not a Word processor.

 

There may be digicams that stay on for hours without unduly draining the batteries (assuming LCD is off) but you'll have to read the fine details in the manuals to find them, I think, unless others contributors can help.

Minolta Dimage X is very small. Turn on time is under 2 seconds with short shutter lag (pre-focusing speeds it up of course). Your choice of 2 or 3 MPix, and it's very small. Has a 3x zoom that doesn't protrude from the body, and it's still very small. Has good image quality. And did I mention that it is very small?

www.imaging-resource.com reviews digital cameras in all categories. It will also list start-up times and shutter lag times for the various cameras.

Andrew I have been looking at a small digital camera too. I have narrowed it down to the Pentax Optio series. Thay are very small, and will take good photographs. I suggest you check it out.

 

I just came home from Japan today, when I was there, with the exception of the die hard film guys with monster lenses and cameras on tripods, All I saw was digital cameras. Everyone was taking pictures with digital cameras, exchanging email addreses so they can share the photographs. While I was visiting my son in Japan we took in a baseball game. While at the game he took a photograph of me with his cell phone, and emailed it to my wife in the states, who had the photograph a few seconds later. I think I have seen the future!

 

Regards,

 

David

The Canon Ixus V3 is the one you want. It fits your specifications perfectly. I've been using one for a few months and like it a lot - only downside is that the optical viewfinder only shows about 75-80% of the image which I find annoying. I now use the LCD (which shows 100%) instead. The lens is only a 2x (35mm - 70mm equiv.) but I still think that's better than the usual nasty 38mm - 100+mm with a crap aperture that most digtal's have. The camera is tiny and actually made of metal (gasp!). I'd give 9/10.

Andrew, here are some shots i took with my V3. hope this link works,i'm hopeless w/ computers.hope this helps you decide. pc

 

 

http://groups.msn.com/canonIxusV2ElphS200/paulc.msnw?albumlist=2

Well the digital ixus has a good reputation in german magazines. Go to a big shop and let them show you something faster.

If you want small, the new <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0301/03010801pentaxoptios.asp">Pentax Optio S</a> looks unbeatable for a 3MP camera. Their big sales gimmick is that it fits inside an Altoids tin. They're also touting the speed. We'll just have to see. No word on price either -- I'm sure it won't be cheap.

 

<p>As far as shutter lag goes, the real problem isn't shutter lag per se, but focus lag. However, most good cameras these days have a two-stage shutter, where you press halfway to lock focus, then all the way to shoot. Once focus is locked, the actual shutter lag is minimal and predictable, in fact better than with a typical film SLR. Even my Kodak DC4800, a couple of years and several generations old by now, is fine in this respect.

 

<p>I second the high marks for the Ixus V3/Elph S230. I may even buy myself one soon.

Matt, when I mentioned the pentax in my post above, I had no idea that the Optio S existed. I was thinking of the 330 and the 430. The "S" looks like the ultimate pocket camera. The only thing I would be a little worried about is the long term relibility of the sliding lens. But other than that it really looks great. Heck by the time the sliding device gives a problem, there will be somthing even better to lust over. It's impossable to have the latest in electronics. As soon as you get the box open a newer version will be announced.

The Ricoh Caplio G3 digital camera is touted as having the fastest shutter response. It looks interesting. Details here:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0302/03021302ricohg3.asp

 

Some have said the Caplio may not be sold in the US.

>>Ricoh Caplio G3 digital camera is touted as having the fastest shutter response<<

 

That does look interesting. I'd use my Coolpix much more often if only it weren't so slow.