Best point and shoot...?

So, I've been looking at some of the high end point and

shoots...something compact. From what little I've found via google so

far, it seems as though many people consider the Leica CM the end all

of point and shoots.

I realized I may get some biased responses on a Leica board...but is

this really the general concensus?

 

So is the CM superior to the Leica Minilux, Contax T2/T3, Nikon

28ti/35ti, Ricoh GR1/GR-whatever, Konica Hexar, Rollei 35 SE, ect...?

 

Thanks!

AF-C1

You MAY get some biased responses on a Leica board? Well here's your first one -

GR-1v.

did anyone mention Olympus XA?

As far as point and shoots go I can not imagine that therre is one which offers better picture quality or control then the GR-1. My only complaint is it has a 28mm lens not always ideal. I have a olympus XA as well although I do not beleive it to be the equal of the ricoh but it works well and is a manual focus 35mm lens makes it useful for me. The koncia I used to have is even better but it is much larger than the two previous cameras. You really can not go wrong with the cameras you mention also a firend had the yashica T4 which was great. I really like the GR-1 because it is very easy to use, controls at least major ones are obviuos. Cheers George

J,

 

I bought a Kodak retina IIIc from the auction site for $80 as a point and shoot, carry

everywhere camera. It's small, folds up, and has no compromise in picture quality.

And it's cheap enough not to worry about.

 

Of course, it is a manual rangefinder camera...but this is the Leica forum.

 

Sorry I didn't really answer your question, but others might think it's a good idea for

them.

Contax T. The best lens of any of them. The Contax T pictures really come alive. Contrast? I don't what it is, but they really pop with detail and energy.

No consensus. I had a look at the CM and rejected it out of hand - bulky, no flash override, even though I liked the 40mm focal length better than the more common 35mm.

 

In my opinion, the best P/S are the Olympus Stylus Epic and the Contax T3 if you can afford it. I used to have a Nikon 35Ti. Gorgeous camera, and built like a rock (anything short of a Leica M or a Nikon F3 feels flimsy in comparison), but poor ergonomics, and also too big.

Olympus Stylus Epic...

CM = rebadged Minilux ?

I use a C3 with 28-80mm zoom lens.

The yashica T4 super is really cool, cheap and has a finder you can look down into (super-scope) and is water resistant. The Carl Zeiss Tessar T* lens is really sharp, too.

Minox 35mm GT, small, light, somewhat cheap, auto only with minimal overide. VERY SMALL.

Compact cameras are very useful. Most of my most satifying photographs in the past couple of years have been made with a Rollei 35 or Stylus Epic.The Contax T3 is not made as well as the T2 though it may have marginally better optics. The T2 is only available used and the T3 will probably be discontinued after this year. the CM may, in fact, be all that it's cracked up to be but the price tag seems way out of line. I'm looking around for a T2. Kyocera will completely overhaul the camera for about $135 which looks OK to me after the $$$ I've spent on the M6.

Leica or Minolta CL. I used to carry a half frame Olympus Pen W with a 25mm f/2.8 wide angle lens. Oriental collectors have driven the price of this one time $49.50 list price camera (I paid $25.00 for mine used years ago) up to about 2/3 the cost of a used CL with a 40mm 'cron! Crazy! But it did take some great photos for me and fit in a shirt pocket!

wow...really surprised by the responses...

 

i sorta kinds almost collect 35mm point and shoots...so i already have the yashica t5 (t4 super), olympus stylus epic (mjuII), minox 35 GTE, Olympus XA, and some others that have not been mentioned in this thread...

 

i thought that the high end point and shoots would be better than the affordable ones that i currently have. but from the responses so far...i'm beginning to think that is not true?

 

are you guys honestly telling me my epic or t5 will take photos of the same quality as a t3 or minilux or cm?

 

i read an article and a website saying that the leica cm was second to none for picture quality. and i saw some real nice examples of slide film photos from a cm...i was impressed...

 

i think i'd still like to pick up a high end 35mm...but now i'm more confused than ever! no concensus on a top 35mm, eh? i wish i could test them all out before buying! lol

<i>Oriental collectors have driven the price of this one time $49.50 list price camera</i> <p>

I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and call this one an innocuous mistake but Christ Al, get with the times man!

Lochner,

 

You're gonna get as many different responses as members posting to this thread.

 

P&S cameras are essential. I have used many different models and have yet to find the "ideal" one. Among the several that I have or have used are:

 

Contax T3.

The good: Extremely good optics, fairly fast 35/2.8 lens, small "cigarrete package" size, aperture priority, manual focus capability (buried under two menu steps) and exposure compensation (also buried somewhat). Good brightline viewfinder with decent info. Titanium clad finish very resistant to wear and tear.

The bad: Horrible interface requiring lots of forethought. Longish shutter lag (even with the prefocus option). Delicate lens cover that prevents from carrying the camera neked in your pocket. No DX override. Pricey.

 

Olympus Epic.

The good: Small Size, good optics, fairly fast 35/2.8 lens, good lens cover, decent shutter lag.

The bad: Bad pushbutton interface, minimal adjustment options, no manual focus or exposure.

 

Olympus XA.

The good: Small size with good lens cover. Can ride your pocket all day with keys and coins without problem. Manual rangefinder-assisted focus, aperture priority AE. Manual film speed setting (doubles as limited compensation control).

The bad: Ultra small rangefinder base (might as well focus by scale), dim rangefinder patch, no exposure compensation other than the ISO setting, quirky lenscover-activated switch that causes frequent unintended shutter locks in the worst moment; apparently there's a cure but have been lazy to find the instructions. The lens is so-so. Very sharp in the center but drops horribly to the edges. Also vignettes and has a four-bladed diaphragm that gives the word bokeh a bad meaning.

 

Retina IIIc:

The good: Beautiful vintage folding camera albeit with delicate innards. Superb optics. Usable non-coupled meter.

The bad:

Dim viewfinder, barely useable rangefinder patch, not very fast shutter and aperture controls. Fairly large size, larger than a Leica LTM with collapsible lens, although the folding design and fairly smooth decks make it very pocketable.

Give the guy a break, Drew. The whole "Asian v. Oriental" thing is so overblown. "Oriental" may be old-fashioned, but it's hardly the equivalent of the n-word (if it is for you then you've probably spent way too much time in academia). Besides, IMHO, the term "Asian" is so broad that it's useless, anyway.

 

---------------------

 

"Oriental collectors have driven the price of this one time $49.50 list price camera

 

I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and call this one an innocuous mistake but Christ Al, get with the times man!"

Point and shoot cameras aren't supposed to have a lot of control. The whole idea is that anybody can pick it up and make it work.

 

This really makes no sense. Either it's a point and shoot or it's something else. The Hexar, which I know better than the rest on this list, sure isn't a point and shoot, it's something you have to know how to use.

I don't think you are getting the same responses you would get if you had asked which point-and-shoot has the "sharpest" or "the best" lens. You asked for opinions, and are getting them, from people used to having 100% manual control overy their images. To the extent a point-and-shoot takes away or only approximates full manual control, some here are going to find that unacceptable. Preferences about interfaces are very personal, depending on how each user wants to use a particular camera. Also, one of the themes of this forum seems to be that the best is worth paying for, but not worth overpaying for. So you may be getting diffent responses than if you had asked about "the best lens irrespective of cost."

 

The T3 lens is outstanding. I just had some 16x20 prints made from T3 grab shots and they look fantastic. I once had a Stylus and it's a nice camera for the price, but I don't see how anyone could claim the lens equals the T3's. For whatever it's worth, at the time the T3 came out, there were some tests saying it had the "best" lens ever put in a point-and-shoot, etc. The archives may reference these. Somewhere in the archives there is also a claim that the T3 lens outresolves the current 35 summicron in the center of the frame. I have no idea if this is true (or whether it matters), but this kind of claim does not seem outlandish given the results I've seen from my T3. The CM lens is the same lens that is in the Minilux, so I think the T3 still has the distinction of having the most recently recomputed lens put in a point-and-shoot.

 

I don't find the T3 interface "horrible." The fact that Jorge finds it so illustrates what I said above about preferences. For my uses (auto everything or fixed manual focus hyperfocal shooting), the interface is fine. For someone who wanted to frequently tinker with some of the settings, the interface might be horrible. What I like about the interface is that I can set my preferences (flash off, lens prefocus, manual focus distance, etc.) once and then they stay that way as long as I want. If I wanted to change a bunch of settings frequently, I think I would start to agree with Jorge. But I have other cameras to use when I need more manual control. Oh, I don't think the shutter lag is significant at all if the lens is prefocused.

 

Interestingly, according to everything I've seen written here, you cannot set the CM to prefocus the lens when you depress the shutter release half way. According to these reports, it *always* has to move the lens after you depress the shutter in autofocus mode. This built-in extra shutter lag by itself would keep me from choosing the CM.

 

I note that much more has been written here about the special qualities of Hexar photos than about any distinct qualities (besides "sharpness") of photos produced by other cameras on your list. The Hexar AF--with its 35/2 lens supposedly modeled on a pre-ASPH summicron, its larger dimensions and its odd 1/250 maximum shutter speed--strikes me as different enough from other point-and-shoots to qualify as sui generis.

So what's wrong with "Oriental"? "Asian" takes in a much broader area. And where does Europe end and Asia start?

 

I put the camera on Ebay and the bids were coming from Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, etc. That little camera went for over $400 in "user" condition, a bit of black paint missing to show the brass underneath, but the lens was flawless, the finder clear, and the shutter speeds all worked ~ 1/8 to 1/250 I think. That was one sharp little lens! I'd made some 16x20's from it a few times.

<I>So what's wrong with "Oriental"?</I><P>

 

A little insensitive and anachronistic. I think it's an age thing - mostly coming from older

folk.

"And where does Europe end and Asia start?"

 

yer kidding right?

Jeff,

 

>> Point and shoot cameras aren't supposed to have a lot of control. <<

 

You have a good point there. However if I can have it as an extra, it's very welcome.

 

Mathew,

 

About the T3 interface, I should have said in comparison to what. For example I would like it to have a dial based focusing control like the one on the Rollei AFM35. I've been wanting to handle one of those but I haven't been unable to find one in Mexico. It seems to have dropped sharply in price too, B&H is advertizing it at $299 but -alas- out of stock.

Al, Brad and Eric, please take the brawl outside... :-)