Elegant Digital Prototype

Discussion in 'Minox' started by minox_london, Sep 16, 2011.

  1. What a beautiful camera,
    why did Minox never put more effort in the modern Digi cam design? They all look so 90s cheap. This study shows how they should look! If this was for sale, I buy it straight away
    http://lovelyandco.net/blog/2010/10/01/sp1-compact-camera/
     
  2. That's one pretty camera and yep, I'd buy it in a heartbeat as well. I was disappointed that Minox didn't listen to user complaints and suggestions about their 60651 and come out with an upgraded version of it. What I get from most of the reviews and the couple of people I've talked to that have actually used it is that it would be perfect if a few problems that causes it to suddenly decide not to work were taken care of. I've also heard some purely good reports about it so would guess that it is as much a QC problem as anything else.
     
  3. In my opion that prototype is flawed. Too streamlineda such that there is no place for a minimum mode switch for
    still,video and playback.

    Further, a Minox spy camera must retain certain. Hallmark of original Water Zappa design, a milled dial switch is a
    minimum, with. Minox style form factor. The prototype is too thin and too wide, it is more like a Sony than a Minox.
     
  4. A "Minox" it isn't but I love the design. My only negative is that it doesn't appear to have a 'viewfinder' and I've never become comfortable using a viewscreen.

    Martin
    Do you know if the Minox DSC 60666 is appreciably more reliable than the 60651?
     
  5. The 60651 is ok, the pictures from DSC are generally better than what I obtained from EC. I am looking out for 60666 sales to get one, so far the lowest price I have seen
    is about $199.
     
  6. I agree that it is not a Minox design, it may have design flaws that may make it not as user friendly. Having said that, new products have to take the old and embrace the new. This is personally a very elegant product design study taking the modern trends of cameras and phones and adding the twist of the classic Minox to it. They took the iconic camera size and maybe the even more iconic opening and closing mechanism of the camera. So iconic, all minox from the humble Riga ,A, B, C , BL, C, EC, to LX were featured with such a mechnism. I think, that this feature in its own right would have also lent the current Minox Digital camera line a flair of 8x11 nostalgia.
     
  7. "Telescoping" mechanism is characteristic of [​IMG] subminiature Minox film camera, it is not necesary for Minox DSC.
     
  8. Minox lineage[​IMG]
     
  9. One cardinal principle of viewfinder camera design is to position the lens as close to the midpoint between two eyes, so the picture resembles human point of view.
    This is true of Leica rangefinders, true of all Minox 8x11, Minox 35, even Kodak 110 Instamatic etc.
    The so call sp1 when the camera held at eye level, the lens
    is clearly positioned to the far end of the "camera", violated this cardinal principle, hence it is a design failure.
    No serious camera manufacture would ever produce such a "camera"
     
  10. Martin The SP1 is listed as a "concept" camera, that's what it is... a design concept not a finished product. Though it was inspired by the minox 8x11 cameras it doesn't appear to me that it is attempting to mimic them.

    The viewfinder is a LCD not a a Galilean finder so it's location well to the right of the lens really seems to be a rather non issue just as it is a non issue for the DSC's attached liquid crystal display being well to the left of the taking lens. :)

    Lastly, I'm not a major camera case fan so on small cameras I like the idea of a sliding shell to cover the lens just as on larger cameras such as the Retina II or Super Ikonta III I like the hinged cover.
    Rich L
     
  11. I am talking about the position of lens, which should be at the center, not position of viewfinder( with any rangefinder, the viewfinder is always at one side, that is a non issue) Do you think that the square opening at the right is supposed to be a lens, then where is the lens ?
    A concept "camera" no lens ??
     
  12. Sorry, I mis-read part of your first post.
    For film cameras and digitals that are trying to replace a film model, the lens is indeed centered or near centered. A vast number of the pocketable cameras (my Samsung NV3 for instance) however have their lens' offset to the side. I personally do not find offset lens' objectionable from either an esthetically or user viewpoint.
     
  13. "Minox" is a registered trademark, it is not appropriate to call a prototype a "Minox" unless
    really designed by or adopted by Minox.
     
  14. In their words: "This concept study takes the iconic Minox form factor as inspiration. We wanted to create a sub-compact camera that targets the fashion-conscious consumer and encourages quick, discreet and stylish usage." (italics mine).
    That doesn't look to me as if Lovely&co is calling it a Minox or even implying that they have anything to do with the Minox company.
     
  15. That is why the original title Elegant Minox 8x11 digital protoye is inappropriate.
    Further, it shouldn't be in "Minox 8 x11" categorit as you pointed out it has nothing to do with Minox 8x11
     
  16. I didnt know that my post would cause so much trouble, sorry guys
     
  17. No trouble at all and I thank you for the original post.

    Been looking for a similar camera ever since I saw your SP1 post and I don't find a single blankety blank manufacturer that produces one even close. (Get that 'I told you so' smirk off your face Martin) :)
     

Share This Page

1111