The Quest

<p>Well, here I am pondering about buying my first digital camera and needing your help. Despite browsing quite extensively through this forum, I could not come to a choice because my requirements are very specific.<br>

1) I’m an unredeemable fan of film photography, and my collection of 200+ classic manual cameras includes some 40+ models of various formats that I actually do use whenever and wherever photography is the main or only purpose, from grandchildren to landscape.<br>

2) What I am looking for is a very small but reasonably good quality digital camera to carry always along, ready to use in a hip holster or skirt’s pocket, while engaged in mountaineering/climbing/strenuous<br />hiking. I’m currently using a Rollei 35SE or an Olympus mju (Stilus) for these purposes, with the former being the standard equipment while the latter comes in handy when I know in advance I will need to take photos with one hand or/and to use the built-in flash. I’m perfectly happy with the results, and the only<br />reason to go digital would be to facilitate the exchange of photos with other people without the hassle of scanning my slides one by one.<br>

3) Consequently, what I need is a camera that:<br>

a) Does not exceed the dimension of a Rollei 35SE (might be a little but longer or/and higher, but certainly not ticker);<br>

b) Is equipped with a lens that will deliver images of roughly the same quality as the Sonnar;<br>

c) Features a viewfinder, because the LCD screen will often be poorly visible in bright outdoor light;<br>

d) Is fed by rechargeable batteries. I would certainly not wish to free myself from the need to carry around dozen of film rolls on a long trip, to start carrying batteries instead;<br>

e) Has some form of attachment points that would accept a robust carrying strap;<br>

f) Weatherproofing would be highly desirable, but true waterproofing is redundant;<br>

g) A zoom would be a nice feature, but it is not indispensable. Also, I don’t think I would ever have any use for a focal length beyond 75-85mm equivalent, while a 28mm or ideally 24mm equivalent would be precious;.<br>

h) Ideally the lens should offer the possibility of attaching filters (a UV should be permanently in place, and a polarizer is often advantageous). Failing this,some form of sliding/cover for the front lens is mandatory.<br>

I’m not interested in having absolutely the very latest technology, and even a (working) second-hand or<br />discontinued model would be fine with me.<br>

Any suggestion, please?<br>

<br /><br /></p>

 

<p>Not wanting a camera bigger than a Rollei 35 limits you mainly to digicams, which is going to make it hard to accomplish anything near the same image quality generated by the little Rollei 35. Add the fact you want an optical finder and you're setting yourself up to be disappointed. Just go try and find this non-existant camera. The only thing you didn't say to make it totally impossible was, you want it for around $100!</p>

<p>Does it have to have a prime semi-wide lens close to what the Rollei 35 or Olympus Stylus has? Look at the Fuji X100. Just don't gag when you see the price. There's not much beyond that camera, and nothing that'll come close to it. Of course, right now it's rather hard to find.</p>

<p>Otherwise, the Panasonic LX5 would be nice, but no viewfinder. You'd need to buy the accessory EVF. Ditto with something like an Olympus Pen E-PL2 or E-P2 with the 20mm f1.7 (40mm equivalent, just like your Rollei 35).</p>

<p>I've found that it's always a dangerous thing to know exactly what you want, as you never can find it !</p>

<p>Greg, that's exactly what I got by browsing through pages and pages of photonet.... I was sort of hoping that this was due but to me doing a sloppy research work, and that the Holy Grail was just waiting to be found...</p>

<p>I would say that the camera series that gets you closest is the Canon G-series. Size is off, of course, but you get a viewfinder and the ability to attach filters by way of adapter. (Which further drags you away from your size restriction.) You will find that very very few non-interchangeable lens cameras allow you to attach filter threads directly. Lenses that extend and move (even fixed focal length ones do for focus) don't have filter threads. The UV requirement should be discarded and as an alternative to the adapter, the polarizing filter can just be held up in front of the lens</p>

<p>I take that back, LensMate has an adapter that does mount to the lens, rather than to the adapter mount on the body.</p>

<p>http://www.lensmateonline.com/store/G12QC.php</p>

 

<p>Precious few compact (pocket-size) digicams have optical viewfinders now.</p>

<p>The Canon Powershot G11 or G12 (or G-series predecessors) are a bit bulky for a digicam, and are slightly thicker than your Rollei (just how much depends on whether you're including its collapseable lens or not). It would seem to meet your other requirements, though you may be unhappy with what's involved with adding filters. The older G9 is pretty close in thickness to your Rollei but has only a 35mm-e wide end of the zoom. The G10 gets the 28mm wide end but is 2mm thicker. The G11 and G12 are 2mm thicker still due to their flippable rear LCD screens. For durability reasons you might actually like the ability to flip the screen. The optical viewfinders are available if not impressive.</p>

<p>If you're willing to go with an accessory electronic viewfinder, a Panasonic LX5 is a pretty good choice, offers a fast 24-85/2-3.3 zoom. It's not as rugged as a g-series but it's small enough that you might be able to protect in a case better. It comes with an actual tethered lens cap but you can get accessory automatic lens caps that seem to work OK (I have one). I don't have the electronic viewfinder, but it might be a good choice if you're concerned about bright light.</p>

<p>There are other cameras in this class that merit consideration:</p>

<ul>

<li>Olympus XZ-1</li>

<li>Samsung TL500/EX1 (not sure if there's an EVF available)</li>

<li>Nikon P7000 (similar to Canon G-series but with longer zoom range, slightly thinner)</li>

<li>Ricoh GR Digital III (fixed wide angle), GX200 fast 24-70 zoom (offer OVF, a bit pricey well built, have a cult following, better than average handling & features. Maybe a step behind in terms of imaging performance)</li>

</ul>

<p>These cameras all offer pretty good image quality and RAW capture. Their lenses are probably not quite as good as your Rollei but contrast-detect autofocus is generally accurate and the digital capture may outperform whatever scanning you were doing for film. What you'll lose is a lot of ability to limit depth-of-field...this can be good, can be bad, depending on the sort of pictures you like to take.<br>

Next step up in image quality that might work for you is Panasonic Lumix GF-2 with a pancake prime--they have a 14/2.5 (28mm equiv) and 20/1.7 (40mm equiv), these would sound like good choices. This should offer more ability to limit depth-of field and superior image quality due to the larger sensor. Should also be more filter-friendly and has an EVF available. The Olympus PEN bodies (e.g. E-PL2) would also work but are slightly larger and Panasonic's (compatible) lens selection seems a little better suited to you.</p>

<p>If you don't mind paying out some money and going slightly bigger, a Pentax K5 DSLR with 2-3 of their high-dollar, fast compact primes would be a powerful combination, giving really nice image quality and access to excellent high ISO performance.</p>

<p>The Olympus Stylus 770SW might fit the ticket. Here's a link to one being shown on Amazon.<br>

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Stylus-Digital-Camera-Optical/dp/B000LXXJ1I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1302118457&sr=8-1">http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Stylus-Digital-Camera-Optical/dp/B000LXXJ1I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1302118457&sr=8-1</a></p>

<p>This is waterproof, shock-proof, multi mode P & S digital. 7.1 megapixel. Waterproof. Shockproof. Feels strong and rugged in the hand.</p>

 

<p>If you have rechargeable batteries then you need to carry the charger and have acces to mains power? Small cameras these days only have LCD and not viewfinders unless you look at 'toy' cameras. For the occasions you cannot view the image on the LCD I suspect as a photographer of long standing you should be able to literally 'point and shoot' at wide angle of the zoom with reasonable accuracy ... and just as you probably shield the lens when pointing towards light sources you could probably shield the LCD when the sun is shining on it? So the LX3 or LX5 seems an answer with its Leitz designed lens. The Mp/sensor size ratio is favourable at 22 [Mp/cm2] More recent cameras will have higher Mp but have compacted more pixels into them up around 50. 22 compares favourably with the Canon G and Panasonic FZ50 cameras at mid twenties which are much bigger. <br>

I may be barking up a gumtree with this way of comparing cameras but when I find DSLRs and 4/3 camera have single figure ratios and P&S now up around 50 I cannot help but feel there is something in my idea.</p>

<p>LUMIX</p>

A Sigma DP-1 offers a 28mm lens in a compact body, raw capture capability, an optional optical viewfinder and an APS-C sized sensor.

<p>Thank you all so much for the unvaluable suggestions and comments. You certainly gave me something to ponder about!<br>

Depth-of-field control in not an issue (for this specific application), because all photos will basically be either a) landscape, but with a documentation rather than artistic goal, or b) people engaged in some kind of activity against the background of said landscape. I would thus nearly always want maximum DoF, and I seem to understand that most not to say all P&S digicam would select that automatically.<br>

There is however a more fastidious aspect of my requirements, namely the fact that when I say "pocketable" I do mean "pocketable". Both the Stylus and the Rollei 35 can be carried around in a shirt pocket, even if the latter makes me look like a poor taste caricature of Dolly Parton. Some of the suggestions that have been put forward here are for cameras that are more or less the same size as my Canonet GIII or Minolta Hi-Matic 7s II, and will thus rather need to be carried with a neck strap.<br>

Nothing wrong with that, of course. I do so when circumstances allow, and over the years I have developed a number of ways to carry a camera safely attached to the shoulder straps of my backpack, or to the upper part of an integral climbing arness, so that it will stay safely in place yet be available at the snap of a carabiner. Point is, with these carrying arrangements the weight and size of the camera are no longer that relevant. If I can carry a GIII then I will probably rather carry an Olympus OM-2, or in the digital field my wife's Canon PowerShot Pro1 (or whatever that is called your side of the pond).<br>

I was specifically enquiring about the avaliability of a reasonable-quality digital camera, to be pocketed when I am traveling at the lowest weight as possible, or/and I don't want to have anything hanging in front of my chest or over my shoulder.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>[[i was specifically enquiring about the avaliability of a reasonable-quality digital camera, to be pocketed when I am traveling at the lowest weight as possible, or/and I don't want to have anything hanging in front of my chest or over my shoulder.]]</p>

<p>You can't throw a rock in a camera or electronics store and not hit something that is "pocketable." But your requirements listed in your original post reduce that number to zero.</p>

<p>So, you'll have to decide what you want to give up in order to maintain the size restrictions.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Maybe you should look for a two year old Canon SD 850 or SD 1200 (they called IXUS in Europe and ELPH or something in US). They are very pocketable and have a viewfinder. Zoom is either 35-105 or 28-105. What you dont get is the ability to mount a filter. There are other models in that series as well. Look for 28-105 zoom and Image Stabilisation IS and 8 or 10 Mpix.<br>

The are known to expose pretty good and deliver good color. IQ is quite impressive in good light (ISO 80,100) and if the sceen is kind with respect to dynamic range requirements.<br>

If you can live with the absence of a viewfinder, then the Canon Powershot S95 is the obvious choise for a zoom compact (more compact than the Panasonic LX3 or LX5). IQ is better than the IXUS, especially at higher ISO.</p>

<p> The Ixus was indeed what I had originally in mind, but I have now learned that the choice is much broader than I tought.<br>

Beyond the fact that I need a truly pocketable affair, the first requirement I would be prepared to drop is the possibility to attach filters. This would then be followed in this reverse priority offer by weatherproofing, by the viewfinder and finally by the zoom (but in this case, the lens should be a 35-40mm equivalent). I would however be rather reluctant to accept reductions in image quality much beyond the logical limits as dictated by technology and reasonable cost.</p>

 

<p>Then this one maybe: Very pocketable, no veiwfinder, no zoom, no filter attachment, no wetherproff but have the best IQ below 1000 Euro or 1200 USD.<br>

Its the Sigma DP2s or the latest DP2x. It has a fixed 41/2,8 equiv lens. I wouldnt go into details here about the special technology behind it but l can say this, I have the corresponding DSLR Sigma SD14 and a Canon Rebel XTi/EOS 400D and the Sigma IQ is much better. Better color and tonality, better dynamic range, lower noise up to ISO 400 and slightly better resolution.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>This would then be followed in this reverse priority offer by weatherproofing, by the viewfinder and finally by the zoom (but in this case, the lens should be a 35-40mm equivalent). I would however be rather reluctant to accept reductions in image quality much beyond the logical limits as dictated by technology and reasonable cost.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>well, you could either wait for camera manus to design a camera to your exact specs, or just get an s95.</p>

<p>Please consider Fuji X100, Leica X1, Ricoh GXR with 28 equivalent lens (and maybe the 24-70 zoom), Sigma DP1, and possibly Sony NEX5 with 16 or Olympus E-PL2 with Lumix 14, or Panasonic GF2 with the same Lumix 14 lens. Separate optical viewfinder of suitable focal length completes the package (except for x100 which already has it). These are not quite as small as the Rollei, but are better quality than any digicam with a miniature size sensor. They are also well built and therefore appeal to someone used to proper cameras. </p>