What's the Yashica T4 of digital cameras?

[sarkar]

I bought the Yashica T4 five years ago after reading Philip

Greenspun's emphatic recommendation (see <a

href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/point-and-shoot/intro#sensible">Yashica

T4: a sensible choice</a>), and, despite its limitations (no exposure

control, no zoom), I've been more than extremely pleased with <a

href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=258664">the

results</a>. We mostly shot our "everyday photos" with it, i.e. casual

family/friend photos that seldom get enlarged to anything beyond 4x6

and never beyond 8x10. Now I'm thinking about promoting the T4 to

where it rightfully belongs - in my SLR bag with slide film loaded in

it - and buy a digital point & shoot to do the "everyday work". This

would save me money & time, and add to the fun factor of

seeing/sharing the pictures immediately. I think all I need is a 3MP

camera for this purpose (max print size 8x10) and should not need to

spend much more than $200/250. I wouldn't mind getting a discontinued

or a used one from eBay either.

 

There's too much choice out there - very confusing. Which one of the

of 3MP (or 4 or 5) digital cameras take really good pictures that can

produce great prints like the T4 in 4x6 and 8x10 sizes. I dont want

too many bells and whistles except perhaps some basic exposure

controls which are very easy to use. But I do want great picture quality.

<p/>

Here is my feature wishlist (in decreasing order of importance):<ul>

<li>Great lens, great sensor => great pictures.</li>

<li>Exposure comp, Av, Tv, M modes. Must be very easy to set.</li>

<li>Fits in pocket or at least my wife's handbag.</li>

<li>As little shutter lag as possible.</li>

<li>As much zoom available without scarificing picture quality. 3x is

fine. 10x is great! Unless picture quality is compromised.</li>

</ul>I looked around a bit and saw most people love the Canon A

series. How about the Panasonics with Leica lenses (the 3.2MP one is

<$200 after mail-in rebate) or the Sonys with Zeiss lenses?

[sarkar]

In short: Is there a digital pocket camera out there that would make a Yashica T4 user happy for prints upto 8x10?

[jim bob]

Canon A80 fits your requirements. Check out the review at:

 

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/onlinesharing/A80/review/

[sarkar]

Being pleasantly surprised by the Zeiss lens in the T4, I was wondering if any of the Sony cameras with Zeiss lenses are as good as, or better tham the A80 -- and if not, why not (despite having a Zeiss lens on them)?

[tom_burke3]

I don't know how the T4 is in this regard, but for me the worst thing about any compact

digital camera I've used is that the VF coverage is way less than 100%. Less than 90%, I'd

say. The result is that if you compose through the viewfinder you have to guess how much

extra there's going to be in the actual picture, or you have to try and compose using the

LCD monitor, which you can never see properly in daylight.

 

My advice would be to try one or two out, and pay attention to that particular point!

[ronald_smith2]

What about the SD110? Too bad someone didn't make a 35mm equivalent fixed 35mm f/2 or 2.8 in a digicam.

[godfrey]

Yashi T4 equivalent: Sony DSC-U60. Ruggedized, waterproof, 5mm f/2.8 lens, 2Mpixel.

Very sharp and excellent color. No manual modes (like the T4) BUT manual focusing

possible.

<br><br>

If you want a higher end camera, the Panasonic FZ series are great. I'm using an FZ10 and

enjoying it immensely. Some recent pics: <br>

<a href="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/IoM-1/">http://homepage.mac.com/

ramarren/IoM-1/</a><br>

<a href="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/IoM-2/">http://homepage.mac.com/

ramarren/IoM-2/</a><br>

<a href="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/IoM-3/">http://homepage.mac.com/

ramarren/IoM-3/</a><br>

(A couple of the above are taken with Canon 10D...)

<br><br>

Godfrey

[leslie_cheung]

One thing for sure is you wouldn't have to adjust to digicam lag

as the T4 lag is as bad.

[george_mazzetti1]

I have the Canon A80 and can safely say that you can get beautiful color saturated 8X10's.

 

George Mazzetti

[stephen_cysewski]

I am very happy with the Canon S60. The 28mm wide lens, the custom settings, and its shutter response make it a great carry around camera. I have it set so I can switch to Black and White with the custom setting. I am waiting for reviews of the S70 to see if the extra resolution is worth the upgrade.

[dean_g]

All the compact digicams (that I'm aware of) have zoom lenses, and there's an immediate tradeoff compared to a fixed prime. The Sony's Zeiss is a zoom, and probably doesn't match the T4 lens. But then again you've got more "lenses" in the bargain. The Ricoh GX lens is very sharp and that's the camera I'd recommend because I've got one, and it is light and very compact. In the US via ebay the Ricoh would probably set you back $400-$500. But you'd get great exposure control and sharp pictures. None of the digicams will give you selective focus or nice bokeh because the sensors are too small and create a huge DOF. But I don't suppose you could predict any of that with the T4 anyway.

 

Really any of the better compacts like the Canon S60 or even the ELPH 3.2meg S230 will provide 4X6 and occasional 8X10 probably better than the Yashica for casual shooting.

 

If you want the least shutter lag, it would be the Ricoh Caplio RX (3meg) or Caplio GX (5meg). The RX has no manual exposure modes.

[michaelchristensen]

The Yashica T4 is everything they say about it. A great little auto camera for all around shooting. I always have mine in my camera bag.

 

I bought the Canon A80 ($279) and believe this is about as close to snap-shot digital that I can stand. Yes some of my digital pics are good, in fact great, especially lower light .. but I still think the Yashica T4's lens is superior.

 

The Canon A80 or the A75 (?) are both good cameras, the A80 indeed a little more bulky, but not a problem. Try to find a "made in Japan A80" for under $300 -- took me a month to find one, and it was the last one on the shelf .. camera is now discontinued .. but for $300 w/no film cost and immediate access to what you shot .. that's a small price to pay; and I realize that everything digital is only new for 6 months anyway before someone supercedes it with another model .. one of the reasons I don't & won't .. go high-end digital.

 

I have mixed emotions about the A80's lens performance .. and wide open notice distortions in the architecture, but color rendition is very good, sometimes outstanding .. personally, I like film better in almost all shooting situations .. but the A80 is a great little camera in its' own right and easy to use .. and produces some interesting images .. it has more features than the common man can understand .. yet, can be as simple as any other point & shoot.

 

Feeling like you want to try some interesting photography? The A80 has features to change your metering modes (spot, center, & matrix) .. shooting under tungsten light .. no problem, fiddle with the white balance ... want vivid color outdoor shots .. or black & white?? .. want to try manual modes and exposure compensation? .. and yes, there are the typical "bells & whistles" to amuse you .. I like the sound of a SLR shutter clicking when I take a picture .. the A80 does all of it and more .. or if sounds annoy you, just turn them off.

 

No, it won't fit in your pocket .. perhaps OK for your winter coat though; zoom is limited for most needs; menus are not that much a problem, but certainly not as easy to use as a standard SLR.

 

Get the A80 with a 256mb card .. two sets of batteries and a charger; and then go out and take 100's of pictures for "free" -- but don't scrap that Yashica T4 -- cause side by side the T4 is still a winner in my book with good film.

 

By the way, I work in a police dept. and our patrol uses the predecessor to the A80, the A75 .. and they produce great pictures -- it is a little smaller than the A80. Both of these camera are easy enough for the novice to use -- instant results, pictures moved to a CD disk and placed into evidence .. we used to use SLRs and wait 7-10 days for the mug shots, crime scene photos .. no more! Now I've got tons of pictures of some of the ugliest people in town .. prostitutes, drug dealers, battered women .. criminal property damage, auto accidents, etc. .... all the photography I hate to look at .. and in house discussions revolve around how do we up/download photos, store it, etc. -- So for me, low end digital just does not replace 35mm film -- and high end digital is too expensive.

 

My recommendation: A80 for $300 or the A75 for $250 -- check it out at kenrockwell.com and other sites .. they talk about the A80 at length .. really pretty good if you want a digital camera to throw in your camera bag. I will say the A80 is fantastic as a snap shot camera -- very, very easy on the batteries too. I just don't consider it a serious photo machine (others may disagree) - but its a hell of a lot of fun to use.

[mark u]

I have to say that the much recommended A80 really isn't a substitute for a film P&S with a good lens such as your Yashica. Yes, it has quite a degree of apparent flexibility in its shooting options, but you soon find yourself boxed into a corner if you want quality results. Noise starts to appear at ISO 100, and by ISO 400 you have a result that ends up as mush when processed for noise that makes 1600 ISO film look fantastic. It's really limited in dynamic range - you have to be very careful to avoid blown highlights, often needing to dial in negative exposure compensation for this, and you need to stop down to try to control purple fringeing if you have high contrast elements in the scene. On the other hand, it can need a large dose of increased exposure compensation for predominantly light subjects. Forget about Av as a means of depth of field control. Flash is puny (the more so because you are so ISO constrained for acceptable results). Reasonable results are possible - provided you operate with a tripod in all but the brightest light at the slow shutter speeds forced on you by ISO 50, and the scene is of limited contrast (no good for anything with motion unless it's sunny, more or less). Barrel distortion at the wide (only 38mm equivalent) focal length is quite severe. It's not really a P&S, as you have to keep fiddling with the settings to get acceptable results - if you don't, you'll have some happy hours of post processing on the computer to try to make amends.

 

Maybe the Leica/Panasonic Digilux 2 begins to get there with its rather larger 2/3" sensor and much bigger pixels (not really pocketable though, and way over your budget), but I honestly think that you will have to wait until someone puts an APS sized sensor in a digital P&S before you can really begin to expect something that truly competes with film. Even then, unless you're content just to view images on a screen or email them as is, you're faced with much the same turnround time (and not dissimilar expense - more cost if you print at home) as film when you take your memory card or CD in to have prints made of everyone who was at the baby shower. Thankfully, you don't have to print the unsuccessful shots (and Aunt Agatha is probably pleased about that too).

[dean_g]

" I honestly think that you will have to wait until someone puts an APS sized sensor in a digital P&S before you can really begin to expect something that truly competes with film"

 

I'm basically a digital shooter, but I have to agree. I just shot some vacation pictures, had 3 cameras, my Ricoh GX 5meg 1/1.8" sensor compact, the 10D, and my 'toy' film camera, an Oly LT zoom 105 P&S. I have to reluctantly admit that in A-Bing some prints made of similar shots, the quality of the prints from the film (scanned to CD at the minilab) is richer and more nuanced than those from the GX (which are mighty sharp and colorful), and that the 10D with it's APS sized cmos, to my eye, is more than a match for the film images. Of course this is all subjective, and none are necessarily better, all good depending on what you're looking for. The prints from the film however seem to possess a tactile quality that isn't as apparent with either digital. Film was the el cheapo walgreen's (agfa) 400 I usually buy, and fairly grainy, and the camera is really a decent P&S, albeit not up to the imaging capability of a T4 or Stylus Epic with good film.

 

But if you are just looking for a casual shooter a compact digicam will definitely do it. As the discussion progresses I'm more and more inclined to recommend the Canon ELPH series, I've got a S230 and I don't think you can find a better pocket or purse carry along all purpose compact. Very rugged also.

[sarkar]

I borrowed my friends A75, and although it is a very capeble camera and a lot of fun, there are at least two things that didn't make me feel entirely comfortable about buying it:<ul>

<li>The optical viewfinder sucks</li><ul>

<li>It doesn't show 100% of the frame -- which is fine -- but at least show the center of the frame please. This one arbitrarily shows a non-centered crop of the frame. </li>

<li>The viewfinder seems misaligned in a way that what seems horizontal in the viewfinder, turns out tilted towards the right in the final picture. When all my horizons started turning out tilted, I had to switch to shooting with the LCD -- which is sometimes hard to see outdoors, and I think the awkward shooting position could cause more camera shake. I came home and experimented with several horizontal objects to confirm that the problem was in the camera and not behind it. Based on my feedback, my friend got his A75 replaced for a new one hoping his was just a defective sample -- but the new one had the same problem too. At its wide end the barrel distirtion was so much that its hard to say whether horizontals are tilted or not.</li></ul>

<p/>

<li>Questionable pocketability</li><ul>

It fits into my pocket, but the lump on the right hand side that makes it nice to hold also makes it very uncomfortable in the pocket. You can call it a pocket camera, but it almost isn't one. A true pocket camera would be Olympus Epic size (great camera by the way, wish T4 had a spot meter like it), or at least the T4 -- which is not as thin, but of uniform thickness i.e. no lump.</ul>

</ul>

I wouldn't comment on the picture quality much as it includes my lack of skill. Suffice to say that I only shot in auto mode, some turned out very satifactory, most were average, and overcast sky in the frame seriously threw off the meter (hoped the evaluative meter would do better than that).

 

My very subjective opinion is that if I had shot as many frames using my T4 (digital is just so much fun), I'd probably end up with as least three times as many pleasing pictures I got from this one. Not one of the pics made me say "wow" as the T4 sometimes did. But I admit this may not be a fair judgement as too many factors are involved besides the camera.

[phule]

<< You can call it a pocket camera, but it almost isn't one >>

 

I know think I've ever seen anyone call this a pocketable camera. Of course, I didn't read through all the posts above, maybe someone did. That would simply be wrong. Everyone I've talked to that owns a A-series (from A60 on up) is quick to say that it's pocketable for a jacket or purse, but not a shirt or front pocket.

[eric_miller10]

Nikon Coolpix 5200, I don't really care for Nikon's compacts, but it does get pretty good marks and it's 5 megapixels. And it's really small.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5200/

 

Some of the Olympus Stylus' cameras are worth checking out too, like the 300/400, and they are weatherproof too.

[gl5]

i think there's a reason why numerous pros like <a href="http://www.terryrichardson.com">Terry Richardson</a> still use the T4, no digital quite compares.

[sarkar]

Where does it say that he uses the T4?

[summitar]

I often wear a very light vest, an Eddie Bauer vest, not one of those with 57 pockets. With said vest, I can carry a small cell phone and the Canon A80 very securely. I do have shirts with pockets that can handle an A80, most of my shirts cannot. I consider the A80 to be the best to date take anywhere camera, great photo quality, all the manual controls one could want, and very importantly, two custom settings that the owner can preset to his/her desire. The custome settings make possible a nearly instant on capability. Read all the reviews you can find. The A80 is a camera that CAnon built better than they knew how.

[john_mccormack]

The A80 may be a great camera but is limited by its narrow angle of view at the wide end, IMO. A camera that starts at 38mm is too limiting for travel and landscape shooting (I know - you can stitch images together, but stitching is a pain and not always successfully done.)

 

The Canon S60/S70 digicams with their 28mm wide angle lenses are much more suitable to the kind of P&S shooting one would do with a T4.

[gl5]

"Where does it say that he uses the T4?"

 

i've read numerous articles where he has state that's what he uses. it's alluded to in this interview;

 

http://www.hintmag.com/shootingstars/terryrichardson/terryrichardson01.htm

 

but you obviously haven't looked through his site. Yashica T4s are everywhere.

[taner]

If I remember correctly, there used to be a Canon A300 - a 3 megapixel single focal length (it was either 35mm or 38mm equivalent) digicam. The chances are, it has been replaced by a entry level zoom lens 4 megapixel camera. A clean used one for a dirt cheap price maybe?

[taner]

here it is; a Canon Powershot A310

 

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=145&modelid=9829

[oofoto]

Why has nobody mentioned the G2 or G3 by Canon? Are they inferior to the A80 or are they just not pocket sized enough?