Small digicam with non-zoom lens anyone?

[pbizarro]

I am constantly surprised by the size they can make compact digicams

these days. And even with a zoom lens. What I would really like is

the digital equivalent of something like the Ricoh GR1V, Rollei

AFM35, Leica CM, Contax T3, etc.

 

These are superb compact cameras, and they have a niche market.

There is really no digital equivalent, though Rollei/Ricoh have come

up with the DR5, but why the zoom lens? Do manufacturers think there

is really no market for such prime lens compact, with APS sized

sensor? Or even a 4/3 sensor? Am I the only one to miss those

wonderful cameras?

[Ken Katz]

If someone put an APS-C 6MP chip in a compact camera with a fast, semi-wide prime lens, and sold it for a reasonable price, I would put my order in today. Unfortuanatly, there may not be enough demand to get one of the big consumer digital camera companies to market such a product.

[ralph_jensen]

No, you're not alone. I think quite a few photographers are hoping for

something like a digital version of the film Olympus Stylus, not like the digital

Stylus that Olympus is currently making but one with a large sensor and a

great fixed-focal-length lens. (Olympus does make at least one non-zoom

digital pocket cam, I think, but it's no better than its zoom sibling and costs

almost as much, so it's probably not doing very well in the marketplace.)

 

I think cameras like the one you describe will come with time, as camera

makers see that more-advanced photographers will be seeking to augment

their d-SLRs with small cameras that can match the dSLR quality but not

features (rather than small cameras that strive to match the d-SLR features but

not quality, as is now the case).

[kevin conville]

I see the appeal of a camera w/ a fast 35mm (equiv) lens and APS sized sensor with a

usable manual focus option. It will however never really be a true replacement for one of

the 35mm cameras you cite as the DOF issue will remain. APS will help here as compared

to the smaller sensors of most P&Ss but (for me) this is the most missed aspect of 35mm

photography.

 

Regarding sharpness and contrast, etc. Aside from speed, many of the newer digicams

have truly wonderful lenses. I have a Canon S70 that I've had for a month now and I'm

super impressed by the lens. I've used mostly prime lenses on 35mm for 25 some odd

years including Pentax, Zeiss (Contax G), and Canon L, and I'm saying the lens on this S70

is damn good!

 

About the prospect of boutique digicams. I think it will happen as the gold rush for big

sales numbers subsides niche cameras will surface. Certain manufacturers will want to

produce these for the prestige if not for revenue. This is more likely to happen when the

speed of the advancements in the technology slow and people look less upon digital

cameras as disposable. If I had to guess, I'd say 2-3 years away.

[hugh_crawford1]

What I would buy in an instant is a electronic viewfinder camera that had a Leica M mount and a aps c sensor at 6 meg or better, with a button to enlarge the center of the image for focusing. Fold out LCD for waist level focusing. I'd like the Leica M mount since that would allow almost any rangefinder or SLR lens ever made to be used via adapters.

 

I'd pay about $3000 if it was rugged metal, $2000 for plastic, body only.

 

Oh, and the sensor could be 4/3 or better yet for me square.

[vivek iyer]

Too bad that the Voigtlander RD-1 is so expensive.

[pbizarro]

Glad to know I am not the only one thinking about these cameras. However, I am not optimistic. Even the high-quality non-zoom film compacts had a difficult time selling. But I'll keep on wishing for something like a Ricoh GR1V (they already have the camera body, just take out the zoom lens and put back the 28mm), or the Rollei AFM35, those were excellent value for money and really nice.

 

But like with the film compacts, it will still be a niche market. And with the prices of entry-level DSLRs dropping regularly, it would be difficult to convince people to pay 500-1000 dollars for such a compact digicam.

 

I know that the zoom lenses of current digicams are capable of excellent results, but nothing can beat making photographs with a nice prime lens attached to a capable small compact.

[daniel_taylor]

It's not lack of demand, it's lack of imagination. There's no reason a camera like you describe wouldn't be profitable. Unfortunately the marketing types who drive development, but couldn't take a decent picture to save their lives, can't imagine why anyone would want a large sensor, fast prime P&S with a good viewfinder over a tiny sensor, slow zoom P&S with live preview.

 

FWIW, the zoom lenses on some digicams are very good indeed considering the miniturization. I didn't expect too much from the Canon S410 when I ordered it, but I wanted a pocket digital. I've been pleasantly surprised. 8x10's are sharp, have plenty of detail and good color. And the noise at ISO 50 doesn't look any worse at that print size than film grain. If you turn off the stupid AiAF and turn on all the high speed shot/mode settings, you can even get the shutter release lag down to a usable level.

 

I highly recommend the camera, but it doesn't quench my thirst for an instant on, instant shot, real viewfinder, APS sensor compact with a fast f/1.8 or f/1.4 lens. I would own both if the fast prime P&S existed.

[jbq]

How about a DRebXT with a 28/2.8? Yes, not as compact as a stylus epic, but it'll fit the rest of the requirement.

 

Digging deeper, one of the reasons often invoked is that digital sensors need microlenses, which cause problems with fast wide-angle non-retrofocus designs. Check how much vignetting you get on an R-D1 with lenses shorter than 28mm. Speaking of which, the R-D1 might fill the bill more than a DRebXT (it's not cheap, though).

[jbq]

Forgot to add - do not underestimate what can be done with a $250 film scanner. I wouldn't claim that it's a perfect solution, but honestly the cost of e.g. a Stylus Epic plus a Dual IV might be worth it for the portability of the small film P&S.

[daniel_taylor]

"How about a DRebXT with a 28/2.8? Yes, not as compact as a stylus epic, but it'll fit the rest of the requirement."

 

Not really. Nothing against the dRebel or DSLR's in general. >90% of my photography is done on a 10D, including plenty of low light work with a 50 f/1.8. But a dRebel won't fit in your pocket.

 

Problem is, there really isn't anything out there that's digital, will fit in your pocket, and is usable in low light conditions *without a flash*. Nobody in the digicam engineering or marketing world gets this. Serious photographers are looking for a simple, quick response P&S with top notch, fast prime glass and a quality sensor.

 

"Forgot to add - do not underestimate what can be done with a $250 film scanner. I wouldn't claim that it's a perfect solution, but honestly the cost of e.g. a Stylus Epic plus a Dual IV might be worth it for the portability of the small film P&S."

 

If you really need high speed in a compact form, film still clearly wins. If only film scanning wasn't such a pain....

[pbizarro]

Jean-Baptiste: I mostly shoot slide film, and for "serious" work I use my 1V and fast primes (28 1.8 or 50 1.4). Therefore, a 350D is not what I am looking for.

 

It seems that all small compact digicams follow two trends; one for the average consumer, sporting zoom lenses, and one for the "posh" lady-consumer (Coolpix S1, Finepix Z1, SD20, etc), also with zoom lenses.

 

I mean, what would it take to put a digital sensor in a Ricoh GR1V, Rollei AFM35, or Leica CM type of cameras? Ricoh have done it already (same with Rolei with its DR5, I think), but with zoom lenses!

[jbq]

The DR5 has a 5MP 1/2.5" sensor, so in my book it isn't any different from the Canon SD20 from that point of view, and the SD20 has a fixed f/2.8 lens.

[jbq]

On the other hand, the SD20 is expensive, has no optical viewfinder, and seems to have essentially no exposure control. The A510 is a bit bigger and heavier, it has a zoom lens instead of a prime, but it's cheaper and offers a lot more control (down to full manual, to the point where you can even control the flash power manually - even my 10D with a 420EX doesn't let me do that).

[kevin_krumwiede2]

<i>There's no reason a camera like you describe wouldn't be profitable.</i>

 

<p>Sadly, the vast majority of people shopping for digital cameras these days are what we in the business call "idiots."

[vivek iyer]

Shouldn't that be "digiots"?

[jorgen_udvang]

Is the zoom lens really the biggest problem here? I have an A95 which is a wonderful camera in many ways, but for manual adjustments, it depends on the LCD. That means adjustments is impossible in bright sunlight and slow at any other time.

 

A black, "semi-pro" A95 with exposure info in the viewfinder and a command-wheel would be great. Lots of Rollei 35, Olympus AX and Minox were sold 20-30 years ago, so it should be a market among DSLR-owners who want something pocketable. I don't care if it has a zoom or not, but I suspect they would sell more with a zoom.

[pbizarro]

The problem is that zoom lenses are inherently slower, starting at 2.8 and tipically ending at 4.5 or thereabouts.

 

There are already lots of cameras in the market that, once fitted with a 28 or 35 fast prime (say f/2), would fit the bill.

[sanyi_deme]

The consumer electronics world runs on large volume production runs. Digital cameras are no different.

 

If the masses want zooms then that is what we all get.

 

Furthermore, the use of the anti-aliasing filter in front of any digital sensor, no matter how large the resolution, reduces the resolution of the camera to 40 lppmm max. Hand held shooting at slower than 1/500s to 1/1000s reduces this to somewhere between 20-30 lppmm.

 

Zoom lenses are compatible with these resolution targets. Prime lenses are overkill...except....

 

Except for the fact that some prime lenses have vastly superior colour rendition and superior treatment for internal reflections etc.

 

So you are all partly right - the fixed lenses would be better in many ways other than just resolution. This has been attested to by people using Leica R lenses with an adapter on Canon digital SLRs.

 

I agree wholeheartedly that a scanner with film is still a great alternative solution to digital cameras.

 

The resolution of the Leica R back is supposed to be 75 lppmm in practice. This does allow the use of primes on a a bulky SLR.

 

I also agree that an Olympus OM1/OM2 sized digital solution would be great but I think the 1stDs from Pentax is supposed to cover this niche.

 

All good things come to those who wait. Let's hope waiting brings our ideal prime lens pocket digital to fruition.

[dg1]

I think Ricoh is the company to watch for this. There is supposed to be a digital GR1 coming out soon, and one would assume with a fixed focal lenght lens similar to the GR lens. I have the Ricoh Caplio GX, and they've clearly brought over concepts from the GR1v 35mm compact camera. Things like the "snap" mode (fixed hyperfocal focus) to further speed up the already unusually fast response, and f/2.5 lens with 28mm wide angle. In the GX case it is a zoom lens, but they've thoughtfully included a step mode that offers discreet focal lengths of 28, 35, 50, and 85 mm equivalents and it defaults to 28mm, so it's easy to use as if it were a fixed focal length lens. The GX features well thought out controls that allow operation without referring to menus for most situations. Sure, it betrays it's digicam roots with some "scene" modes, and the 1/1.8 " sensor, but it is, IMO, the strongest nod to the serious photographer any manufacturer has yet provided in a compact digicam. It's very apparent the designers had real photography in mind. It's not perfect, but the best I've seen. An 8meg GX2 will soon be released, to be followed hopefully by the promised digital GR1.

[jbq]

Sanyi: there's a load of BS in what you wrote. As an example, a Sony 828 is able to resolve close to 150 lp/mm (lens+sensor), a far shot from the 40 lp/mm that you quote. And that is measured data, not theoretical extrapolations.

 

Paulo: zoom lenses aren't inherently slower. Taking the Sony 828 as an example again, you get f/2 at the wide end and f/2.8 at the long end, but you end up with a monster of a lens. The problem is that in general smaller cheaper lenses are slower, and that for a given price and size a zoom is usually slower than a prime.

[jsilva]

I'm using two cameras at the moment: an Olympus Trip 35 from around 1975, and an Olympus C-170/D-425 from 2005. I also own a 35mm SLR which I hardly use. The C-170/D-425 has a nice, sharp prime lens (38mm equivalent I think). It's not as fast as it could be (at f/2.8) and I can't set the aperture manually. Then again, my old Kyocera T* Proof (Yashica T4) had even less manual control, a f/3.5 lens and people here still get all hot and bothered about that camera. My point is, if you want a sharp little camera with a prime lens to keep in your pocket, Olympus makes a modern-day Trip 35 that's cheap enough for you not to care about its plasticky construction (ie. you won't care if it gets bumped). I paid the equivalent of US$207 for my Olympus D-425 in Brazil - I think in places with a rational tax system it sells for $150. Now, we're talking about photography here. If what you need is a fetish item, wait a year or so and I'm sure Leica will oblige with an overpriced Digital minilux-type thing. Now that Kyocera has given up on Contax (a shame really) Leica will have that market for themselves. Thing is, digital (unlike film) is not just about who makes the best lens. Most $200 digicams had the $900 Contax TVS Digital beaten to a pulp in terms image quality, never mind the Contax's T*-coated vario-sonnar (it's a zoom, but still, it had "pedigree" so to speak). Oh, the TVS D also had a 1/1.8" sensor, but the images it produced were still noisier and generally less pleasing than those from consumer cameras with smaller sensors. It was all down to the compression and other image-processing magic that happen inside the digital body. Contax couldn't match the Canons, Nikons and Olympuses of this world. Nice, fast prime lenses are just part of the equation now...