Best P&S for Money: Leica Minilux, Contax T2 or other?
ba...@witty.com
My apologies if this subject has been beat to death in this group.
What is currently considered the best bet for price vs. performance? Leica
MiniLux, Contax T2 or another camera in this category?
I'm not a pro, but I'm employed in graphic arts, so I'm aware of what
separates a good photo from a bad photo, and I might even know what
separates a good one from a great one. I started to do some traveling a
while ago, and not wanting to lug my SLR around, I got the smallest,
simplest camera I coud find: a Kodak Cameo. After using it on my last
three trips, I'm happy with all the shots I've gotten from the cameras
ability to be ready in a half second, but I'm more disappointed in all the
shots I've missed with the lack of flexibility in the camera.
What I need is a camera that will allow me to use the flash only when I
need it and to control aperture and exposure as I see fit, but which can
be used as a true point and shoot when I need that. The thing that bothers
me most about the Kodak is when the flash blows out (over-exposes?) the
foreground when I'm really trying to capture something in the background,
such as in a concert situation. I also hate that everything in the photos
are (somewhat) in focus. I need a cemera that will be able to blur out the
background when necessary.
Is there a cheaper camera than the Leica and Contax that will give me high
performance and maximum durability/portability? $700-800 is my upper
limit, but if I can get comparable performance for a more reasonable price
I wouldn't mind.
Thanks,
Ralph Bartholomew
Portland, Maine
____________________________________________________________________
Marc Cooper
You can get a Yashica T-4 Super (T-5 in Europe) for less than $200. It
is the less expensive brother to the Contax T2. It has a Zeiss F3.5
lens. I can produce very sharp, good contrast pictures. It is small and
weatherproof. You can set the flash to automatic, fill, red-eye
reduction or off. You can also set the focus to infinity if you need to
shoot through glass.
There are other good small, affordable point & shoots. Others may
recommend the Ricoh R1, the Leica Mini3, the Olympus Stylus, etc.
My personal preference is for the Yashica.
Regards,
Marc
Alan Chang
Hi,
There are less expensive alternatives available, like the Ricoh
GR-1 and the Konica Hexar. I believe James Rosenzweig posted his
experience with the GR-1 here before. The Fuji DL Super Mini is supposed
to be pretty good too, although it's not available in the States.
I have a T2 and am very happy with it, the lens is superb and the
ergonomics is great.
Try looking at http://www.ee.nus.sg/~zhu/photo/ there's quite an
amount of info on these cameras.
Anyone knows if there's a T3 coming out?
Cheers,
Alan
"I'm not in a good place, and I'm no painter"
- Michelangelo
http://www.duke.edu/~ybc
James Rosenzweig
I would suggest looking up the test report on the Ricoh GR 1 (not R 1) in
the January 1997 issue of Popular Photography.
The $450 GR 1 has a metal alloy body, aperture priority and program
modes, centerweighted and spot metering options, shutter speed readout in
the viewfinder, exposure override +/- 2 stops in half stop increments.
The handling? "Of all the so called luxo P/S's to come out so far, this
one has the most straightforward, clearest operation by far." The lens
quality? "...in SLR terms, it would still rank among the best
single-focal length 28 mm lenses." The quotes are from the Popular
Photography test. I'm attaching the report from the British magazine that
awarded the GR 1 "Best Compact Camera of the Year" in February of 1997.
From Amateur Photographer February 1997:
"The concept of a high quality lens on a compact camera used to be a
contradiction. The Ricoh GR-1 is the latest in a short but illustrious
line of cameras which gives the lie to that sentiment.
When AP's technical editor Joel Lacey took the opportunity of spending a
couple of weeks with the GR-1 on a tour of France, he was immediately
struck by the quality of the results. His assessment? The defining
feature of this camera is its excellent lens. But that is not the sole
recommendation of this diminutive camera. As well as its 28mm f/2.8's
resolution, the camera offers aperture priority (as well as program -JR)
and exposure compensation to the more accomplished photographer. Flash
selection could not be simpler, and the broad shutter speed range of
2 - 1/500 sec. covers even the most testing photographic situations.
As a useful, if seemingly unattainable comparison, the GR-1 was tested
in tandem with a 6 X 4.5 medium format camera. The result? The medium
format camera's pictures are sharper... JUST!
As well as quality and ease of use, the compact and sturdy nature of
the Ricoh GR-1 also came in for praise. Given that this is a camera you
can slip into the narrowist of pockets, there is no reason why you
shouldn't take it anywhere you go.
To sum up: Here is my verdict on the GR-1 and in particular its lens.
Top drawer. "
> >
> > Compact Camera of The Year:
> > Ricoh GR-1
>
TEAShea
When was the T2 introduced?
Martin Step
MARTIN TAI
-> I have a T2 and am very happy with it, the lens is superb and the
-> ergonomics is great.
->
-> Try looking at http://www.ee.nus.sg/~zhu/photo/ there's quite an
-> amount of info on these cameras.
->
-> Anyone knows if there's a T3 coming out?
->
-> Cheers,
-> Alan
There was a Yashica T3, which came out before T4/T5.
Yashica makes T2.
martin tai
Eric Leonard
I have a Leica Mini3 and one of its best festures is the small focus
area. It has the ability to focus in an a small portion of the view
finder which enables the user to "focus in" on what they want and what
they don't want in focus. I also have an Olympus stylus, which puts
"everything" either in or out of focus. Both work well, but I have
found the photos from the Olympus to by unbearable when blown up to 8x10
where the Leica photos are still very sharp. In addition, the Leica has
extra features not unlike the Yashica which offer a plus. My favorite
setting if the Flash/ slow, which enables the flash yet keeps a slow
shudder speed. Great for low light action and still shots. It is a bit
more expensive, probably about $450-$600 depending upon where you shop,
but is a great little "point and shoot"
Eric
zar...@epix.net
Up until 1986( a long time ago) I was a good part time wedding
phtographer. I got out about then and went on to other aspect of my life.
I used medium format Mamiya 645 and a 35 mm Canon FTb. The canon has
died, and I need to replace it. I'd like to purchase any of the three
above but since they are out of date by a bit, I need some
recommendations.
Anyone have one(or two)
eric
gre...@ameritech.net
On Tue, 01 Apr 1997 17:25:12 -0500, Eric Leonard <ewle...@syr.edu>
wrote:
Take a look at the Nikon 35TI, I've had one ever since they came out
and never regretted it for a moment.
VHVAIL
AE-1 and AE-1P bodies, plus many FD lenses for sale. All EX+ to M-.
VHV...@aol.com if interested in list.
Martin Tai
Marc Cooper (mvco...@erols.com) wrote:
: ba...@witty.com wrote:
: >
: >
: > What is currently considered the best bet for price vs. performance? Leica
: Regards,
: Marc
For compactness and sharpness, nothing beats Minox GTE, it has
a super sharp 35mm/2.8 Minoxar lens, close focus up to 2 feet,
allows you full control of aperture and depth of field. A new GTE
cost about $300 at B&H.
I have many compacts: Contax T2, Olympus XA II, Canon Elph,
--- the one always in my pocket is the Minox GTE.
martin tai
James Rosenzweig
The worst thing about the Leica Mini 3 (made by Matsushita) is its 14
step AF system. The mini 3 can be purchased for a price in the $200 range.
Both it, the Stylus and the Yashica T 4Super do not have the
flexability/features that the Ricoh GR 1, Contax T 2, Leica minilux and
Nikon Tis have. Nor do they have the metal construction that the last
group mentioned has.
: >I have a Leica Mini3 and one of its best festures is the small focus
Godfrey DiGiorgi
gre...@ameritech.net wrote:
> Take a look at the Nikon 35TI, I've had one ever since they came out
> and never regretted it for a moment.
Sadly, I regretted buying one. I owned it for two and a half years and
was impressed with its capabilities but totally unimpressed with the
ergonomics and quirks of making settings. The Leica Minizoom returns a
more consistently excellent photograph for me, and the Contax TVS which
I bought recently has the ergonomics that Nikon's 35Ti should have.
It's a good camera, but I would not buy another.
Godfrey
ons...@idirect.com
Eric,
I have both the Canon AE-1 and A-1. If you have to chose 1, the A-1
offers much more choices of settings and options.
Dave
James Rosenzweig
If you are looking for the best ergonomics, look at the Ricoh GR 1. If
you are looking at a great price, look at the GR 1. It has a lens that
ranks with the best of them.
Godfrey
Bugsi
Eric, given a choice, go with the A-1 over the AE-1. The AE-1 is just a
shutter-priority camera. The AE-1 Program added full auto exposure, and
the A-1 adds Full auto AND aperture priority. The A-1 is generally
considered a little bit more "Pro" than its AE-1 brethren.
Godfrey DiGiorgi
ji...@dorsai.org (James Rosenzweig) writes:
>If you are looking for the best ergonomics, look at the Ricoh GR 1. If
>you are looking at a great price, look at the GR 1. It has a lens that
>ranks with the best of them.
I've played with the GR-1 and it seems well designed. Good options, in
general, with a couple of niggles:
- no manual focus ... you can "freeze" the focus, both with a focus
lock and using the "snapshot" mode, but in the case of difficult
to target subjects, there's no way to tell the camera to just set
a particular distance.
- no way to use a filter ... I need this for B&W work quite often.
Only the Contax TVS and Konica Hexar in this class of camera have
lenses threaded for filters.
The lens seems very very good, I like the rest of the camera. Now if
a 28mm lens really suited me all the time, I'd snap it up in an instant.
However, I find I'd really rather have a 40mm lens most of the time,
and a 20mm the rest... ;)
Godfrey
James Rosenzweig
As for as the GR 1 is concerned;
The SNAP mode can be used in two ways.
If you merely go into the SNAP mode by pressing the mode button, it locks
exposure at two meters for as many exposures as you wish. Since you may
choose the aperture in aperture priority mode, you can select a small(er)
aperture for great(er) depth of field.
Second. If you prefocus (hold the shutter button down partially) and then
enter the SNAP mode, the camera retains the prefocused distance for as
many exposures as you wish.
In other words, in both modes the camera does NOT release the focus
setting after the exposures. In fact you must exit the SNAP mode to
release the set focus distance chosen.
You also have an infinity focus lock setting that does NOT automatically
release after each exposure.
As for 28 mm vs. 40 mm, that's obviously a subjective call.
You don't have enough room on the tiny GR 1 to have a filter.
James Rosenzweig
On Tue, 8 Apr 1997, Cyrus Gardner wrote:
> James Rosenzweig <ji...@dorsai.org> wrote:
>
> > > > >You don't have enough room on the tiny GR 1 to have a filter.>
> Hi Jim et al.,
> How about just dialing in exposure compensation and holding a big
> ol' 58mm filter in front of the lens? Isn't that likely to be better
> than nothing? I'll try that on my GR-1 and see how it works . . .
> ---
>
> -------------------
> Cyrus Gardner
> gar...@korgard.com
> Kormendi \ Gardner Partners
> 202/822-0900 Voice
> 202/331-1151 Fax
>
James Rosenzweig
On Tue, 8 Apr 1997, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> James Rosenzweig wrote:
> >
> >As for as the GR 1 is concerned;
> >The SNAP mode can be used in two ways. [snip focusing detail...]
>
> I'm aware of the use of the SNAP mode to lock focus, the infinity focus.
> What I'm saying is that in many instances, it's difficult to get a solid
> focus lock with AF and a simple, scale focus adjustment with a DOF
> indicator is faster, easier and more reliable. It's not a big deal, just
> a point which I've come to appreciate on certain cameras.
My point with the SNAP mode was that it could be used not only to lock
focus, but if engaged without locking focus, the camera locks at 2
meters. That was a feature not mentioned in the Popular Photography test.
They only knew about the SNAP mode's focus lock feature after focusing.
> > >You don't have enough room on the tiny GR 1 to have a filter.
> This excuse is not very satisfying. Many many small cameras in the past
> take filters or have them built in. For example:
> - A Minox B is 1/4 the size of the GR-1, the Minox IIIS is even smaller.
> The B has Green and ND filters built in, the IIIS has Green and Orange,
> and both take clip on filters as well.
> - A Rollei 35 is about the same size (a little thicker in the body): the
> Tessar lens takes 24mm screw in filters/lenshood and the Sonnar lens
> takes 30.5mm screw in filters/lenshood.
If you look inside the GR 1 with the camera turned off, you'll note that
the seven element lens has just enough room to fit inside the 1.0"
thick(thin) body. Both the Sonnar and Tessar are designed with fewer
elements (5 and 4) as I'm sure you know. Now if you did NOT have a built in
automatic lens cover and added the pain in the neck lens cap that the
Rollei 35 has, you'd have some space. I for one rather deal with the
built in lens cap that gives me a 1" thick body in total. The Rollei 35
body is 1.75 inches thick without the cap and filter (called Rollei at
1-800-SNAPSHOT and asked for the Rollei dep't). That would be
75% thicker than the GR 1 without the cap and filter.
Now if you are talking different film formats, that's a different story
with the camera designer having different parameters to work with.
Jim
Cyrus Gardner
James Rosenzweig <ji...@dorsai.org> wrote:
> > > >You don't have enough room on the tiny GR 1 to have a filter.>
Godfrey DiGiorgi
James Rosenzweig wrote:
>
>As for as the GR 1 is concerned;
>The SNAP mode can be used in two ways. [snip focusing detail...]
I'm aware of the use of the SNAP mode to lock focus, the infinity focus.
What I'm saying is that in many instances, it's difficult to get a solid
focus lock with AF and a simple, scale focus adjustment with a DOF
indicator is faster, easier and more reliable. It's not a big deal, just
a point which I've come to appreciate on certain cameras.
>You don't have enough room on the tiny GR 1 to have a filter.
This excuse is not very satisfying. Many many small cameras in the past
take filters or have them built in. For example:
- A Minox B is 1/4 the size of the GR-1, the Minox IIIS is even smaller.
The B has Green and ND filters built in, the IIIS has Green and Orange,
and both take clip on filters as well.
- A Rollei 35 is about the same size (a little thicker in the body): the
Tessar lens takes 24mm screw in filters/lenshood and the Sonnar lens
takes 30.5mm screw in filters/lenshood.
>As for 28 mm vs. 40 mm, that's obviously a subjective call.
Yes.
The Ricoh GR-1 is a fine camera. It's just not quite everything it could
have been, and two small features would have had me digging for my
wallet in a hurry if they were there. As it is, I'll likely buy one
eventually anyway.
Godfrey
TEAShea
The GR1 lenses are threaded for filters. The GR1 also has manual focusing.
James Rosenzweig
We are talking about the GR 1 camera. Follow the thread back.
TEAShea (tea...@aol.com) wrote:
: The GR1 lenses are threaded for filters. The GR1 also has manual focusing.
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Cyrus Gardner wrote:
> How about just dialing in exposure compensation and holding a big
> ol' 58mm filter in front of the lens? Isn't that likely to be better
> than nothing? I'll try that on my GR-1 and see how it works . . .
It'd work, but you might block the AF windows and/or meter cell. It
takes practice and experimentation. And it's clumsy as all heck, not
exactly the greatest solution to making quick, effortless pictures. ;)
Godfrey
Godfrey DiGiorgi
James Rosenzweig wrote:
>My point with the SNAP mode was that it could be used not only
>to lock focus, but if engaged without locking focus, the camera
>locks at 2 meters. That was a feature not mentioned in the
>Popular Photography test. They only knew about the SNAP mode's
>focus lock feature after focusing.
I found it out from reading the Ricoh brochure. I don't read
PopPhoto or any other of the 'magazines filled mostly with
advertisements'.
>>You don't have enough room on the tiny GR 1 to have a filter.
>If you look inside the GR 1 with the camera turned off, you'll
>note that the seven element lens has just enough room to fit
>inside the 1.0" thick(thin) body. Both the Sonnar and Tessar are
>designed with fewer elements (5 and 4) as I'm sure you know. Now
>if you did NOT have a built in automatic lens cover and added
>the pain in the neck lens cap that the Rollei 35 has, you'd have
>some space. I for one rather deal with the built in lens cap
>that gives me a 1" thick body in total. The Rollei 35 body is
>1.75 inches thick without the cap and filter (called Rollei at
>1-800-SNAPSHOT and asked for the Rollei dep't). That would be
>75% thicker than the GR 1 without the cap and filter.
Um, James: you seem to be incredibly defensive about the Ricoh
GR-1 camera. I'm not putting it down, I just wish it had one or
two minor additional features that would make it, in my opinion,
a fully professionally useful, miniature camera. An extra couple
of millimeters on the lens bezel for a threaded filter mount and
some way to specifically set a distance on the focus, quickly
and easily, are all I'd like to add to it. They may not be items
of much importance to many people, but so what? I'm just voicing
an opinion on what is lacking for me about an already very fine
compact camera.
The Ricoh is quite a bit thinner than the Rollei 35, certainly.
But they're in the same size class. NO need to call and ask
someone, I can just measure my Rollei if I need to. The Rollei
35S (Sonnar lens) is also much heavier than the GR-1 - 13oz vs
7.5oz. So what? It's not the point. The Rollei is an all manual,
all mechanical camera with a superb lens, which says nothing
disparaging about the Ricoh at all. Both fit nicely in my jacket
pocket or belt pouch, which is all that's important to me.
If the Ricoh did not have the built in lens cover, it could
likely have plenty of space for a filter mount. I'd take that
over a lens cover anytime, that's my opinion. That's why the TVS
can take a filter, and a lens hood, too. The additional size of
the camera is inconsequential to me, another opinion.
The Minox 35GT is smaller than the Ricoh, albeit missing some of
the automation features, yet it takes filters and a lenshood as
well. When closed it has a fully protected lens, if that's important
to you. With a Rollei 35, I just leave a UV filter on the lens when
I'm not storing the camera and leave the lens cap at home. Works fine
that way.
It's obvious you love the Ricoh, but it's not all things to all
people. Let it rest. I'm not voicing my opinion to argue with
you.
Godfrey
Mark Verber
I'm aware of the use of the SNAP mode to lock focus, the infinity focus.
What I'm saying is that in many instances, it's difficult to get a solid
focus lock with AF and a simple, scale focus adjustment with a DOF
indicator is faster, easier and more reliable. It's not a big deal, just
a point which I've come to appreciate on certain cameras.
I have been somewhat frustrated with the AF on the Ricoh GR-1. I have
been using manual focus optical rangefinder cameras since the mid 70s.
In recent years I have had owned a number of P&S cameras with active
autofocus, and a really basic SLR. In the last two weeks I have taken
more shots with the GR-1 where the main subject was out of focus than
in the last few years combined (at least an order of magnitude more
common). The GR-1 seems to need a rather high contrast, well lighted,
vertical line for the AF to work. I have often found (ever with the
indicator of which side of the field was used) that the AF lock was on
something I wasn't expecting, putting the main subject out of focus.
My second gripe is the exposure system is only adequate. My first
roll of film had a number of frame that were overexposed, even
though the lighting conditions where not what I would characterized as
extreme.
I seriously considered returning the GR-1 because I can't trust it to
do everything automatically when I just want to P&S. The Yachica
T4super is a much better P&S: it got the the focus right every time,
got the exposure well except in extremely conditions (like very strong
backlighting), and costs significantly less than the GR-1 with a lens
that is good enough. I went shopping for a T4super that would be more
durable with manual overrides... I hated when I would look through the
T4super's viewfinder and knew that it wasn't going to get the exposure
right with no way to correct the situation. I looked at the Nikon
Ti35 (bad user interface), the Lieca Minilux (viewfinder was too small
for me wearing eye glasses), Contax T2 (perfect except pricy and you
lose AP if you want the flash to fire). The GR-1 looked good enough
for significantly less money than the T2.
I am going to keep the GR-1... but this is because what I really
wanted was a small camera that would give me some manual control... I
wasn't really looking for a classic P&S. I am starting to get use to
the AF system (mostly by using the "center weighted mode"). Exposure
also seems under control because a now have a reasonable idea how the
exposure system will fail me and manual overrides to correct the problem.
If I could justify the cost, I would exchange the GR-1 for a T2, but
I would rather put the money into a good lens for a different camera.
--Mark
esza...@aol.com
And I suppose it makes you coffee and tells you the latest baseball scores too.
esza...@aol.com
>The GR1 lenses are threaded for filters. The GR1 also has manual focusing.
>
>
And I suppose it makes you coffee and tells you the latest baseball scores too.
TravGlen
About six months ago, I purchased a Nikon 28Ti. The 28Ti was my choice
because I'm an Architect and the lens is rated as one of the best 28mm's
around. I know the camera seems klutzy and not well designed, but after a
couple of rolls of film, I guarantee your opinion will change as did mine.
One glance and I know where the camera is set. Four buttons control
everything, including three exposure modes!
You have Auto, Aperture AND a custom setting. And the pictures from this
camera are outstanding: well exposed, in focus, and with virtually no lens
distortion. I know the T2 has had problems with vignetting, plus the lens
is no way as sharp as the 28Ti. This is a great street camera. Oh, by the
way, did I mention the flash? Wow, no red-eye!
Thomas Kachadurian
I must agree.
The 28Ti is one of the best cameras I have owned. It has the sharpest of
any Nikkor lens I've owned or used. It rivals Leica glass.
Tom
Monsieur X
ka...@freeway.net (Thomas Kachadurian) wrote:
>I must agree.
>Tom
Has anyone done any comparison between this Nikon and Leica? How
about comparing it to Konica Hexar?
Daniel (Doni) Rosenzweig
I'd strongly suggest that you exchange your GR 1 for another GR 1 sample.
Your experience is at variance with mine and with the Popular Photography
(1/97 issue) test of the GR 1. You can bet that if the GR 1 performed as
you describe that the British publication Amateur Photographer would not
have awarded it "Best Compact Camera of The Year". The British
publication in its March 1997 issue also praised the GR1 (page 17). "A
beautifully crafted compact with a wide range of functions including both
program and aperture priority exposure modes. Cracking 28 mm lens too.
Lovely." Obviously they tried the camera or they would not have commented
about the "cracking 28 mm lens."
Michael Schuster
In article <Pine.SCO.3.91.97041...@tact.touro.edu>,
Daniel (Doni) Rosenzweig <dani...@touro.edu> wrote:
>I'd strongly suggest that you exchange your GR 1 for another GR 1 sample.
>Your experience is at variance with mine
You and your dad **BOTH** own this camera? :-)
>and with the Popular Photography
>(1/97 issue) test of the GR 1. You can bet that if the GR 1 performed as
>you describe that the British publication Amateur Photographer would not
>have awarded it "Best Compact Camera of The Year". The British
>publication in its March 1997 issue also praised the GR1 (page 17). "A
>beautifully crafted compact with a wide range of functions including both
>program and aperture priority exposure modes. Cracking 28 mm lens too.
>Lovely." Obviously they tried the camera or they would not have commented
>about the "cracking 28 mm lens."
I tend to take magazine reviews with a grain of salt. That's why I read
the experience of real users, such as those posted in these newsgroups.
In the last few weeks I've read the following negatives:
- vignetting is real. One poster emailed me back to confirm that, on a
contact sheet, there is VERY noticeable light fall-off towards the edges
when the background is homogeneous.
- numerous auto-focus errors - posted this week.
- auto exposure only adequate - posted this week.
I don't doubt that the lens is very sharp, or that the camera is small, or
well-built, or that the ergonomics are well thought out. But I wish people
would stop quoting the same reviews again and again, and adopting a
"nobody can criticize the GR1 attitude" in spite of people's
real world experiences while casting cognitive dissonance aside.
So far I see nothing that impels me to sell my 35Ti.
--
Mike Schuster | 70346...@CompuServe.COM
schu...@panix.com | schu...@mem.po.com
John Bigbootee
In article <Pine.SCO.3.91.97041...@tact.touro.edu>,
"Daniel (Doni) Rosenzweig" <dani...@touro.edu> wrote:
> The British
> publication in its March 1997 issue also praised the GR1 (page 17). "A
> beautifully crafted compact with a wide range of functions including both
> program and aperture priority exposure modes. Cracking 28 mm lens too.
> Lovely."
If that's not covered under warranty, it should be.
;-)
-john
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My Usenet e-mail identity is spamproofed.
Return e-mail to jlaf...@kvo.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Daniel (Doni) Rosenzweig
The place to find reports on many cameras including the Nikon Ti is
www.ee.nus.sg/~zhu/photo/welcome.html
You will find the report of serious light falloff on the Ti there.
Daniel (Doni) Rosenzweig
First of all I'm using my son's account because my server has been down
for days. Second of all, I'll post the URL (when I get back to my account
to locate it) where you can happily read about the report on the Nikon Ti
where the owner was so unhappy with the serious light falloff that he
returned it. Third of all, although many people don't trust American
magazine tests (I am NOT one of them), many do trust European tests. The
Ricoh GR 1 test reports have been unanimous. You can find people who are
critical of every camera. Whether you choose to accept their criticism is
your choice. Many fail to operate them properly or to understand the
cameras features/functions. I stand by my feeling/reaction. You don't
find the very serious light falloff problem reportedly found on the Nikon
I'll post the URL for you to check out as soon as I can so you can
confirm the gist of what I said about thhf'
esza...@aol.com
>If the Ricoh did not have the built in lens cover, it could
>likely have plenty of space for a filter mount. I'd take that
>over a lens cover anytime, that's my opinion. That's why the TVS
>can take a filter, and a lens hood, too. The additional size of
>the camera is inconsequential to me, another opinion.
Godfey,
I think the point that Jim is making is this: if you want a T VS or Rollei 35, buy it. A lot of things would be nice. The point is, Ricoh has obviously made some production decisions taking into
consideration the camera's size, overall specs and price point. It's ergonomically wonderful, small and feature-rich and there are so few cameras (none, really, that I can think of) out there that
match them, that it's hard to complain about missing features. Maybe Ricoh isn't capable of designing in the two features on your wish list (threaded filters and manual focus) because of these
considerations. Maybe the next model they produce will fulfill this wishlist, and more, in a smaller package for less money. Who knows? If it means that much to you, contact them and let THEM know.
I had some questions about other features of the GR1 (I am in the processes of deciding whether to buy the GR1) so I called Ricoh's 800 number and got a hold of one of Ricoh's technicians last week
about the camera. I, too, vented my frustration about the threaded filter issue. He said something interesting that may work. He said that the lense barrel is 1.25 cm. He said that he is an amateur
astronomer and that 1.25cm is the exact size of the filters that slip onto telescopes. He said that he hadn't tried it yet, but he thought that it should work on the GR1. Maybe someone out there
reading this thread would give it a try and let us know how it works. <g>
Best of luck,
Eric
Nigel Cliffe
In article <5irodq$j...@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu>, cal...@umich.edu
(Monsieur X) wrote:
> ka...@freeway.net (Thomas Kachadurian) wrote:
>
> >I must agree.
>
> >The 28Ti is one of the best cameras I have owned. It has the sharpest of
> >any Nikkor lens I've owned or used. It rivals Leica glass.
>
> >Tom
>
> Has anyone done any comparison between this Nikon and Leica?
Photon magazine (UK publication, used to have an on-line version, which
seems to have stopped) compared the Leica Minilux, Nikon 35Ti and Contax
T2. Photon gives the impression of a quality publication aimed at fairly
serious photography, and not easily led by gimmics and new fashion trends.
The article made reference to 20x30 inch enlargements used to test lens
optics. There was some slight criticism of the Contax T2 for quality and
vignetting in the extreme corners when used at F2.8. At F5.6 and in the
centre at F2.8 it was OK. The Leica was criticised for its noise, poor
viewfinder, ugly design and poor ergonomics. Its lens was the best. The
Nikon was criticised for the lack of exposure lock, limiting exposure
override. Its lens central performance wasn't as good as the Leica or
Contax.
In summary, Photon said (my copy typing errors permitting):
"There can be no winner in this test. The three have more similarities than
differences, and all offer high quality and flexibility in a durable and
compact body.
The field-corner failings of the Contax lens must be seen in context: the
T* Sonnar is still streets ahead of 99 per cent of compact cameras. It also
benefits from the best ergonomics and handling.
The Leica had the edge optically (literally!) but falls short on design and
on some aspects of handling. The Nikon seems to be a good compromise, but
is let down by the lack of an AE lock. It did sem to be the most solidly
built.
Any one of these cameras will last a lifetime and deliver excellent
results. Choose with care, as your own personal affinity for the camera is
probably the most important factor towards ultimate satisfaction. "
> How
> about comparing it to Konica Hexar?
Richard Caruana has reviewed the Hexar at:
http://photo.net/photo/hexar.html and draws some comparisons with the Nikon
35Ti. I don't think he carried out any lab or controlled testing.
He plumps for the Hexar because it has manual control options, conventional
flash connection, F2 lens, better viewfinder. However, its at the expense
of weight and pocket size.
- Nigel
(I own a Hexar, considered a S/hand T2 but decided against).
--
Nigel Cliffe, BT Labs, Martlesham Heath UK | No Spam, not
To send me email, remove the XgarbageX | even on toast.
element from the reply address.
_
Darren Reely
ons...@idirect.com wrote:
>zar...@epix.net wrote:
>>
>> Up until 1986( a long time ago) I was a good part time wedding
>> phtographer. I got out about then and went on to other aspect of my life.
>>
>> I used medium format Mamiya 645 and a 35 mm Canon FTb. The canon has
>> died, and I need to replace it. I'd like to purchase any of the three
>> above but since they are out of date by a bit, I need some
>> recommendations.
>>
>> Anyone have one(or two)
>>
>> eric
>
>Eric,
>I have both the Canon AE-1 and A-1. If you have to chose 1, the A-1
>offers much more choices of settings and options.
Agreed. I owned an AE-1 and then upgraded to an A-1. One of the things I
like about the A-1 is a switch that covers the speed/aperature wheel there by
stoping you from making an accidently change. This was my biggest pet peeve
of the AE-1 because it was easy to do. This will garrantee that the camera
stays in syc with the flash.
The older cameras like your FTb do not require power for the shutter. So
with the new cameras, make sure you have a good battery. I bought a TX for
astrophotography just because of this problem. It also serves as an extra
camera. Even if I loose power to the needle, I can still use the camera.
Darren
http://www.bcog.org/~dreely