RF vs. P&P

Bill Pierce

Bill Pierce

Well-known
Local time
9:11 PM
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
1,407
I wonder if, in some areas, the rangefinder is being replaced by the point and push? In the film world, the Leica Minilux and the Zeiss Contax T3 became favorite "street" cameras. With their disappearance, prices for unsold or slightly used ones skyrocketed.

I see the same thing happening in the digital world. I see photographers using cameras like the point-and-push Canon G9 in the same situations where not so long ago they would be using film rangefinders or maybe even digital rangefinders. No question, these digital point and pushes, with their zoom lenses, have certain advantages in decent light. And these digital point and pushes with their slow lenses and small sensors have certain disadvantages in dimmer light.

Any thoughts? What are you folks doing?

Bill
 
One thing that's always turned me off the point and push digitals is the delay after pushing the button. That seems to be improving. My current 'lunch' camera is a Leica III with Summar and 50 brightline that I prefocus and treat as a point and push. When they come out with a digital one where I can fix the focal length (for me 50mm), prefocus quickly (or auto focus if fast enough), and has a finder shoe, I'd be very interested.
 
Bill, it's an interesting observation. I find my carryaround P&S digicams often usurp the role that I would previously have assigned to a rangefinder. The tiny one I carry in a small belt pouch has 28mm equivalent at the wide end and zooms to 105mm equivalent. That's a very useful range for city shooting. The shutter lag is not bad and because it has AF I can easily hold it at waist level and shoot without framing. It's poor in dim light though.

Gene
 
I feel the digital versions of exotic P&P (or P&S) cameras have yet to come. On films, all you need to care is the quality of the lens. When you get a real nice lens equipped on a camera, let's say, T3, you will have hard time to tell the superiority between T3 and other rangefinders, say, M7 and a 35mm lens. The favorite comes down to the individual taste, but not in technical terms.

However, digital versions of P&P is another story. Even though the tech has advanced, a small sensor is still no comparison to a big sensor found in the DSLR, or M8. The only digital compact with big enough sensor is Sigma DP-1, although it is far from mature, in my opinion. I will be dreaming, at least for now, to see Leica, or a revived Contax to come out an APS-C sized sensor digital compact. If this becomes true, what do you think the price will be? :bang:
 
Last edited:
I think that there is a market for a good digital P&P camera with a superb fixed fast lens and a large bright finder.
the Canon G9 is a wonderful camera within its limits.
cameras like this should evolve into a seperate branch to cater to "street photographers".
There is not much competition in the market place right now for a P&P model like this.
 
So many of these compact digitals are close, but no cigar in my book.
The G9 is a cool camera and I find it focuses and shoots very fast, but the lens is too slow and not wide enough. The Panasonic LX2 is a nice size and has a wide lens and interesting 16:9 aspect ratio, but no optical viewfinder and it's a little too slim to hand hold properly.
These are great cameras for snaps but every time I've shot something more serious with one, I'm a little disappointed and wish I shot it on film. My recently-acquired CL with 40mm Summicron seems to have solved this problem!
 
we need a digital version of the Yashica GSN.
with a similar quality fast lens and just as affordable.
 
I just added Ricoh GR-DII for a pocket camera to suppliment my M8. It's small sensor had a nice gritty look when converted to B&W. It is also a very manual camera. I also like the idea of a fixed 28/2.4 lens.

I think rangefinder users will feel right at home with it. Here it is compared to my IIIG. Oh, for an optical view finder I use the CV 28/35 Min which is much smaller than Ricoh's and can do double duty on the M3.
 

Attachments

  • GRDII.jpg
    GRDII.jpg
    201.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Bill Pierce said:
Any thoughts? What are you folks doing?
Click to expand...

"Point And Push"? I don't think I've ever heard that one before. :)

But seriously, I did a long-belated planned walk-through of a certain urban neighborhood for a blog entry, and I considered three weapons of choice. :)

1. Pentax K1000 with a huge honking 28-135 zoom.

2. RF, either the Canon GIII or the Mamiya SD.

3. Olympus Stylus Zoom P&S (P&P?). :)

I'm not the type who loves to lug multiple cameras and such around, so one and only one was the limit.

I also needed multiple focal lengths. Lots of this was wide, but a few were things like zooms on marquees and name tablets on buildings and such, so I needed tele as well. This made it 1 or 3.

I wanted to concentrate on what I was taking, composition and such, as opposed to the mechanics of focusing and the like.

Obvious choice, the little Olympus P&S (P&P?). :)

That worked, for me, anyway. It may not be what others here prefer, but I do think that the lowly P&S does have its uses for semi-serious things. With Fuji 200 Superia, I think it captured the scenes quite well!

Now later that evening I did a few night shots, and the obvious choice was the GIII for that.

If you care, here's the shoot I was talking about:

http://omababe.blogspot.com/2008/03/alphabet-city.html
 
Well, nothing is perfect, is it? I gave my Leica Minilux to a Salvation Army charity auction about six years ago. Great camera, but the finder was utter rubbish. I must have had 10+ P&S cameras of the digital kind up through the years, but none was held onto longer than a month. The combination of decent ISO400+, adequat AF, snappiness and speed is hard to find - and make, I should think.

I've come to realize that the closest thing today is my M8, but of course it comes at a price. I agree with the digital GSN idea, that would be insanely cool.
 
beyond 1/1.8" can be pretty good

beyond 1/1.8" can be pretty good

I think that once the image sensor size goes beyond the smallest common p&s size (1/2.5") and on to 1/1.8 or so as in the G9, Fuji F30/31, GRD II, etc., the quality can start to get close to film 35mm, at least for 8x10 sized prints.

Things like resolution, # of MP on the sensor, low light capabilities, and noise handling, are then dependent (with tradeoffs) on the vendor implementation and various processing engines.

Bill Pierce said:
I wonder if, in some areas, the rangefinder is being replaced by the point and push? In the film world, the Leica Minilux and the Zeiss Contax T3 became favorite "street" cameras. With their disappearance, prices for unsold or slightly used ones skyrocketed.

I see the same thing happening in the digital world. I see photographers using cameras like the point-and-push Canon G9 in the same situations where not so long ago they would be using film rangefinders or maybe even digital rangefinders. No question, these digital point and pushes, with their zoom lenses, have certain advantages in decent light. And these digital point and pushes with their slow lenses and small sensors have certain disadvantages in dimmer light.

Any thoughts? What are you folks doing?

Bill
Click to expand...
 
I'm very happy with my GR-D1 that I got a few months back. It has replaced my Bessa L & CV 25/4 combo that I thought I would never set aside. The 28/2.4 is a fine lens, I use the metal CV black 28mm bright line when I can't or do not want to use the LCV. If the LCD were not there to me it would be no big deal.

I've had a number of P&P (aka PHD Press Here Dummy) cameras but never really felt they gave me the control I wanted in an easy manner. Way too many menus and steps to do. While the GR-D1 is not perfect, it's close enough for me for now.

I'm sad that Nikon missed the boat with their attempt, they usually get thing right the first time. I'm really not a zoom lens sort of guy even on my SLRs so I would gravitate to the GR-D rather than the GX-100. One of the folks here who purchased a 35mm CV Metal finder from me uses it on her GX-100. It has zoom stops at "Standard" intervals 28, 35, 50, etc..

I hope that Ricoh will come out with wider versions just like they did with the R1 years ago. While I am interested in the 40mm adapter (turns the 28 into a 40mm) I would rather purchase another small body and finder. They are small enough that I think it would fit 80% of what I want to do digitally. I could then get by with a D60 and a 180/2.8 EDIF AF.

B2 (;->
 
I like at least a bit of DOF control in my pocketables, and that means my Ricoh GR1 and a few rolls in my pockets. Even my "ordinary" Konica Lexio 70 is a bit quicker on the draw than my reasonably-fast Casio EX850 digicam. So little film-beruners still rule for me, although the Casio is still damn handy to have around for sub-critical stuff.


- Barrett
 
My "second" camera is a Fuji F30 that's pretty much replaced the Olympus XA2 I've had since I was a kid. I usually have it in my bag, even if I'm not lugging anything else photographic around. If it had a firmware update with shutter/aperture priority functions added, it would be even better. If it had a wider lens I'd consider it damn near perfect.
 
great blog!

great blog!

I like the walk through of Omaha. I've never been there, but it's different than I imagined. What comes to mind are some big buildings in the center of town, possibly an insurance building!

Lots of Mexican food and restaurants, I love Mexican food.

I wonder if there is a "Forgotten Omaha" book at Costco, they seem to have them for many big cities.

Great photos!

dmr said:
"Point And Push"? I don't think I've ever heard that one before. :)

But seriously, I did a long-belated planned walk-through of a certain urban neighborhood for a blog entry, and I considered three weapons of choice. :)

1. Pentax K1000 with a huge honking 28-135 zoom.

2. RF, either the Canon GIII or the Mamiya SD.

3. Olympus Stylus Zoom P&S (P&P?). :)

I'm not the type who loves to lug multiple cameras and such around, so one and only one was the limit.

I also needed multiple focal lengths. Lots of this was wide, but a few were things like zooms on marquees and name tablets on buildings and such, so I needed tele as well. This made it 1 or 3.

I wanted to concentrate on what I was taking, composition and such, as opposed to the mechanics of focusing and the like.

Obvious choice, the little Olympus P&S (P&P?). :)

That worked, for me, anyway. It may not be what others here prefer, but I do think that the lowly P&S does have its uses for semi-serious things. With Fuji 200 Superia, I think it captured the scenes quite well!

Now later that evening I did a few night shots, and the obvious choice was the GIII for that.

If you care, here's the shoot I was talking about:

http://omababe.blogspot.com/2008/03/alphabet-city.html
Click to expand...
 
I use a Canon G7 as my walkaround camera and I love the way it tucks itself away when you turn it off.It fits into the pocket of a Levis shirt and it looks harmless 'cause it's so small although it's a fully loaded camera.Not bothered about lack of RAW,although the G9 has it.When you look at the way it sits on the table it looks like a little rangefinder maybe a poor mans M8.:D Also use an Electro (GT) which is the fastest lens I got and even though it's an old banger I still love the pictures it takes,never seen colour like it and I'm inclined to rate it higher than my Leica D2 with it's Summicron although that's probably down to the small sensor in the D2.
PS First post please dont bite my head off...cheers ...Liam
 
I usually carry the little Leica D-Lux3 as the pocketable camera. Pretty good in good light (the lens is truly excellent), wide 16x9 image. No viewfinder, but on the other hand you just look like a tourist when squinting at the LCD (which can be an advantage in some situations). I always shoot raw and find that setting the camera in B&W mode is useful when composing on the LCD.

Here is a selection of London shots:

http://www.pbase.com/kirkh/london_dlux3

Not perfect, but useful.

Cheers,
Kirk
 
Looking over everybody's comments, there's a general feeling film point-and-pushes are ahead of digital ones.

The Ricoh GR Digital II and the Olmpus 420, essentially a very small DSLR with a 25mm lens, look interesting. But for a while, the digital point and push of choice may be the comparatively bulky and very expensive M8 simply because its high-speed lenses and rangefinder focus deliver in low light.

I would love to hear why I'm wrong.

Bill
 
Several photographers where I work (metro newspaper) have a G9 or something very similar as their 'sketch' cameras. A couple G9 photos have made it into print as well, but that's not a great test.

With some fiddling of settings, even modest digis like my Canon A560 have virtually no shutter lag and can pop off a sequence of 3 or 4 photos, just like an M4P. Once you back off top file size and top resolution (who needs it to print a 6x9 anyway?) the performance improves quite a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top