Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)  (Read 12177 times)

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1044
Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)
« Reply #20 on: December 02, 2009, 09:06:04 am »

Quote from: KevinA
I like the Leica idea best. I thought it would be good to have a point and shoot for when the 1DsmkIII was to much to take around. That turned out to be wrong, a bit like sucking a dummy it offers a bit of comfort but nothing like the real thing.
I bought a Richo , to be honest the picture quality is OK but has point and shoot stamped all the way through and it's just to small and messy, so small and slow I find it clumsy. I now don't mind slinging the Canon around my neck with just the 35mm f1.4, it covers far more and does it better than any P&S. A Leica M8 or LX1 could tempt me, no more the small sensor P&S for me.

Kevin.

I completely agree with Kevin - that's where this all started - I refuse to print from any P&S I've tried, because I'm so used to top-end DSLR image quality...

Logged

cecelia

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 33
Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2009, 11:23:50 am »

I just got the GF1 with the 20 mm lens but have not really explored it in detail yet.  The M9 just seems to have too many shortcomings vs price to make the plunge (Lloyd's review).  I had used the LX-3, but the file quality was a problem when you are accustomed to a D3x.  

I like using the Voigtlander 40 mm f2 lens on my D3x.  This makes for a system I can carry for a day, with a padded strap over my shoulder.  I am hoping the GF1 will be an option for travel when I don't want to pack the big boy.  The D3x with the 24-70 is not realistic for me to carry for any length of time.

Logged

James Godman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 126
    • http://www.godman.com
Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)
« Reply #22 on: December 07, 2009, 02:29:53 pm »

I too have been waiting for a good compact to be available with a bigger physical sensor size.  I guess I need to go try a couple of these and see if they could be a worthy replacement for my Contax T2.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2009, 02:30:29 pm by James Godman »
Logged
James Godman
[url=http://www.godmanblog.

Baxter

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • http://www.baxterbradford.com
Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)
« Reply #23 on: December 07, 2009, 03:27:11 pm »

The M8 is a great lightweight camera compared to a DSLR. I have a D700 and when out Mountain biking etc happily take my M8. Unless you want really wide full frame, I really don't think that the M9 is worth the expense. I'm not changing, would rather put cash towards a D3X! Briefly had a Canon G10 and images were v poor in comparison to the M8 and D700, so it went.

Cyan drift with the wider lenses can easily be fixed in the m8 using Cornerfix. With 6 bit lenses it isn't an issue.
Logged

tbonanno

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 101
    • Tony Bonanno Photography, LLC
Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)
« Reply #24 on: December 24, 2009, 12:56:51 am »

Quote from: KevinA
I like the Leica idea best. I thought it would be good to have a point and shoot for when the 1DsmkIII was to much to take around. That turned out to be wrong, a bit like sucking a dummy it offers a bit of comfort but nothing like the real thing.
I bought a Richo , to be honest the picture quality is OK but has point and shoot stamped all the way through and it's just to small and messy, so small and slow I find it clumsy. I now don't mind slinging the Canon around my neck with just the 35mm f1.4, it covers far more and does it better than any P&S. A Leica M8 or LX1 could tempt me, no more the small sensor P&S for me.

Kevin.

I just posted a related item here...

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....mp;#entry335279.  Love the GF1 !!

Tony
Logged
Tony Bonanno Photography
ASMP Profession

Ben Rubinstein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1822
Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)
« Reply #25 on: December 24, 2009, 02:38:35 am »

Can you hyperfocal focus with these leica lenses? Do they have the markings for hyperfocal? For a landscape photographer stopping way down, that and the lack of need for critical focus accuracy might be enough. Then frame via the LCD adjusting as you go along.

What I find interesting is people complaining about small viewfinders on DSLR's but for whom the 50mm croplines in a rangefinder pose no difficulty...  
« Last Edit: December 24, 2009, 02:39:01 am by pom »
Logged

Plekto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 551
Good "compact camera" for a D3x user (EP1, GF1, used M8 or will only an M9 do)
« Reply #26 on: December 24, 2009, 02:12:29 pm »

Quote from: Dan Wells
I shoot landscape (ranging from broad vistas to intimate near-macros) with the D3x, and need something for longer hikes when a D3x, a few lenses and a 2-series Gitzo just aren't an option. I've owned about 5 small-sensor compacts over the years, including well-regarded ones (G7), and never gotten an image worth printing with any of them - the issue is mostly dynamic range - the compacts I've used have decent resolution, and the noise isn't that bad if they're used carefully, but they have a very harsh, digital look to their files, caused in large part by the lack of DR.

This is a problem with the capabilities of the underlying technology essentially being driven to the point where you don't get significant gains any more.  Traditional Bayer type patterns and imaging techniques used in traditional sensors can't *do* better than they currently are and a re-design is required if you want significantly better results.  Sure, they can tweak the results a bit, but a small sensor and smaller lenses will result in vastly less quality than your D3x.(and also results much better than your 3dx won't likely ever be possible).  Moving to a larger sensor will solve a little bit of it, but it's really not a very good solution as it means the camera isn't "compact" any more.

That leaves non-Bayer sensors, which also happen to do great for landscapes.  This means you want something with the newest Fuji sensor or the Foveon.  They will have high DR, produce great images, and while the resolution won't be that great, they will more than suffice for a compact camera.

The Fuji is basically a tweaked Bayer pattern in that it uses on-sensor pixel binning and bracketing techniques to create essentially the same effect that bracketing and blending does.  You get higher DR and less washed-out results in bright sunlight, as well as a significant factor less moire and artifacts.  Built-in HDR, essentially.  And that 1-2 stops makes an enormous difference.

The Foveon sensor is well understood as well by now - and it produces very pleasing results, though resolution isn't that great.  Good enough for 5*7 prints that are (truly) equivalent to film, but not really a lot better(though it does enlarge beautifully - 8*11 is still very clean).  Though, they did manage to stuff it into a compact camera and as such it is one of the largest sensors that you can get in that size package.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/cameras/dp2.asp
Very nice, compact, and the reviews of it are generally very good.  

http://www.rytterfalk.com/2009/04/20/initi...ull-size-shots/
I like this guy, especially his YouTube video reviews of the camera.  It's very small and works well.  The downside is that it really does need a small tripod at times and the lens isn't a zoom(!).  And the $600 price.  That aside, it does produce fantastic scenery.  Check out the sample with the ocean waves and the field of wheat.  Most compact cameras would just suck at that sort of moire and jaggie-inducing subject matter.

http://www.youtube.com/user/rytterfalk#p/u/15/9bF9p2DhNKE
I find this to be better than some technical pixel-peeping review site, since the raw conversion software is so critical to the process and output.   The output is very good, as you can see.

The Fuji, OTOH, is priced and works more like a normal compact camera.  I don't think the results for scenery are as good, but it's quite user and tourist-friendly.  Good at low-light, good at bright light, and it does have a zoom lens (such as it is, it's not NEARLY as good optics as the Sigma) so at least the subjects are framed exactly as you want them to be.

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/digita.../exr/index.html
http://www.digicamreview.com/fujifilm_fine...0exr_review.htm
The mode that you should be shooting in is the DR priority.  This does the on-sensor HDR/blending trick, and even in the cropped and mangled (jpeg) samples, it's apparent that there's a massive improvement over normal mode for scenery.  It's not as good as the Sigma, IMO, but it's a lot more usable and has a ton more features.

Which one, though...

I like the Sigma better myself for scenery.  I just wish it was a little higher resolution.  OTOH, the lens that it does come with is awesome and purpose-made for outdoors scenery.  Win-win combination.  I just wish the price was a bit lower.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up