a small camera

[studio347]

This forum is for medium... but as a medium format camera user, which small camera(digital) do you recommend?
casual, everyday carrying, not big, not heavy for casual carrying around, but still professional in terms of image quality quality, 11 by 14 possible print is good, a great design, not too expensive...
I want to use the camera for everyday scenes_people, surroundings, details, around me....
Yes, after so many years, I want to go back to the basic... for me...
But I think I need a bit more than iPhone 5S's camera.
It's not for my job which requires P65 and up in a way... I use 4 by 5 camera, and hasselblad h2  with it.
I could use the H2 with some cheap, used p20 or something. But it seems to be too heavy and big.

My teachers used to carry a black leica, a small Japanese camera in old days. ...on the neck and shoulders....

I don't know much about it nowadays.
I saw some canons in B&H, but for some reasons, my mind is not going there. They don't seem to have the old-black-leica kind of spirit... too many buttons, the shape is not upto the great design...
What would be a similar camera with the black leica with 35mm lens nowadays? Is it still a digital black leica?
I prefer single lenses.. since it's lighter and I'm an old sch...
And a bit cheaper other option but still good enough?

Thanks in advance.

[BernardLanguillier]

You may want to look into the Sony RX100 II.

I own the version I and it is truly excellent.

Cheers,
Bernard

[eronald]

You may want to look into the Sony RX100 II.

I own the version I and it is truly excellent.

Cheers,
Bernard

Your problem is a common one here.
Bernard's answer is on the nose.
Cooter is pushing the Olympus EM-5, because it makes good pictures. I like the form factor of the tiny Panasonic GM1.

Edmund

[Ken Bennett]

You might look at the Fujifilm X Pro 1 with their 23mm f/1.4 lens. The sensor is APS size, so the lens covers the same field of view as a 35mm lens on 35mm film camera. It's a quirky little camera, and took me some time to figure out, but it's capable of some amazing images. And the lenses are excellent.

[JV]

The Fuji X100s if you want it to be pocketable.

[fredjeang2]

A discontinued GH2.
Why not the gh3?
Because the #2 is a multi aspect-ratio
Camera. Its sensor is in fact 2mpx bigger
So it uses the extra pixels for multi format
Capture. They sadly abandonned that on
The current version.

[studio347]

thanks for all the suggestions.
Fuji 100s looks interesting especially.. small size and quiet shutter.
I like the small size since I want to mimic the every-moment carrying practice of my teacher~ha

I will do some more research.
....Wondering if it can produce enough image quality ....for let's say...like conde nast magazines.

[fredjeang2]

This could help you: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

You get instantanly 2 cameras of your choice with the different files that you can download.
There are jpegs but you can draw conclusions IMO.
click once on one of the serie, then other click to see the image full size.

[TMARK]

The X100s is plenty good enough for those pricks at Conde Naste, even Hachette.  Conde Naste will use an X100s file without permission just as readily as a Phase One or Leaf image.

the X100s/Xpro files hold up well, take post well, have a nice range.  I think the IQ is on par with the fullframe dslrs, with better color.  They are close the Leica M9 files, sort of.  Its really a different look.  I don't think the Red Dot on the leica makes M9 files any more printable than an X100s file.

thanks for all the suggestions.
Fuji 100s looks interesting especially.. small size and quiet shutter.
I like the small size since I want to mimic the every-moment carrying practice of my teacher~ha

I will do some more research.
....Wondering if it can produce enough image quality ....for let's say...like conde nast magazines.

[Justinr]

I chopped in the Pentax K5 for the D3 and although the operating envelope of the latter knocks the Pentax into a cocked hat the former is still a darn good camera for the money, especially in low light. It's also compact and pretty rugged having a metal frame and can withstand a few knocks.  The K3 is meant to be better still but I'm not sure the price difference between is justified by extra ability, the old 5's are still about at clearance prices.

These are examples of its fruit - http://www.inkplusimages.com/Trouble/index.html

[fredjeang2]

Well yeah,
I was about to mentionned Pentax but it seems
That in this forum their products don't exist and
It's a pity because they make damn good cameras.
I actualy think that the K3 would be the camera
Klaban is seeking for years.
keith, if you read that, hire a k3 when you can a week
Or 2 and...send me swiss chocolates when you buy it.
I think the K3 is a serious camera, and like the
Leica M, no filter I beleive and from memory 20ish +
Megapixels, completly operative under rain, snow and
Cyclons.
The body is maybe on the most robust to date
And the size is smaller than the CaNikons, wide
Range of sealed pro lenses too but ain't cheap.
I'd take a K3 over all the cameras mentionned
Above except the Leica M maybe for the
Snobish factor as it fits with the color of my Lambo,
And it seems that the red dot still impresses the
Chicks...."ohhhhh...is that a Leica?", "yes, what else?"

TMark, you made me laugh with Hachette...but you're
Right.

[Telecaster]

I've always liked Pentax stuff a lot. When my first SLR, a Canon AE-1, was stolen I replaced it first with a Pentax KX and then later an MX (which I still have). When much later I decided to give medium format a spin it was with a 645N II. (Totally Michael's fault, BTW...his review is still available here in the archives.) Eventually sold the camera but kept the lenses, now used with great enjoyment on a 645D. I also had a K10D for awhile. AF weirdness, in particular consistent misfocusing in incandescent light, led to me getting rid of it...but again I kept the AF lenses.     The 31, 43 & 77mm Ltds are particularly lovely image makers IMO. I'm not at all in the market for another SLR—I like EVFs far too much—but the new K3 looks very nice indeed. If it had an EVF I'd be all over it.

For a Leica-ish small camera I'd strongly consider Fuji's X-100s. Or a Panasonic GX7 with either an Olympus 17/1.8 or Panasonic 20/1.7 lens. (I own a GX7 and both lenses.)

-Dave-

[eronald]

There's one alternative which is strange, but which I used for many years, namely stick a small old style AF 50mm prime on any Canon or Nikon dSLR and it becomes a compact
Canon Rebels are really nice cameras, as long as you don't drop them.

Edmund

[Petrus]

the X100s/Xpro files hold up well, take post well, have a nice range.  I think the IQ is on par with the fullframe dslrs, with better color.  They are close the Leica M9 files, sort of.  Its really a different look.  I don't think the Red Dot on the leica makes M9 files any more printable than an X100s file.

Ha! X-Pro1 (thus also X100s with same innards) is equal to the venerable Canon 5D2, which is much better than M9. If you mean that Fuji files have the same "feel" as M9, fine, but the real quality (resolution, dynamic range etc) is actually much better.

And yes, Fuji X-Trans sensor files do have that nice different feel to them. If one needs just a one lens mid-wide camera, X100s is the one.

Disclamer: I have both X-Pro1 and X100s as a spare (or great mid-wide lens with free body if you want to see it that way…)

[Ken Bennett]

The Fuji X100s if you want it to be pocketable.

Yup, I was kicking myself later for forgetting to mention that one. Might be the perfect choice.

[JV]

Yup, I was kicking myself later for forgetting to mention that one. Might be the perfect choice.

On top of that it is the world's best digital camera according to Ken Rockwell!!

Who would dare to contradict that…?

[Justinr]

I've always liked Pentax stuff a lot. When my first SLR, a Canon AE-1, was stolen I replaced it first with a Pentax KX and then later an MX (which I still have). When much later I decided to give medium format a spin it was with a 645N II. (Totally Michael's fault, BTW...his review is still available here in the archives.) Eventually sold the camera but kept the lenses, now used with great enjoyment on a 645D. I also had a K10D for awhile. AF weirdness, in particular consistent misfocusing in incandescent light, led to me getting rid of it...but again I kept the AF lenses.    The 31, 43 & 77mm Ltds are particularly lovely image makers IMO. I'm not at all in the market for another SLR—I like EVFs far too much—but the new K3 looks very nice indeed. If it had an EVF I'd be all over it.

For a Leica-ish small camera I'd strongly consider Fuji's X-100s. Or a Panasonic GX7 with either an Olympus 17/1.8 or Panasonic 20/1.7 lens. (I own a GX7 and both lenses.)

-Dave-

My first dip into digital was with the Pentax ist, what a great little camera that was, I moved up to a Canon 30D expecting things to be so much better, but they weren't, spent too long trying to make sense of that thing before switching back to Pentax and the, K10 and then K5, but Pentax have just sat on their hands since, so it was time to move on. Shame really as they were doing so well.

[bcooter]

I use 4 by 5 camera, and hasselblad h2  with it.

My teachers used to carry a black leica, a small Japanese camera in old days. ...on the neck and shoulders....

I saw some canons in B&H, but for some reasons, my mind is not going there. They don't seem to have the old-black-leica kind of spirit... too many buttons, the shape is not upto the great design...
What would be a similar camera with the black leica with 35mm lens nowadays? Is it still a digital black leica?

Thanks in advance.

I think you answered your own question.

If money is not the issue, then a M9 or Leica 240, if money is an option the a used Leica m8, because they're going for point and shoot money.

Everything else, large or small everyone will debate until your computer runs out of memory.

The debate will be better larger frame size (always larger frame size) more pixels (always more pixels), more DR (always more dr), low noise at a billion iso (always about noise in shadows at a billion iso), but they'll never mention the joy of using a camera you find special, or how If you ever actually take a beautiful photograph with it.

You understand the ccd look (and yes that will be debated also), you appreciate european design and if your shooting professional work with a Hasselblad, you obviously not swayed by the D800 A7R syndrome.

I own a lot of cameras, for a lot of different uses, some I like, some I love, some are just tools of the trade, but I bought an M8 when it first came out, had never owned a rangefinder in my life though when I shoot with it I find it a joy and I would be surprised if I ever sell it.  

The downside is it's manual focus, the lenses if you don't shop around are expensive, you'll need some extra batteries, the bottom plate has to be removed to change cards.  

The upside is if something only the owner and user will understand.  




IMO

BC

[eronald]

I think you answered your own question.

If money is not the issue, then a M9 or Leica 240, if money is an option the a used Leica m8, because they're going for point and shoot money.

Everything else, large or small everyone will debate until your computer runs out of memory.

The debate will be better larger frame size (always larger frame size) more pixels (always more pixels), more DR (always more dr), low noise at a billion iso (always about noise in shadows at a billion iso), but they'll never mention the joy of using a camera you find special, or how If you ever actually take a beautiful photograph with it.

You understand the ccd look (and yes that will be debated also), you appreciate european design and if your shooting professional work with a Hasselblad, you obviously not swayed by the D800 A7R syndrome.

I own a lot of cameras, for a lot of different uses, some I like, some I love, some are just tools of the trade, but I bought an M8 when it first came out, had never owned a rangefinder in my life though when I shoot with it I find it a joy and I would be surprised if I ever sell it.  

The downside is it's manual focus, the lenses if you don't shop around are expensive, you'll need some extra batteries, the bottom plate has to be removed to change cards.  

The upside is if something only the owner and user will understand.  




IMO

BC

 I hear the M9 actually works without needing pull-battery-wait resetting, needs no IR filters, and has decent Hi-ISO.
 Picture-wise the M8 is actually as good as cooter says, but if it's the only camera you have you will become a nervous wreck.

Edmund

[EricWHiss]

Those of you who recommend the Fuji X100 -  is there something you'd recommend with a longer focal length?