Some Notes on Currently Available Digital Cameras
Really, these are for my own benefit, so don’t take them too seriously. The nearest sizable camera store is 2.5 hours away in Chicago, so while we were in Portland, I stopped at a couple of camera stores just to check out what some of the newer digital cameras are like. My last digital camera was a Nikon D80, purchased almost three years ago now, and sold not that long after. It seems like things must have improved since then, and so they have.
Canon & Nikon
The Canon and Nikon APS-C models seem like really pretty decent cameras now. I was primarily looking at the low end models as I don’t want anything as large as D300 or 50D. The D60, D5000 and Rebel models all sport totally usable viewfinders and highly evolved user interfaces both physical and on screen. The Nikon models seem to have slightly better viewfinders, but on all of them I could manually focus the fairly slow kit zooms with little problem, so good news there. Bad news, the grips on these things are all beyond pointless. I don’t understand the fascination people have with molded grips in general, but on a camera this small, those grips force you to hold the camera in such a way that your knuckles knock against the lens barrel.
I also played with the 5D II and the D700. Yep, those viewfinders are big, but not really all that bright compared to something like an OM-1 or an FM2. AF performance on both seemed snappy-ish but not really all that great, although both were mounted with fairly slow zooms. They were solid seeming cameras, but ridiculously big. You’d have to pay me a lot more than most pro-photographers make to carry one of these things, but I thought the same of the big, pro level Canon and Nikon film bodies of yore. Many pros must have felt the same then given how many used to carry FM2s or F3s.
One sentence review of the Canon G10; that interface is better thought out than any other digital camera out there.
Sony & Pentax
No one seems to carry the full line for either of these manufacturers. One store had the A900, the other the A300. Neither seemed as highly evolved as the Canon and Nikon competition. No one had the Pentax K7, a camera that certainly sounds good in the online reviews. Wish that I could have seen it.
Olympus
Nope, no one had an E-P1, but I wasn’t really looking for one of those anyway. It’s the E620 and E450 that I’ve been really curious about. No one had the E450, but the E420 seems like a nice little camera, and a lot smaller in practice than the Canon or Nikon APS-C bodies, particularly with a lens mounted. That pancake 25 is a tiny little thing. The viewfinder of the E420 was better than that of the A300, but not quite up to the current Canon and Nikon APS-C cameras.
The E620, while really only slightly smaller than the Canon and Nikon cameras, fit much more nicely in my hand. The abbreviated grip makes a lot of sense, and my hand just naturally fell into position. Other controls worked just as you expect them to by this point. The rotating screen seems like an interesting idea, but it’s hard to tell how it would out in practice. It does make the camera a bit fatter. The viewfinder, while larger than the E420, is still not quite as nice as those on the Canon and Nikon, but I was able to manually focus the slowish 12-60 F4 without any problems. That’s quite a lens, btw, and if I knew what to do with all those focal lengths, it would be the ticket.
And it’s on that question of lenses where Olympus still seems to be ahead of the curve. I like an angle of view equivalent to something between 35 and 50. Anywhere in there will do. Right now, the Olympus E series is the only thing offering a compact, moderately fast lens in that range. The Sigma 30 F1.4, while a fine performer, is a beast, as is the new Nikon 35 1.8. The Canon 28 1.8 is similarly sized. That Oly pancake 25 is tiny though, so small, in fact, that it makes the slightly larger E-620 a very appealing camera. If anyone at Olympus headquarter is listening, make a 20 F2.8. It can be a bit larger than the 25, but not too much. Come on, you know you want to hearken back to the 40 F2 for the OM line.
What I’m Buying
I’m not buying anything at the moment. My pennies are accumulating for a medium format camera, I think a Yashica-Mat 124G, which seem like a good entry point for me. Not sure how I’ll handle the world being reversed, but I don’t always know my left from my right anyway, so I’m sure I’ll figure it out eventually. I’ll be keeping my eye on that E-620 though. I think I could have fun with one of those, and with a 25MM lens, extra battery, CF card etc, the whole kit would be less than I’ve paid for any of my three previous DSLR bodies alone, and that’s a real consideration at the moment.
If you’re ever up in the Cedar Rapids, IA area, my friend has a Pentax K-7 and it’s pretty sweet; I do think the camera needs the battery grip to it for a more balanced feel. I’m sure we could all get together and talk cameras, I’d definitely like to see your M6 since I haven’t seen one in person yet and I’ve been thinking about getting a working rangefinder.
I think my Bronica ETRS was a great buy off of eBay, medium format negatives/slides just have this appeal to them that is hard to describe.
Hello
or for a M9 presetend the 09/09/09 ? :-))
Heh. I’ve played with all these cameras in the shops too. And I don’t want any of them either. (And I’m interested in a medium format camera too, probably a Fuji GA645. The new Fuji folder looks really nice, but expensive.) I find the D700 screen with a 50 mm lens plenty bright, and the focus almost instant, but the camera is too manly for a fop like me. That E-620 with pancake, on the other hand, will slip into a coat pocket – nice for travel and hiking. For now, my D80 is sitting at home, and I’m having fun with the Hexar AF and want to buy a scanner. You seem to have a lot of knowledge in that area. Which current scanner would you recommend for 35 mm film?
To Matt and James, I have an extra Rolleiflex that is about to be sold and a Fuji GA645 up on the chopping block.
The wife needs a new car so both are heading to auction soon. Let me know if you’re interested.
As to the 35mm scanner question: I don’t think you can go wrong with any of the big-name 4000+dpi scanners from Nikon, Canon, or Minolta. I’ve used all of them and they have their quirks, but none really beats out any of the others. Find a good deal on one of them and run with it is what I suggest.
Hey!
I just wanted to chime in and comment on a few things:
The fact that some people are all for molded grips/handgrips on their M8s etc, is something I personally can understand perfectly well. One thing is that I feel my grip to be more secure when actually taking a picture, but I also feel that carrying it gets much easier, i can just have 2-3 fingers on the grip, and the camera is safe.
When it comes to AF, the D700 is quite a bit faster than the 5dmII and on par with the 1d-series and the D3, so if it felt slow I’m not sure what your expectations are or maybe the lens was exceptionally slow or malfunctioning?
Matt – the Yashica-Mat is a nice camera, with a good taking lens and fairly solid mechanics. I used one back in the 80s for a while. I have to say, though, it did not compare to a Rolleiflex of any vintage after the MX (1950, or so). You might look at one – they are usually not much more expensive than a Yashica-Mat, sometimes even less so.
2 1/4 TLRs are a different breed. Some people love them (I do) and some hate them.
While I have had several Hasselblads, and still keep one complete kit and occasionally use it, I never quite warmed up to it. The amazing quality of my old Rollei 2.8 E3 – both mechanically and optically – is unexcelled.
The Rollei (and the Yashica-Mat) suit my type of photography. I suspect you would find it quite amenable to your style.
Max
Robert, if I’m ever in the area, I’ll look you up.
‘so if it felt slow I’m not sure what your expectations are or maybe the lens was exceptionally slow or malfunctioning?’
My expectations were that it would be markedly faster than any AF camera I’ve previously used, which is what the hype seems to suggest. I tried it with both the 105 (?) VR, which I’m pretty sure is a 2.8 lens and a 24-120 zoom. I suppose it could have been malfunctioning, but the sales person seem to think that all was well. Perhaps I’m expecting too much, but if the vf is crippled by the needs of AF, I expect that AF to be pretty good indeed.
‘You seem to have a lot of knowledge in that area. Which current scanner would you recommend for 35 mm film?’
Apart from a couple of flatbeds, the only scanners I’ve used extensively are my current Coolscan 9000 and the KM ScanDual IV. The latter is perfect if you only want to do 35MM B&W. The Coolscan is of course more expensive than many fine digital cameras!
Max, thanks for the feedback on the yashica-mat and rolleiflex. Have you ever used a Rolleiflex T?
I have – I worked in a camera store in college, a very long time ago, and we had a “T” in the used window that I borrowed pretty regularly for a while. The EV-connected speed/aperture feature did not bother me much, and the lens, a simple Tessar, was great. I was sorry to see it sold, eventually.
All Rolleis are really superb cameras – the T was a sort of evolved MX and meant to be a more economical camera than the then current 2.8F and 3.5F, but still fancier than the Rolleicord (it had the wonderful crank advance). If you can find a T cheap, you will not go wrong.
That said, these cameras are getting old and may need work. The best guy in the country, maybe in the world, is Harry Fleenor in California. A nice guy and a genius with the Rolleis. He rebuilt my 2.8E3, which had been abused by a previous owner, into the masterpiece it orginally was. That was more than 10 years ago, and the camera continues flawlessly today. His price was entirely reasonable, and turnaround time was quick.
Max
Hmm, ok. I have to say that especially with hsm/af-s/usm-lenses, af is as good as instant with my D700, it is far quicker than say my old 30d. But it all depends on what one expects of course!
I agree with your comment about the viewfinder. Compared to my old FTb, all the modern viewfinders seem cramped.
“If anyone at Olympus headquarter is listening, make a 20 F2.8. It can be a bit larger than the 25, but not too much. Come on, you know you want to hearken back to the 40 F2 for the OM line.”
Add my vote for a 20mm Olympus prime. Though, if we’re going to hearken back to the Olympus OM 40/2, why not go the whole hog and make it a 20/2? An E620+20/2 would be the perfect complement to my D700+CV 40/2 combo which, although it’s close to perfect, is not the camera one wants to carry everywhere.
Jeremy and Matt, thanks for the suggestions. Jeremy, both cameras sound tempting! But I need to sort out what I’m doing with scanning and output first. As you say, Matt, dedicated film scanners are expensive. Unless I can find a good deal on a secondhand one, I may just settle for an Epson V700. I want to scan black-and-white and colour negative, 35 mm and 120.
An interesting set of comparisons by someone who has not been glued to, or using, digital DLRs. I’m currently using the e-420 with a variety of lenses but on the street, either a 25mm pancake or an OMZ 21mm f3.5. The latter is lovely but for quick reaction has to be pre-focused: I can focus throught the viewfinder but would love a 20mm digital lens of any speed. I look forward to the e-620 successor with the e-p1 processing package. You would be amazed at how useful a folding/tilting LCD is )even one direction as on the e-330 was very useful.
btw panasonic is preparing a 20mm/1.7 for the micro 4/3s system
so you’ll be even better off than 40mm/2.0 on film :P
and i think it’s a pancake as well
[...] Go here to see the original: 1pt4 | B&W Rangefinder Photography by Matt Alofs » Blog Archive … [...]