Anyone know anything about this Leica P+S?

[StorminMatt]

This camera actually belongs to my dad, but has been sitting for quite a few years unused in a drawer. It is sold by Leica, but, according to the label, is actually made by an unnamed Japanese manufacturer. Does anyone here know anything about this camera? Is it any good? Also, would it be good enough to properly expose Kodachrome? I thought it might be good to take places where my EOS 3 with 24-70L is just WAYYY too conspicuous. But, as a slide shooter, should I even THINK about using this thing? Or is it only good for C41?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Given Leica's long history of collaboration with Minolta, that's who probably made it. I don't know if i'd entirely trust it with slide film - you'd probably be ok on 80%+ of your shots, but the remainder would be an open question, especially in difficult lighting.

 

[dougjgreen]

In all honesty, it's probably a pretty limited 35mm camera. It's one of those things that would be selling used for under $5, except for that Red Dot Logo on it. It might still take an adequate photo with C41 print film, you might as well test it with a roll of film, but it's really unlikely to be good enough for Kodachrome.

 

[lns]

That's the Leica Mini-Zoom. I used it for years. It was fine as a point and shoot, with a useful zoom range, and very easy to operate. The flash is a built-in, but you have decent control, with red-eye reduction and the ability to turn it off and on manually.

The lens isn't as sharp as a Leica rangefinder lens, to put it mildly, but it's absolutely fine for a p&s. Comparable to an Olympus Stylus Epic -- maybe not quite so sharp, but as a zoom more useful. It's always possible that I had an extremely good copy, but I was happy with the quality (and still am as I look back at the photos.)

The meter worked fine for me, but I used C-41 negative film exclusively. I think it would certainly be worth trying a roll of slide film. It does have a way to compensate for exposure, as I remember, so you could use that in strong backlight that might fool the meter.

The only real bad point that I can think of is that you don't get precise framing, which I suppose is due to parallax error. If I remember correctly, the framing is fine in most ranges but problematic for close focus and at one end of the zoom. If that is an issue, you could figure it out with one test roll and a close look at the manual. I just lived with it because I was using it for travel and family snapshots, and none of that was critical. You have no control of aperture or shutter speed, of course, because it's a true point and shoot.

Seriously, it's fine for a point and shoot. I'd definitely give it a shot.

-Laura

 

[Francis in VT]

If you have the manual check the DX range. If you use a film with a non listed speed there will be a default setting which the camera will expose at. I remember checking a Olympus zoom P&S I was considering. There was no 64 DX so I used Kodachrome 100. Exposure was fine.
If you stick to slide film with similar ASA/DIN ratings you should be OK

 

[firecracker]

Given Leica's long history of collaboration with Minolta, that's who probably made it.

But I think this camera was made by National/Panasonic. Besides Minolta, there's that history also.

 

[winjeel]

Given Leica's long history of collaboration with Minolta, that's who probably made it. I don't know if i'd entirely trust it with slide film - you'd probably be ok on 80%+ of your shots, but the remainder would be an open question, especially in difficult lighting.

I think that's quite likely. Check Alpha Photo Club, a British web blog of the formerly known as Minolta Club (or something like that). I think they've got some history on that particular episode in Leica - Minolta relations.