Best point and shoot compact?

[blockend]

I'm interested in peoples' experience of P&S cameras, in particular which you feel has the best lens. Let me be clear, I'm not concerned with upmarket compacts like Contax TVS, Fuji Natura, Konica Hexar, etc, just run of the mill pocket AF or zone focus cameras of a semi-disposable nature. Are there any sleepers in the sub £/$100 market? I have a number of these P&S cameras with my own favourites, but it would be interesting to hear of any cheap compacts that exceed their optical pretensions. Let's say the kind of thing you'd be confident printing tack sharp at 10 x 8".

 

[OptiKen]

For point and shoot.....for street...I really like my Olympus XA2
Very quick and easy and small with a great removable flash

 

[wildbill]

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Rick A]

Olympus and Pentax units I buy for a dollar each at thrift shops. Haven't found any Nikons yet, but I'm looking.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

You may want to consider this overview of 1970's rangefinders on Stephen Gandy's Cameraquest website:

https://www.cameraquest.com/com35s.htm

My XA2 isn't good enough for "tack sharp" 8x10's; maybe 5x7 at best. The XA1 I think is better, but can you get it under $100?

I would recommend a Canonet 28. The Canon QL17 GIII is better, but probably over $100.

None of these are disposable, of course. The cheap plastic cameras you find for a few dollars at places like Goodwill are fun, but I wouldn't use them if I wanted very sharp 8x10's.

 

[BenJT]

The Nikon L35AF, I got mine for free, I bet they're no more then $40 on eBay.

Fully automatic, fast accurate autofocus, unassuming looks, and a great 35mm 2.8 sonnar type lens.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

The Olympus Stylus had a tiny little clamshell case and a nice, fast glass lens. (Olympus always had great glass).

Many photojournalists used to carry these in their bags, as backups or even loaded with TMAX 3200. Terrific little film camera.

 

[nsurit]

Have a 16 X 20 hanging on my wall made with a hand held Olympus XA ( Which I think is the best of the XA series.)

 

[Patrick Robert James]

You are really limiting yourself with the $100 and the tack sharp stipulations. I have never seen a cheap camera that was tack sharp. The Olympus Stylus Epic has incredibly fast autofocus, but I wouldn't call it tack sharp. Still a great option though. Fuji made a couple with really good lenses, one a zoom, called the DL Super Mini. I used a zoom one for years for color film and pictures of family. Was fantastic with color, but a little flat with b&w. If you find one, snatch it up. If you want something wider, the Nikon AF Lite Touch is pretty decent. There was a Pentax Espio that was pretty good. A lot of cameras had those 4 element Tessar type lenses.

None of the above though would I classify as tack sharp. There is a reason why the better cameras cost more. The only pocketable camera that I am aware of that can be had for cheap and can hold a candle to the GR1's and Contax T3s of the world is the Minox 35. Damn fine lens, but somewhat clunky camera and it doesn't really work in low light nor does it have autofocus. The hot shoe is a nice touch though. And it is smaaaaalllll.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

My XA2 isn't good enough for "tack sharp" 8x10's; maybe 5x7 at best. The XA1 I think is better, but can you get it under $100?

You are confusing the original XA with the simpler XA1.
The XA1 was a cheap camera with a selenium meter and a 35mm f/4 lens: http://www.diaxa.com/xa1.htm

 

[Theo Sulphate]

You are confusing the original XA with the simpler XA1.
The XA1 was a cheap camera with a selenium meter and a 35mm f/4 lens: http://www.diaxa.com/xa1.htm

Yes, you're correct! I did mean the XA. (that XA1 is awful)

 

[perkeleellinen]

10x8 from a sub-£100 compact is often a challenge. I've often been disappointed with the prints I've made from such cameras. But the balance I think lies in the fact that often I'd take no camera with me if all I had was bigger cameras. I had a GR1s once and that made great prints but it cost much more than £100. I wonder if the less-than-tack-sharp nature of sub-£100 cameras may be more to do with focusing error than lens design. Most little cameras occasionally frustrated me with focusing just past the subject, particularly with portraits. I tend to solve these issues by only printing 5x7 or 6x4 or shooting 800 film to close down the aperture.

 

[John Bragg]

Olympus Mju 1 and Mju II turn in respectable results. They are in demand though, so prices are creeping up, even on ebay. In use I prefer the earlier model, although it can be more prone to flare. It is also a fact that the best camera is the one that you have with you.

 

[heespharm]

I love my Olympus 35rc

 

[blockend]

Thanks for the replies. I've owned a MjuII/stylus Epic since the 1990s and find it pretty good. The Konica Big Mini is okay but the focusing is slow, the zone focusing 5-element lens Konica C35 EF3 is better. I've seen someone print 16 x 12" from an Olympus Trip. Also very sharp results from Pentax Espio compacts.

I think some compacts give results as good as SLRs but we tend to look for flaws, or attribute other problems to the fact it's a compact camera. The biggest hurdle is a necessity to use fast film to overcome slow lenses, and particularly on later models, no way of overriding the DX coding short of scratching the panel.

 

[Jon Buffington]

I will have to second the earlier recommendation of the Nikon L35AF. I own about six different oly's including stylus, stylus epic and XA. Though the small package can't be beat (for me) with the oly's, the L35AF has a much sharper lens. I would consider it tack sharp. An added bonus is it has a filter ring which most compact P&S don't have. I also have found the AF to be very accurate where I sometimes have the missed AF with the stylus epic.

 

[blockend]

I will have to second the earlier recommendation of the Nikon L35AF. I own about six different oly's including stylus, stylus epic and XA. Though the small package can't be beat (for me) with the oly's, the L35AF has a much sharper lens. I would consider it tack sharp. An added bonus is it has a filter ring which most compact P&S don't have. I also have found the AF to be very accurate where I sometimes have the missed AF with the stylus epic.

I've been told the Nikon has a 3-element lens, do you know if this is true?

 

[Paul Howell]

I've been told the Nikon has a 3-element lens, do you know if this is true?

The L35 is a Sonnar type lens 5 elements in 4 groups.

There are many 35 point and shoots with very good to excellent lens.

Although not a autofocus the Konica S3 with the 38mm 1.8 lens was tested as being on the sharpest lens in the almost wide range ever tested by both Modern and Popular Photography.

The Canon AF 35Al is a 40mm 1.8 5 elements in 4 groups. Like the Konica and Nikon L35 it will take filters. Minolta also made a 40mm 1.8 with AF, but not motor advance.

The Canon Sure Shot XL has a very nice zoom, somewhat slow, but the Xl has a high shutter speed.

The Canon Sure Shot A 1 underwater and bad weather camera is a 32mm 3.5 6 elements in 6 groups.

Olympus made a number of great point an shoots, the Stylist 170 is a 38 to 170mm 10 elements in 8 groups with spot metering, weather proof case.

I was given a box of point and shoots, I tricked out a Nikon Zoom 100 by gluing a series V adaptor the from of the lens assembly, I now have a lens hood and can add a light yellow filter, by cutting out a section of a an old Kodak print scale for a 1 and 2 density with I can tape with clear tape over the light sensor I can also use orange and light red.

 

[rhmimac]

I just bought a Pentax 90WR and a Nikon AF zoom 310 from a big dealer in the UK. Testing right now. I shot with at least 4 Oly Stylus/Mju types, the MkII 2.8 is a great lens but too fragile plastic parts. The plastic battery door hinge is too thin and beakes too easily after a couple of years. The MkI 35-70 zoom is the biggest but is the toughest of them all. The zoom lens though is prone to have lots chromatic aberation(lots of purple).

I used a canonet 28 for a while. Great camera but 2 disadvantages: the 1,35V PX625 battery replacement is costly and the locking up shutter when a low light situation accurs, it doesn't go under 1/30.

I also regret my Canon Ixus APS 2.8 camera was no longer usable due to APS film obsolete problem. I really liked the minature APS Camera's. Digital killed it all and it wasn't nescesarry.

 

[Black Dog]

Thanks for the replies. I've owned a MjuII/stylus Epic since the 1990s and find it pretty good. The Konica Big Mini is okay but the focusing is slow, the zone focusing 5-element lens Konica C35 EF3 is better. I've seen someone print 16 x 12" from an Olympus Trip. Also very sharp results from Pentax Espio compacts.

I think some compacts give results as good as SLRs but we tend to look for flaws, or attribute other problems to the fact it's a compact camera. The biggest hurdle is a necessity to use fast film to overcome slow lenses, and particularly on later models, no way of overriding the DX coding short of scratching the panel.

I own 2 Trips , which cost me a combined total of 15 squids and I love them-yes you definitely can print to 16 x 12 with a Trip.
|

 

[Forrest Conifer]

Probably my favorite 35mm compact would be a Minolta Hi-Matic AF2. Get the original, not the motor-drive variant. Simple, well-built and reasonably priced online.

 

[Loren Sattler]

Try a Rollei Prego 90. It has a very good Schneider zoom lens, 28 to 90mm. It is fully automatic with DX code film speed pick up. I like it for casual street photography or shooting musicians in dark bars. I modify the DX code on the film canister to change Tri-X ASA from 400 to 200 to get better shadow detail. This is done easily with sandpaper and black tape. The autofocus works great in dark locations.

This camera originally cost over $200. when new in the 1990's. I have purchased a couple on eBay for as little as $20. in like new condition.

 

[JW PHOTO]

Try a Rollei Prego 90. It has a very good Schneider zoom lens, 28 to 90mm. It is fully automatic with DX code film speed pick up. I like it for casual street photography or shooting musicians in dark bars. I modify the DX code on the film canister to change Tri-X ASA from 400 to 200 to get better shadow detail. This is done easily with sandpaper and black tape. The autofocus works great in dark locations.

This camera originally cost over $200. when new in the 1990's. I have purchased a couple on eBay for as little as $20. in like new condition.

Loren,
I don't mean to side-track anything here, but would you have any experience with the other Rollei Prego models? The reason I ask is I have a 130WA w/ 28-130mm VarioApogon, Rollei Prego 100WA w/ 28-100mm VarioApogon and a Rollei Prego 90 w/ 38-90mm VarioApogon. They are all brand new in-the-box and I hate to use them if they are no better than say a Olympus Zoom 80 or something. John W

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Well, we could fill pages and pages with suggestion and they all would be good.

The reality is that many if not all camera manufacturers produced some very capable cameras.
And I am thrilled that someone wants to use a film P&S compact.

So, what is the best?
The best is probably the one that has the features you want and the ergonomics and weight that makes you want to use it.
There's no point in getting a P&S that has a great lens but you easily forget at home.

Whatever you get, enjoy it!

 

[TheToadMen]

Olympus Mju 1 and Mju II turn in respectable results. They are in demand though, so prices are creeping up, even on ebay. In use I prefer the earlier model, although it can be more prone to flare. It is also a fact that the best camera is the one that you have with you.

+1 for the Olympus Mju II
Excellent camera: compact, fast, very good light meter, water proof. I always carry one in my pocket loaded with B&W film. Colour film is possible as well obviously, but I like this lens for B&W photography.

I recently got me another one for 15 Euro.


Bert from Holland