Not necesarily. An all-manual SLR makes a quick momentary clunk. Most of the point-and-shoots I've used have a very loud focus noise, which doesn't happen until I trip the shutter, so you have whiny gears to focus, and quiet click then whiny noise to advance the film. The whole thing takes much longer than the quick SLR kerchunk, and is a continuous pitched noise that will carry much more than the SLR sound. My Pentax MX is much quieter than my Pentax Espio.
Will the 'Point and Shoot' camera bubble ever pop?
-
A
- Thread starter maevery
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale BOOK SALE! Weston, Karsh, Kenna, Worth, Sexton
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale Complete Mamiya RB67 Pro SD collections with camera bags
- Started by orbitaldebris
-
Want to Buy JOBO ATL 1500/1000 or JOBO CPP2
- Started by balazsfff
-
For Sale Foto-100 bulk roll, 100'
- Started by MCB18
-
Sold Hasselblad ELM battery adapters x2
- Started by blee1996
Forum statistics
Not necesarily. An all-manual SLR makes a quick momentary clunk. Most of the point-and-shoots I've used have a very loud focus noise, which doesn't happen until I trip the shutter, so you have whiny gears to focus, and quiet click then whiny noise to advance the film. The whole thing takes much longer than the quick SLR kerchunk, and is a continuous pitched noise that will carry much more than the SLR sound. My Pentax MX is much quieter than my Pentax Espio.
The advantage of viewfinder cameras I always thought was that because the shutter was in the lens and there is no mirror slap, it's quieter to use than an SLR. My Mamiya RB67 is pretty quiet in mirror-up mode which I always use when taking landscape shots, not that the birds mind the noise anyway.
With the mirror up, how do you see what the photograph will be or frame anything?
You look through the viewfinder and frame everything up and then release the mirror which locks up. Then when you're ready to shoot after the tripod stops vibrating, you release the shutter in the lens.
with a tripod, and composing the shot before flipping the mirror up, maybe? Or maybe he just uses the force?
I'm sure the RB is super quiet in mirror up mode since, the shutter is a nice quites Seiko 1 leaf shutter (I'm pretty sure Mamiya, used Seiko shutters. My Bronicas all use Seiko 0 leaf shutter and are super quiet in mirror up mode. The only loud leaf shutter I've encountered is the Sinar Copal shutter that mounds behind the front standard. That thing is as loud as a Pentax 67.
I definitely think some of the prices of these P&S are absolutely wild right now. Recently, I was organizing my negatives and realized the time I used to own a Ricoh GR21, I shot and brought that thing everywhere! It's a damn shame that long-term serviceability is pretty poor with most P&S if not non-existent... I had sold my GR21 after Ricoh wound down their repairs as those motors were notoriously weak.
I have a Pentax Espio/IQ Zoom 120 that I have only used a few times due to it's small, somewhat opaque viewfinder.
The lens on it is better than most slr zooms, and the exposure is spot-on most of the time, while offering a reasonable amount of control.
These camera's still sell for less than the overhyped models, and equal or outperform them as well.
And yes, the batteries for these are expensive.
The lens on it is better than most slr zooms, and the exposure is spot-on most of the time, while offering a reasonable amount of control.
These camera's still sell for less than the overhyped models, and equal or outperform them as well.
And yes, the batteries for these are expensive.
Last edited:
The Fuji Klasse W & S models (not the way inferior 1st gen) have now skyrocketed in price. Base level is $1200. I wanted one, but at $1200 for a P&S? Just stop for a second and realize that is more than a perfect Nikon F6. Or Leica R6.2. Or Nikon FM3A. And about the same as a Leica M4-2 or M3 DS.
Yes I know, not the same thing blah blah blah but that Fuji was $500 5 years ago. And I think $400 new?
The upside is that it is newer than any Contax, and is apparently much more reliable so you should be able to get some years out of it before it poops.
Yes I know, not the same thing blah blah blah but that Fuji was $500 5 years ago. And I think $400 new?
The upside is that it is newer than any Contax, and is apparently much more reliable so you should be able to get some years out of it before it poops.
I felt bad that I paid $30 for my Chinon 35F Infrafocus, a point and shoot that I really like. Then dug out my wife's old Vivitar 35PS, she carried it for years while working as a feature writer for the old Mesa Tribune. It has a 35mm 3.8 non DX coded so it possible to use the ASA setting to compensate for a back lit subject, takes 2 AA batteries, slide cover that turns the meter on, not very fast motor, lens is sharp. I think the top shutter speed was 1/350. My only grip is that it will take a filter. Here is a picture of wife when she covered the Super Bowel in the 90s, she had the papers photopaper grab this shot.
Attachments
Great pic Paul!
I've been playing with my first gen AF P&S cameras, and much prefer zone focus "P&S" cameras over them because the early AF was frankly, unreliable. And did not offer 'stepless' AF, but pretty much just was set into zones.
With the manual zone focus cameras - no delay and if you messed up you knew it was on you.
With the manual zone focus cameras - no delay and if you messed up you knew it was on you.
What I like about my Chinon MF 35 is that it has a distance scale visible in the viewfinder. I know at what distance the AF is set to, don't know of any other AF camera with the same feature. What I don't like is it doesn't have window to show if the camera has film, being motor driven cannot use the rewind knob to test for tension, need to open the back in the darkroom.
Take off the motor drive. Check the rewind knob. Reattach the motor drive. Or, my choice, leave the motor drive off.
It's integrated, I could disassemble the camera, remove the motor, install a rewind crank, manual advance, then rebuild. Oh, need to have a new chip set made to work with a manual wind and rewind. I think I'll do it this afternoon.
Nikon LW35AF has that. Most prob the Nikon L35AF too if the LW (water resistant) version has it.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 654
- Format
- 35mm
I agree with this.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 654
- Format
- 35mm
I am afraid I may not know what is meant by the "point and shoot bubble". Perhaps there could be some examples of the purported problem. Walker Evans famously took pictures on a subway with a camera hidden in his coat. This might be considered a kind of point-and-shoot because he did not hold the camera to his eye. Yet is he celebrated for those impromptu images. I am more concerned with when the bubble of the obsession with straight photography/ f/64 school,/ultra-realism bubble will burst. Especially with digital, I see endless images that are perfectly focused, and clinically perfect in many ways but boring, and most importantly, unlike millions of others just like them. https://publicdelivery.org/walker-evans-many-are-called/
No doubt there are many perfectly focused images made. The anti- f/64 ultra realism side has a lot of fans in large format. Fuzzy lenses sell for hundreds and even thousands of $ regularly. But the LF’ers don’t take a lot of shots!
Oh yes we need many more so called photographs with emojis, fairies, satyrs, nymphs, sharks jumping out of the water, over sharpened, pasted in skies, artificial objects and other nonphotographed Fauxtow$hopped objects slammed in our faces with captions claiming that it is all real. You are right we need those like we all need fast moving fatal diseases and pandemics.
-
- Kodachromeguy
- Deleted
- Reason: not needed any more
People like them because they are easy to use, they are easy to find, and easy to carry around. That's the basic story. Image quality is subjective, because most younger people using these cameras are looking for images that don't necessarily look clinically sharp and focused.
Personally, I got a T3 in a flea market 4 years ago for 5€. In this time I have taken images I have quite enjoyed, even published. But also the camera is aging pretty roughly, the clear plastic covering the LCD popped off and had to be glued back in, the battery door latch broke and its being held with tape. Will this die down? Yes, look at the way early digitals are coming back. That's the next nostalgic wave. Film is too cumbersome to use, and GenZ and Alpha never even used it when they were young, so they have no nostalgia of it other than whats being marketed to them.
Personally, I got a T3 in a flea market 4 years ago for 5€. In this time I have taken images I have quite enjoyed, even published. But also the camera is aging pretty roughly, the clear plastic covering the LCD popped off and had to be glued back in, the battery door latch broke and its being held with tape. Will this die down? Yes, look at the way early digitals are coming back. That's the next nostalgic wave. Film is too cumbersome to use, and GenZ and Alpha never even used it when they were young, so they have no nostalgia of it other than whats being marketed to them.
Here in my neck of the woods film sales is driven by GenX, they like film, they like film cameras, they spend so much time with smart phones and computers that they enjoy a hobby that is not bound to a screen, well not really most live in small apartments and scan their negatives. Those that I have talked to have a 35mm SLR and are looking for a smaller second body.
As a retired person, I would like to replace my body too. No more of the piece part replacement, just change out my whole body.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 654
- Format
- 35mm
The photojournalist David Burnett has used Holgas and Speedgraphics and has won awards for his work . He did one of Al Gore in the presidential campaign. He said, that, at that time, the majority of photojournalists were using the same two camera bodies and same two lenses. This contributed to a sameness in their images even though they were technically correct. He felt that using film cameras helped him have a distinctive look. The quest for ever-greater sharpness, i.e., resolution, has been driving the design of modern lenses to the exclusion of other qualities. Many people using digital gear are getting clinically crisp, clean images, but in so doing creating work that tends to look similar. But that does not mean that people could not work in different ways, and some do, with digital gear. It is an aesthetic mindset that favors sharpness and realism that drives it.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 654
- Format
- 35mm
Thank you. Wow.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |