Topic: Ultra-compact ultra-obsessiveness ;-)

[mcduff]

My long suffering friends on this thread (TinTin and Hungry Mike) know I love tiny cameras. One of the reasons I like the lighter compact stuff is that I am frequently dragging a spare camera places (such as the canoe trip I just came back from) where weight and space matters. But it is also just a weird obsession with me — one part of this obsession is the subject of this thread: ultra-compact 35mm travel cameras!

Here are some that I like, and I would like to hear from other fanboys and fangirls:

#1: Balda/Voigtlander Vito C
Recently (in TinTin's Fuji 690 review) I was gushing over the XA series of cameras. As a non-XA is at the top of the list, I guess this is a bit of a retraction of some of that love!  I still love the XAs, but I do not know if any of them perfectly overlap with what I am looking for.

I usually take the Vito C (a minox clone) camping and took an XA2 with me this weekend. I now realize why my Vito C is my go-to in this category: It has scale focus, where units of measurement are displayed instead of icons of various torsos in different states of dismemberment. I have decided that I really do not like the zone focus system (if it is not accompanied with units of measure). This camera is also one of the lightest and smallest cameras that I own. It can slide into a pocket and not get in the way whilst paddling or humping a backpack over a portage. And has an awesome lens. This is a bit trivial but unlike many of the ‘real' minox 35s this camera uses good old SR44 batteries. (All in this list use SR44 batteries.)

The downside, is that I think I might be killing it with my love! It has developed a small light leak that I am guessing it around its retractable lens. Again, I have really mistreated it (and feel bad about it). I am not quite ready to blame the light leak on its design, it could have been how it has been slapped around. I just recently noticed the leak so I need to see if I can cheaply fix it.


My Vito C in its typical environment


The “UFO-like” blur in the upper right is the light leak

#2: Chinon Bellami
This is a bit of a goofy ‘barn door’ camera and I have not used it as much as I should, but the more I think about it, this camera has everything I like in a compact camera: It has scale focus. It is compact – not as tiny as the Vito C but generally in the XA ballpark. It is one of the heavier, but for the “plastic haters” out there (cough cough, Tintin) it has a fair bit of metal in the design of it. Its Chinon lens is known to be contrasty and sharp.  I

A downside is that while the ‘barn door’ mechanism (which opens when you cock the camera) is a marvel, I find that having a door open on both sides of the lens makes adjusting the focus somewhat difficult as they get in more in the way than the drawbridge style mechanism that the Vito C uses. Additionally, this design, while technically clever, certainly adds to the complexity and this may offset any robustness that it gets from its more metallic design. I am going to shoot more with this, this summer. I was going to post some pics from this camera, but I could not find any. (In my defence, I normally use these cameras when I am away from home and there is more than one camera in the mix and I do not label the canisters as I shoot them.)

#3 Olympus XA
My XA has been a bit of a shelf queen lately, but I am going to put it into more active service. The XA was not expensive, but having a couple of XA2/3s kicking around made me want to pamper this one. Also, the rangefinder, whilst an amazing design, has a fairly small focus-patch. However, it does have the one thing I really want, a focus scale! So I will be bringing this out to use more than I have. As the usability of the rangefinder is not Leica-esque, I am going to consider its rangefinder as a bonus to the scale focus system that it has. Lastly, the folding lenses of the Vito C and the Chinon are clever, but (as evidenced by the light leak in the Vito C) they can be points of failure. So the XA series gets bonus points for being compact and not requiring a folding lens. Even tho this camera is #3 on my list, I still contend that it is a beautiful design.


XA

#4 XA2 / XA3
These were the cameras that I always thought were my faves, but somehow other cameras were seeing more action. I love everything about these cameras other than the zone focus system. I have decided that any camera that does not have at least a scale focus system, does not fully cut the mustard for me. To be fair, I think part of my problem is a result of something that the designers did not envision: I am sure that when Maitani designed the XA series, he assumed they would be a nice second camera to an OM-system. But film cameras are now so bloody cheap that many of us have dozens of cameras. If I only had one OM and an XA2 I would probably remember what the distances are for the XA2's little zone icons. But I have more than one zone focus camera, and their distances and icons are different enough that I never can exactly remember the distance settings.





I have other cameras that did not make the cut and some that are similar (e.g. 110’s and half frames) but did not want to make this message any longer than it is, especially as I really am interested in knowing if FW has any other fans of tiny cameras?

BTW, I found this link to an old Pop Sci article on mini cameras kind of fun.

Many of you have likely the Submin fan site, but for those that have not, it is quite good (even tho I think it is not really added to much these days)…

[SLVR]

You should have included the Pentax Auto 110. Even though now it seems I've positioned myself as a metal loving neanderthal. I quite enjoyed the auto 110 when I borrowed it from you. The mirror slap and shutter sound is charming and almost toy like. The size is perfectly compact and the shape lets you shoot 110 without looking like Geordi La Forge. My only downfall for it is that 110 sucks and is more effort to fit it into your workflow than the results are worth.

[Late Developer]

Not the very tiniest but the best ultra-compact I've ever owned is the Ricoh GR1s.  The lens is a fixed 28mm / f2.8 and is as sharp as a tack.  Aside from that, I had an Oly XA years ago but I found the buttons / dial / rangefinder too fiddly - but that's just down to my innate clumsiness. The results were excellent, though.

[hookstrapped]

My Rollei 35S has fast become my favorite 35mm

[hookstrapped]

And for a great little camera that costs even littler, the Vivitar ultra wide and slim

[mcduff]

You should have included the Pentax Auto 110. Even though now it seems I've positioned myself as a metal loving neanderthal. I quite enjoyed the auto 110 when I borrowed it from you. The mirror slap and shutter sound is charming and almost toy like. The size is perfectly compact and the shape lets you shoot 110 without looking like Geordi La Forge. My only downfall for it is that 110 sucks and is more effort to fit it into your workflow than the results are worth.

Haha #1, you are no neanderthal, pal! You are a bit of a metal-head tho, but there is nothing wrong with that. I can be that way too. I chose the Mamiya M1000s over the newer plastic cameras (which are perfectly fine), so I have have me metal lovin' moments too 

Haha #2, my initial posting was long enough so I did not want to include my torrid 110-love affair (which I think I have moved past) and my playing with half-frame (which is my placebo for my 110 love). But yes the Pentax is a brilliant, amazing... failure. Where a gorgeously implemented design was built for a film format that really did not deserve the love. I still kept one of my Pentax Auto 110's and I really do love shooting with it. Like you, I am driven nuts by scanning it (even with a Lomo digitaliza neg holder) and how much it costs. Even the Kodak Pocket Instamatic 60 is quite the camera. A Rangefinder 110 is kind of a neat idea, even tho it really was overkill. I also skipped all the compact RF cameras (eg Chinon 35EE) that I have played with.

[jharr]

I am just putting my first roll through my new (to me) Kodak Instamatic 500. I have to say, it is a joy to shoot. It may be just a smidge bigger than I would want to put into my front pants pocket, but with a strap over my shoulder, I can't really even tell it's there. It has a nice Schneider 38mm f/2.8 lens with range focusing from 2.5 feet, full exposure control with a match needle in the view finder. The Compur shutter is almost inaudible and will sync flash at all speeds (1/30th - 1/500th +B). Of course the down side is film availability though if you can find non-perforated 35mm film, reloading the 126 cartridges shouldn't be too daunting for the FilmWasters. So while this may not be "ultra" compact, it is certainly smaller than any of my other rangefinders.

[SLVR]

Well At least you've updated to half frame. I guess I can forgive you now . Some of the shots ive seen from mike's pen are great. It's tempting to get into half but I struggle with the size of 35mm sometimes let alone half of that.

And for a great little camera that costs even littler, the Vivitar ultra wide and slim

I have a slim white angel and have to say that its my beach camera. Fairly decently pocketable camera if I do say so myself.

[mcduff]

Not the very tiniest but the best ultra-compact I've ever owned is the Ricoh GR1s.  The lens is a fixed 28mm / f2.8 and is as sharp as a tack.  Aside from that, I had an Oly XA years ago but I found the buttons / dial / rangefinder too fiddly - but that's just down to my innate clumsiness. The results were excellent, though.

I certainly know that the lens is wonderful -- as it it pretty famous for that. How is the autofocus on these? While I invariably have autofocus turned on when I am shooting my "non-film cameras", I generally have avoided autofocus on film. Part of the reason is that on the few I have tried that the early autofocus systems could be hit or miss, or at the very least a bit on the slow side. That has been my experience with the Olympus Stylus Infiinity (which is not quite in the same ballpark as your lovely GR1s).

[mcduff]

I am just putting my first roll through my new (to me) Kodak Instamatic 500. I have to say, it is a joy to shoot. It may be just a smidge bigger than I would want to put into my front pants pocket, but with a strap over my shoulder, I can't really even tell it's there. It has a nice Schneider 38mm f/2.8 lens with range focusing from 2.5 feet, full exposure control with a match needle in the view finder. The Compur shutter is almost inaudible and will sync flash at all speeds (1/30th - 1/500th +B). Of course the down side is film availability though if you can find non-perforated 35mm film, reloading the 126 cartridges shouldn't be too daunting for the FilmWasters. So while this may not be "ultra" compact, it is certainly smaller than any of my other rangefinders.

James, somewhat like the pentax auto 110, I know there were some amazing cameras made for 126. Mike and his better half are into them and he has at least one lovely one, a yashica, I think. At least 126 has some options that 110 does not have (like easily rolling your own) and with the use of 35mm film the workflow has a lot more options. That 500 is sweet. I look forward to seeing the results.

[mcduff]

My Rollei 35S has fast become my favorite 35mm

I regret that I sold one of these. The good news is that I sold it to a friend and he is not using it so at the very least I can try it again and maybe buy it back.

Why did I do something like sell it?
1) I was broke
2) The light metre broke and I was not comfortable shooting without one at the time. Also I was mainly shooting 'chome and it was less tolerant of exposure errors than the films I am shooting now
3) This reason is most embarrasing -- at the time I really hated scale focus!  I was only shooting my OM at the time and using any other focus method seemed old fashioned and undesirable. (Perhaps your Brian Eno quote is relevant to this because scale focus seemed so old fashioned and "ugly and uncomfortable" compared to my modern split image focussing!)

I think I have seen some images linked as being from the Rollei but can you remind me?

[Sandeha Lynch]

I don't go much on 'tiny' at all, not least because the shots can get pretty fuzzy upsized.  My Oly XA-2 is fine as a carry round, but I have no great expectations from it.  This one, however, the Samoca 35, possibly does deserve the moniker 'jewel' as it's tiny yet still has a rangefinder, all manual controls, and sync flash, and ... after spending ten years in an outdoor shed was still repairable and shootable.



It's about the same weight as a Kodak Retina, but smaller.  If I ever come across another of the same model in better condition I'd probably buy it.

Some nice results, too.

[Urban Hafner]

Not really compact, he'll it's bigger than an Olympus mju, is the Fujica Drive half frame. But it's fun to use (sometimes) with it's clock wind drive.

[zapsnaps]

Personally, I like my mini Blad 501cm with the 80 & 120 lenses. With two backs and the prism finder. It's a small, light, compact and can be taken anywhere. Anywhere I can get the car, anyway. And it is smaller than the 5x4.

My fave compact has got to be the Fuji Mini with the 28mm lens. Known as the "sardine can", it's a similar size, shape (& aesthetics?) but with a belter of a lens. But they cost a fortune new (thanks to the lens) and 20 years on are still very expensive on your local internet camera auction site. But as a pocket travel camera, I'd love one.

[Late Developer]

Not the very tiniest but the best ultra-compact I've ever owned is the Ricoh GR1s.  The lens is a fixed 28mm / f2.8 and is as sharp as a tack.  Aside from that, I had an Oly XA years ago but I found the buttons / dial / rangefinder too fiddly - but that's just down to my innate clumsiness. The results were excellent, though.

I certainly know that the lens is wonderful -- as it it pretty famous for that. How is the autofocus on these? While I invariably have autofocus turned on when I am shooting my "non-film cameras", I generally have avoided autofocus on film. Part of the reason is that on the few I have tried that the early autofocus systems could be hit or miss, or at the very least a bit on the slow side. That has been my experience with the Olympus Stylus Infiinity (which is not quite in the same ballpark as your lovely GR1s).

I never had a moment's problem with autofocus on the GR1s.  My guess is that because the 28mm lens had most things in focus anyway and the lens was so tiny that it had a very short distance to travel to get from one end of the focus scale to the other, that this removed the need to have a Nikon AF-S type motor to focus ultra rapidly.

In some ways, I regret parting with it but 28mm became a bit too wide for me for a carry-round camera and my FM3A with a 35mm f2 on the front doesn't weigh a great deal - and I'm not great with the tiny buttons you tend to get on the smaller point-and-shoots. Oh, and because the GR1s was mint, boxed and had the instruction manual and lens hood, I got a great trade price for it.  If I was going to get another similar camera, it would probably be a Nikon 35Ti.

[Bryan]

Originally made for the military during WWII, the Kodak Signet 35 is a durable compact rangefinder.  The shutter mechanism tends to have problems due to its age and hardened grease but is easy to repair and it has a nice lens.  The downside is no light meter and kind of heavy for it's size. 

Kodak Signet 35 by bac1967, on Flickr

Managaha Saipan Beach by bac1967, on Flickr

Repair info:
http://pheugo.com/cameras/index.php?page=signet35&WEBMGR=fb565eddd539286b4f179478aa81be14

[gsgary]

I love my Rollei 35B, people on the post card exchange  will be getting a shot from my 35B

[Francois]

There's one camera I have that seems to be a mystery for most, it's the Minolta AF-C.
It's small, about the size of an XA. It has a very well designed sliding lens cover. The autofocus is pretty speedy.
For me, the only drawback is that there is no feeling on the button when you're about to go from focusing mode to picture taking mode. You have to rely on a small LED in the viewfinder for that... and it isn't always very visible. It also refuses to release if it can't deliver a perfect picture. No underexposure there.

Here's the tiny monster...

[tkmedia]

recently the Fujica Half 1.9, I dont like the focus so much (at least on my example) and prefer leave it on the middle "group" setting for 4-12 feet a majority of the time. There are also distance markers below the focus lever on the front of the camera, so that comes in handy sometimes. I like the aperture knob that rest on the right index or middle finger, very easy to adjust. I wish both shutter speed and aperture are displayed in the finder, but that's too lux of a feature.

http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Fujica_Half_1.9

[Hungry Mike]

My name is Mike and I love small cameras a little too much. Like McD, I have a XA but I'd say I prefer the Oly RC - a tiny rangefinder - over the XA and its variants. I prefer the lens and rangefinder isn't as dim in low light as the XA. I have a Rollei 16S, an absolutely beautiful little camera, that I've sadly never used. But it definitely made me pay closer attention to the Rollei 35 and its variants. I've coveted the Petri Color 35, the Fuji Compacts. I quite like the Konica 35 and its variants that I've used. Honestly, there is few small cameras of that era that I don't have some affection, lust or appreciation for. The Minox and its clones scare me a bit though... I know if I dive in I won't come back. 

I have a deep primal love of the 126 format that is both frustrating and satisfying. 110 on the other hand I just couldn't get into (sorry McD). I have an Instamatic 500 which I adore, one or two of the simpler Instamatic variations, a Minolta Autopak 700 but sadly no Yashica EZ-Matic (you might be thinking of the Minolta McD).

My dive into small cameras this summer is a Bencini Koroll II I picked up for $5. Not a super small camera but dead simple and weirdly is a true half frame 120 camera - not a 645 but takes 3x4.5cm images. Cleaned her up a bit, sadly some fungus on the lens but shouldn't be a huge deal (I hope).

[hookstrapped]

My Rollei 35S has fast become my favorite 35mm

I regret that I sold one of these. The good news is that I sold it to a friend and he is not using it so at the very least I can try it again and maybe buy it back.

Why did I do something like sell it?
1) I was broke
2) The light metre broke and I was not comfortable shooting without one at the time. Also I was mainly shooting 'chome and it was less tolerant of exposure errors than the films I am shooting now
3) This reason is most embarrasing -- at the time I really hated scale focus!  I was only shooting my OM at the time and using any other focus method seemed old fashioned and undesirable. (Perhaps your Brian Eno quote is relevant to this because scale focus seemed so old fashioned and "ugly and uncomfortable" compared to my modern split image focussing!)

I think I have seen some images linked as being from the Rollei but can you remind me?

Here are some (some are nsfw)
http://www.hookstrapped.com/album/rollei-35s#1

[Rafael Morales]

My compact camera is the Dakota MY-1.

[tkmedia]

My compact camera is the Dakota MY-1.

Got one as well. I always have trouble loading film mine, sometimes it does not catch.

DakotaMY-1 by Studioesper, on Flickr

[limr]

I have to put in a word about the Rollei 35S as well. I still am not really used to scale focus, but it's easier than I thought it would be (or I'm better than I thought I was  ) and I really like the look of that lens. And it's very compact but not too fiddly to work with, which makes it nice to use anyway and particularly nice for street photography. I am still a little thrown about the film advance lever being on the "wrong" side, though!

Before I got the Rollei, my most "compact" was the Olympus 35RC (which I still have and use) and I have to say good things about that one as well. The light meter was always a little bit off but if I keep it on manual, it does really well. The shutter always felt a little Fischer-Price fake toy camera, so when I'm shooting it, I always feel a little like I'm just taking mindless snaps, but the quality of that Zuiko lens reminds me that it's not just a snapshot kind of camera.

[KevinAllan]

I have two working XAs (and one non-working). I'm going to London for a few days with the family soon and my current camera plan is to take two XAs (better make sure its the working ones !), one loaded with Portra 160 and one with XP2. One flash will be shared. They will fit nicely into pockets.

That's for a family holiday where time for photography would be limited. For a more leisurely photo-outing, I find that my Yashicamat 124G is almost as easy to carry as an XA; while it doesn't fit into a pocket, worn over the shoulder the weight is not noticeable.

[02Pilot]

I too am a devotee of very small cameras. In addition to the Rollei 35, which obviously has quite a following (and with good reason), I've found that I get on really well with folding cameras. While I enjoy my Retina I and my Certos (Super Dollina II and Super Sport Dolly), I have to say that Voigtländer really nailed the folding camera thing. Both my Vito and Perkeo II are just about perfect - very high quality, small, lightweight, smooth designs with nothing to get hung up in a pocket.

I've also gotten good results from half-frames, specifically my Olympus Pen D3. It's a really small camera, about the same size as the Rollei but considerably lighter. It has become my "always loaded, grab-it-and-go" camera. With Ektar or TMax 100 the image quality is excellent.

I have a couple of 110s, including a Pentax Auto 110, but they are not in use at this point - the film is too expensive and the negatives too small to warrant the hassle of developing it. That said, I will confess to still wanting a Minox B.

[jojonas~]

one day, I'll have a working Minox 35 camera. one day...

[mcduff]

I should not have started this thread, as I know it would have just resulted in me getting GAS over stuff, including a lot of the cool cameras that have been listed. I am really thinking that I have to repatriate my Rollei 35 -- even if it is just to shoot a few rolls though. I liked so much about it -- Leonore I even thought the 'upside down' winder was kind of fun and funky -- and it will be interesting to see if the stuff I did not like, was things that do not mind (eg scale focus).

I am also liking hearing what y'all are looking for in a tiny camera. The Dakota MY-1 (also a Ricoh according to the web) sounds interesting and something I have never heard of. I like Ricoh cameras and it says it is quite tiny (Minox 35 sized). Tony and/or Rafael, I have a question: Does it always want to use "fill in flash"? One of the things that I do not like about the Stylus is that flash that it defaults to fill-in flash when it turns on, almost always wants to use it, and I forget to turn it off.

[Bryan]

One of the things that I do not like about the Stylus is that flash that it defaults to fill-in flash when it turns on, almost always wants to use it, and I forget to turn it off.

I haven't touched my Stylus for over a decade but when I read what you said about the flash I remembered how it defaulted to fill-in-flash.  That drove me nuts.  I may have to run some film through it again one of these days. 

[Francois]

I've come to the conclusion that the Stylus is designed to be "left on" when using it. It doesn't seem too hard on batteries and since the lens retracts when the picture is taken it doesn't take too much space.

[tkmedia]

The Dakota MY-1 (also a Ricoh according to the web) sounds interesting and something I have never heard of. I like Ricoh cameras and it says it is quite tiny (Minox 35 sized). Tony and/or Rafael, I have a question: Does it always want to use "fill in flash"?

I wrote most of that article btw (except for the spec list and intro sentence). Flash fires a majority of the time from my experience, but I've only shot one roll of film through it, I doubt I'd be the judge. Only reason I bought it was it was ~$10 on clearance special.

[jojonas~]

talking about autofocus compacts... has anyone tried a cosina cx-70?

[mcduff]

I wrote most of that article btw

haha i should have guessed that you wrote this as I know you have authored a lot of stuff on that site.

Regarding the flash - It is funny how it seems all the companies thought fill-in flash was so awesome. And yes Francois, whenever I do use the Stylus I frequently open it up, turn off the flash and then keep it open, banging around in my pocket.  Tho I have kind of stopped using mine.

[Rafael Morales]

The flash is on auto and there is a flash on mode. Also a flash on with timer.  A little bit smaller than an lc-a.

[Urban Hafner]

I hear you mcduff. This thread is not going to end well for my wallet.

[gsgary]

After reading this thread I took my Rollei 35 out last night meter still seams to work well

[mcduff]

After reading this thread I took my Rollei 35 out last night meter still seams to work well

Gary, I remember your pics you took a while back with the Rollei and thought they showed off its optics well. I would love to see other shots from it 

[gsgary]

No problem mate here a few from last summer, just scanning some from last night, mine are with the worst lens of the Rollei 35 series the Triotar, but the shot you re posted was taken wide open at F3.5



Ive got i thing about shooting people with dogs

[mcduff]

...mine are with the worst lens of the Rollei 35 series the Triotar,  but the shot you re posted was taken wide open at F3.5

I forgot that was the 35B. It is interesting to see how good a 'lesser' lens can be if it is from a great company! That image is great, especially since it is wide open. Man, I am jonesing to get my old Rollei back in my hands -- at least for a roll or two, to figure out if we are a better match (now that I have matured, haha)

BTW, those images (including the RB211 shot) show three great uses for these little shooters. For candid street photography (like the dog/people shots), for 'hiking about' photos, and of course the normal shots (like the engine) that could have been done with a 'normal' camera.

[gsgary]

...mine are with the worst lens of the Rollei 35 series the Triotar,  but the shot you re posted was taken wide open at F3.5

I forgot that was the 35B. It is interesting to see how good a 'lesser' lens can be if it is from a great company! That image is great, especially since it is wide open. Man, I am jonesing to get my old Rollei back in my hands -- at least for a roll or two, to figure out if we are a better match (now that I have matured, haha)

I love using mine, here are some from last night HP5 stand developed in Rodinal in the fridge

Are family going for a walk
she is not doing bad considering she had a triple heart bypass 9 weeks ago

[tkmedia]

Just got a Pentax UC-1 (Espio Mini) a few hours ago. Have not developed photos from it yet, but seems pretty good for the usability and ergonomics. Photos examples I've seen are very sharp. Uses a odd length 32mm, f/3.5 lens. My lens seems to be a bit 'squeaky' during focus locking, not sure if that's normal. Flash can be turned off. Not great for non dx films as it defaults to iso 25. The transport seems to sound different on type of film bases, maybe I need a newer battery...

[KevinAllan]

Just remembered I have an Olympus Mju-1 Panorama Quartz Date with fixed 35mm f3.5 lens.  Paid £3 for it. I can't find it at the moment but it must be somewhere in the house. The "panorama" and "date" functions are not really added value; the printed date impinges too far into the frame and it is too easy to accidentally select the panorama function. Interestingly in pano mode you also get an extra little window at the bottom of the frame, as below.

Apart from these faults it can give good quality images and is good for non-photography family members to borrow.

[mcduff]

Just remembered I have an Olympus Mju-1 Panorama Quartz Date with fixed 35mm f3.5 lens.  Paid £3 for it.

I always found those 'panorama' cameras that merely covered a strip of the negative (and did not increase the angle of view) -- most notable as a key feature in APS -- as a funny concept.

And you are right about the 'date' function being really in your face. I accidentally had it turned on the last time I used my stylus. I tolerated it in a few pics, as the pre 2000 date added a funny retro touch. However the novelty quickly wore off and I wound up either having to crop the heck out of some images and/or clone over it in photoshop (something I generally try to avoid doing for anything other than dust and scratches). I have a friend who has this annoying feature turned on with their digital camera! That they work in IT and understand what "metadata" leads to my further bewilderment! 

[mcduff]

Just got a Pentax UC-1 (Espio Mini) a few hours ago... Flash can be turned off. Not great for non dx films as it defaults to iso 25. The transport seems to sound different on type of film bases, maybe I need a newer battery...

I will be interested in hearing how it works. I keep on wanting to have an affordable autofocus (ie less than a GR1 or Nikon 35ti) ultracompact or compact 35. It looks like another camera that defaults to 'auto' flash mode (ie using fill-in flash in lower light situations). I wish they would just remember your last settings (although I can understand their rationale as these were not being designed for camera nerds). The prob I have with my Stylus is that is seems to think most shots could do with a little fill in flash, haha. I would like to know how the Espio Mini behaves in the regard, once you have had some time with it.

[mcduff]

she is not doing bad considering she had a triple heart bypass 9 weeks ago

Nice photos gary, and glad your partner is doing so well!

[gsgary]

she is not doing bad considering she had a triple heart bypass 9 weeks ago

Nice photos gary, and glad your partner is doing so well!

Thanks mate I can't believe how quickly she has recovered

[Peter84]

If I only had one OM and an XA2 I would probably remember what the distances are for the XA2's little zone icons. But I have more than one zone focus camera, and their distances and icons are different enough that I never can exactly remember the distance settings.

I always keep screwing up focus distances with my XA2 as well, this is also due to the fact that when locking the camera (sliding the lens cover shut) the zone focus returns to it centre position. Furthermore I tend to forget what distances the little figure were again.
I like the olympus trip 35 as a semi compact camera as well. With my trip 35 the distances are on the bottom of the lens so a quick glance helps with focussing, but the controls for iso setting and focussing are so loose that by simple putting the camera in your pocket you can alter the iso setting from 100 to 64 or 125.... 
Then again the trip 35 isn't that "pocket small"
An other thing I had with the XA2 is that is couldn't get it working when I just bought it. Ebayed it (of course), when it arrived I inserted a battery and it was completely dead.... Until my dad noticed something rambled in the camera, opened the battery cover and remarked doesn't it take two batteries.... 

[astrobeck]

I always get camera lust when I read these threads, so didn't read any of it until just now!!!   

I have my late mum's Oly Xa, but seldom use it.  As mentioned earlier, it is a bit fiddly, but the lens is dead sharp.

My other favorite compact, is a Lomo Cosmic Symbol, kindly sent to me by another filmwaster....not sure it's truly in the compact family, but it is small and has a nice lens and does amazing things with color films!

The Cosmic is going on  a short jaunt this weekend, so hopefully will have some new pix to share soon.     

Becky

[Francois]

I always found those 'panorama' cameras that merely covered a strip of the negative (and did not increase the angle of view) -- most notable as a key feature in APS -- as a funny concept.

There is one Ricoh model that switched the lens to an even wider mode when you put it in Panorama mode.
In the early days of Filmwasters, I think it was Leon who had one and took out the panorama mask so that he'd get an ultra wide angle with extreme vignetting at the press of a button.

[Jack Johnson]

I always found those 'panorama' cameras that merely covered a strip of the negative (and did not increase the angle of view) -- most notable as a key feature in APS -- as a funny concept.

There is one Ricoh model that switched the lens to an even wider mode when you put it in Panorama mode.
In the early days of Filmwasters, I think it was Leon who had one and took out the panorama mask so that he'd get an ultra wide angle with extreme vignetting at the press of a button.

I have a random plastic panoramic camera with a non-intentionally removable mask. This particular one is a Halina Ansco Pix Panorama Flash, but I see variants all the time. Still trying to find a fun use for this one, and I like the idea of roughing up the mask and putting it back in.

But:


Untitled by knapjack, on Flickr

(shhh, I know where another non-flash one is, and if it's still there it's headed Becky's way)