Lotusm50 Offline Image Upload: Off
|
p.3 #1 · Small manual digicam w/personality? (Ricoh GR Digital?) | |
pascal03 wrote:
Is it possible that manufacturer's are now moving towards really tiny SLR's instead of P&S when it comes to using better sensors. Just a thought, but if you look at the Olympus E-410 or the Rebel XTi, these SLR's are getting to be as small as some P&S camera's now.
To some extent. That apparent trend is only upset by the fact that (except for Pentax) they fail to produce compact lenses to go with them. Further these camera are still significantly larger (not to mention bulkier with a lens attached) than ANY quality compact film P&S (which is the size and performance target here).
pascal03 wrote:I know the fuji, casion, sony P&S's etc. go much slimmer and smaller and more pocketable. But if you look at the mock up of the Sigma DP-1, it wasn't really that small compared to the Sigma SD-14.
Actually, that is not true at all. The SD14 body (without lens) measures 144mmx107mmx81mm, or a rough volume of 1248 cc's. The DP-1 measures 113mmx59mmx50mm or a rough volume of 333 cc's -- roughly a quarter of the volume or size of the SD14 body. Add one of the smaller lenses for the SD14, the 30mm f1.4, and you add another 260cc's, which is almost as large as the DP-1 itself. The DP-1 needs no mirror box or prism or lens mount/interface and that saves a lot of space.
pascal03 wrote:Maybe Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. just don't see the point of making a large sensor P&S when they can shrink the D-SLR to really teeny tiny sizes thereby giving consumers more choices and still making the camera and a really small and light kit lens combination that gives you better images than any P&S ever could. Plus, it opens to the doors to future sales of lenses and accessories for the D-SLR when consumers feel the urge to "upgrade" their cameras. So why bother with a expensive niche product which may fail when you have a winner with a sub-compact D-SLR.
They are really not so teeny tiny, compared to a compact P&S. The Oly E-410, probably as small a body as you are going to get measured 130x91x53mm without lens or 627cc's or nearly twice the size of the DP-1 before you add a lens. But I think the point is that the type of camera we are talking about is NOT a substitute for a DSLR, and a small DSLR is not an effective substitute for this type of camera. It may be used instead of, in certain cases, but it is not a substitute. By making a camera like this, you are giving the consumer another choices and a choice that will increase the number of cameras sold, not just displace others. Further, the point of this type of camera is that it can produce images as good as a DSLR -- relative to pro film SLR's, that is what the quality compact film P&S's were all about. The Contax T2 or Ricoh GR1 or Leica Minilux could easily produce IQ on par with any SLR. That's the point of it. A compact digital P&S with a large (APS-c or 4/3rds) sensor and a quality lens could perform the same relative to DSLR's. It wonlt replace a DSLR, but it will go places where and when you really can't take a DSLR, not matter how small.
pascal03 wrote:I am quite impressed with the new Olympus bodies and the light lenses they have. While it surely will not replace the Fuji F30, it sure can provide all the detail and image quality while still maintaining a light and small package.
I'm sure they are fine. But, relatively speaking, they are still big and clunky. It is far from small and light enough, or portable enough, or packable enough, or store-able enough, or concealable enough, for many times, many places and many uses.
Edited on Aug 06, 2007 at 07:11 PM
|