I’d like to explore decent zoom p&s options and would appreciate some recommendations — or links to previous posts I missed. Here are some preferences and nice-to-haves:
- Balsam separation, etc. resulting in VF degradation is uncommon
- Big for its class VF
- Permanent flash off setting
- Max shutter of 1/500s or faster (at all apertures)
- Metering up to ASA 800 or better
- f/2.8 at the wide end(??)
- Any manual exposure override options beyond DX hacking
- Short zoom range (28-60mm is plenty)
I’ll probably wind up getting a TVS II or QZ if I wind up enjoying zooming, but for now would like to experiment with something under $150.
Look at Pentax IQ zooms. The prices are still reasonable and they work great! The Olympus Stylus is a good option but long from the days when I could find them at Goodwill for five bucks. Take a look at the Fuji Work Record. Weather resistant, built like a tank and a good lens. Don’t overspend for the hyped up Contax. I owned a TVS in 2006 and it was starting to develop LCD bleed way back then. There’s plenty of good choices out there, take your time.
d.s. wrote:
Thanks for the recommendations. I have a Nikon ActionTouch already, but will check out the more compact options.
I’m considering the TVS II if I enjoy the general experience of not zooming with my feet. How badly do they bleed?
Huss often tells the story of going into a repair shop and being shown a drawer full of broken high end P&S. Contax T2’s, Nikon Ti’s, Rollei’s and a bunch of others that sell in the +500 dollar range. None of them were reparable. The advice was, if you want a 90’s P&S, don’t spend a lot of money because they’re going to break. A Samsung Slim (not the R, they’re junk) Pentax Espio or any number of a hundred dollars or less P&S will do a great job and if it dies, it’s easy enough to buy another.
Look through the Films Not Dead forum and you’ll see all kinds of examples of great images from inexpensive cameras. Good luck with the search and have fun.
I have a Rollei QZ35W and while it is technically superb it is massive and does not have a built in flash. The flash is a huge separate hammer head style attachment.
Desmolicious wrote:
I have a Rollei QZ35W and while it is technically superb it is massive and does not have a built in flash. The flash is a huge separate hammer head style attachment.
The QZ’s size looks a bit smaller than an M, which I’m fine with. Have you tried a TVS variant? I’d be curious to know how their performance compares.
I had a TVS about 10 years ago and I loved the physical form factor of the camera. It felt solid and was wonderfully compact with excellent build quality. I was very underwhelmed by the lens though. I had just come off of using a Yashica T4 (I bought it at a Goodwill in superb condition in its original box for $3.99!!) which had a crazy-sharp lens and with the TVS being a Contax, I expected the same level of performance. It just wasn't as sharp as I'd hoped for and the color rendition was flat. After that I vowed to stay away from expensive compact zoom cameras and leaned more towards inexpensive models. One that has worked well for me is the Canon Sure Shot Z180U with its 38-180mm lens. The camera is very compact and full-featured, and the lens is pretty sharp. The AF is also quite good and does a decent job of tracking moving subjects. It fits nicely in your pants pocket and is easy to take everywhere. They can be bought for well below $100. Maybe I just got a good copy, but I really like the camera and recommend it.
racoll wrote:
I had a TVS about 10 years ago and I loved the physical form factor of the camera. It felt solid and was wonderfully compact with excellent build quality. I was very underwhelmed by the lens though. I had just come off of using a Yashica T4 (I bought it at a Goodwill in superb condition in its original box for $3.99!!) which had a crazy-sharp lens and with the TVS being a Contax, I expected the same level of performance. It just wasn't as sharp as I'd hoped for and the color rendition was flat. After that I vowed to stay away from expensive compact zoom cameras and leaned more towards inexpensive models. One that has worked well for me is the Canon Sure Shot Z180U with its 38-180mm lens. The camera is very compact and full-featured, and the lens is pretty sharp. The AF is also quite good and does a decent job of tracking moving subjects. It fits nicely in your pants pocket and is easy to take everywhere. They can be bought for well below $100. Maybe I just got a good copy, but I really like the camera and recommend it.
The maximum aperture of f/5.6 makes it a dealbreaker for me, but I appreciate the well written post. As to the TVS’ mushiness, would you share what your scanning method was when you had it?
d.s. wrote:
The QZ’s size looks a bit smaller than an M, which I’m fine with. Have you tried a TVS variant? I’d be curious to know how their performance compares.
The QZ is a lot bigger. Length, width, height
:
It does have amazing specs for a p&s - shutter speeds from 16 secs to 1/8000 available all the time, full control over that and aperture etc. I think the meter sensitivity is EV20 to EV 1.
I have owned a TVSIII and did not like it. I did love the size (with built in flash like a p&S should have!) and the build. But quickly hated the trap door lens cover. It just made it so slow to operate - turn camera on, wait for the trap door to open, then wait for the lens to extend, then you can take a pic.
Plus it felt like you could snag that door on something breaking it. I also did not like the tiny fiddly buttons to change the aperture.
But the biggest issue is - at least on my copy - it had the most inconsistent AF out of any of my p&s cameras. It missed focus about 30% of the time. When it did hit focus - the pics were spectacular. But it missed way too often.
The design of the TVSII is much better IMO, but I have never used one.
The only Contax P&S I own is neither cheap (anymore) nor fitted with a zoom. It is, however, small and performs beautifully. The Sonnar 35/2.8 was custom designed for the T3:
Three ways to reach full-frame 135 format with 35mm primes.
It does have amazing specs for a p&s - shutter speeds from 16 secs to 1/8000 available all the time, full control over that and aperture etc. I think the meter sensitivity is EV20 to EV 1.
I have owned a TVSIII and did not like it. I did love the size (with built in flash like a p&S should have!) and the build. But quickly hated the trap door lens cover. It just made it so slow to operate - turn camera on, wait for the trap door to open, then wait for the lens to extend, then you can take a pic.
Plus it felt like you could snag that door on something breaking it. I also did not like the tiny fiddly buttons to change the aperture.
But the biggest issue is - at least on my copy - it had the most inconsistent AF out of any of my p&s cameras. It missed focus about 30% of the time. When it did hit focus - the pics were spectacular. But it missed way too often.
The design of the TVSII is much better IMO, but I have never used one....Show more →
Thanks for the sharing the comparison. It’s chunkier than I expected.
From reviews I’ve read the TVS II’s AF is “snappy,” but I guess that doesn’t mean it snaps to the right spot. I really like the idea of having an aperture ring at the base of the lens rather than a button. I’ll probably wind up giving it a shot—at least before the Rollei.
rico wrote:
The only Contax P&S I own is neither cheap (anymore) nor fitted with a zoom. It is, however, small and performs beautifully. The Sonnar 35/2.8 was custom designed for the T3:
d.s. wrote:
Thanks for the sharing the comparison. It’s chunkier than I expected.
From reviews I’ve read the TVS II’s AF is “snappy,” but I guess that doesn’t mean it snaps to the right spot. I really like the idea of having an aperture ring at the base of the lens rather than a button. I’ll probably wind up giving it a shot—at least before the Rollei.
The QZ has a fantastic lens and can take great pics. The problem I have is it is NOT a p&s camera, as to me a p&s camera should have a built in flash.
Desmolicious wrote:
The QZ has a fantastic lens and can take great pics. The problem I have is it is NOT a p&s camera, as to me a p&s camera should have a built in flash.
d.s. wrote:
Between these and the “recent film shots” thread, your results are too consistent to trust that the lens is all that great—but thank you.
Back in the day when I posted on rangefinderforum, I shot my M7 w Elmarit 28 Asph side by side against my QZ35w @ 28mm and posted the results. Just for sharpness across the field - I did not do a flare test as I can tell you the Elmarit is better in that regard.
Anyway, same film, same subject, same time - could not tell any difference apart from @ 2.8 where the Elmarit was sharper in the corners.I wish I still had those images but I deleted them as the free image host site at that time went to pay for play.
Some more QZ, first two @ 2.8
At the time when the Rollei was released, it was by far the most expensive ‘p&s’ on the market. That lens, the incredible shutter specs, the Ti build. All added up. But it is/was very large and kinda noisy.
Desmolicious wrote:
Back in the day when I posted on rangefinderforum, I shot my M7 w Elmarit 28 Asph side by side against my QZ35w @ 28mm and posted the results. Just for sharpness across the field - I did not do a flare test as I can tell you the Elmarit is better in that regard.
Anyway, same film, same subject, same time - could not tell any difference apart from @ 2.8 where the Elmarit was sharper in the corners.I wish I still had those images but I deleted them as the free image host site at that time went to pay for play.
At the time when the Rollei was released, it was by far the most expensive ‘p&s’ on the market. That lens, the incredible shutter specs, the Ti build. All added up. But it is/was very large and kinda noisy.
