Show us yer compacts...

XFile2708

XFile2708

Messages
1,918
Name
Marcus
Edit My Images
Yes
Apologies if there's already a thread doing this sort of thing - I did have a quick look earlier and couldn't see anything specific.. :thumbs:

Thought it would be good to have a single thread whereby people show their 'compact' of choice. I know from reading a lot of threads on here that must of us have DSLRs but a lot of us also seem to have a decent compact in reserve when we don't want to be lugging around a ton of camera bodys and lenses..

So you can just post a pic of your compact if you want or do something creatively to show it - whatever takes your fancy :lol:

If you also want to say the pros and cons as you've found them then that might help others looking in here for ideas as well? :)

I'll start things off :D


Show us yer compacts by XFile2708, on Flickr

This is my Sony DSC-HX9V - had it a couple of years now and been really pleased with the images I've got from it.

Only real downside I've found is it doesn't have a removeable rechargeable battery - you basically plug the mini usb cable into the bottom of the camera.. not a biggy but can be a pain when you need to charge it and don't want to run the risk of one of the kids knocking it over whilst its out the camera case charging.. lol
 
proper 6x6 120 Roll Film, and folds down to as small as, and ever so slightly heavier than the Canon G11.
 
c24012f7fa0e5bae309c43ec7717bb5e.jpg


The older Casio on the right is a much better compact than the Nikon, the Nikon is just so slow to do anything
 
Cg_Girl said:
I'm so jealous.. Expensive I'm guessing too. I daren't even look
Click to expand...

A judicious bit of sniping on Fleabay saw me pick it up for under £20 - though in fairness, it was sold as "Not Functioning, For Spares" - the chap who had got it in a house clearance hadn't realised that it had a "clockwork" shutter, and that you have to "wind" the shutter mechanism as well as winding on the film... :lol:
 
the only pricey thing is the D&P - although TBY probably does that himself which is why he always smells of chemicals ( or he may be running a meth lab, but i suspect thats just a vicious rumour :lol:)
 
It's fair to say, it's had more rolls of B&W than colour through it - i've stopped processing Colour film for the moment - either E6 or C41, primarily because I don't shoot enough to get full value out of the chemicals before they go off - at the rate I'm shooting, it's probably cheaper to send them away - B&W on the other hand... well - Rodinal lasts for years :shrug:
 
TheBigYin said:
A judicious bit of sniping on Fleabay saw me pick it up for under £20 - though in fairness, it was sold as "Not Functioning, For Spares" - the chap who had got it in a house clearance hadn't realised that it had a "clockwork" shutter, and that you have to "wind" the shutter mechanism as well as winding on the film... :lol:
Click to expand...


Jammy!!
 
Enough of these strange electronic jiggery-pokery devices. As per the other thread, we all know film is better ;)

My Kodak Retina 1b



Pros
Truley pocketable
Light
Full frame film lovleyness
A new roll of memory cards can be loaded in seconds
Cost a few quid off a certain auction site
Incredibly sharp lens, same people who did my large format lenses

Cons
You dont see the focus through the viewfinder, its just a hole in the body so you have to pre focus it. Although that has its own plusses for street shots.
 
Last edited:
Got the even smaller 1a myself, lovely tactile camera that feels really good on the hand and has a really nice lever wind-on action..

 
dsc_1362.jpg

Digital Convenience or Full-Frame Film Wonderfulness!
My VERY care-Worn Olympus XA2 from 1981 and the 2007 'Franken-Camera' Kodak 35-105 digi-zoom 'thingie' created from canabalising the bits left over from the two my kids eventually destroyed! Like-wise rather care-worn! And goes to show they DON'T make'em like they used to.
And no, the photo isn't mis-representing the Olympus, it really is BARELY any bigger, in frontal area than the Franken-Camera, its also not a lot thicker.

Threads turning into another Halide-Promotion.... but, what the heck!

Following the why do you shoot digital thread; SLR's AREN'T the be all and end all of 35mm photography; there are a lot of 35mm compact range-finders out there, like the little Olympus, which can rival SLR quality Image Quality, yet, slip in your pocket as easily as a modern Digital Compact... best of all... they are SO CHEAP! Not looking like an 'expensive' camera, some-times folk cant even give these things away!

Here's another:
1230062_658899890801598_226305816_n.jpg

My Konica C35. Meter-Coupled Automatic exposure in fully auto or aperture priority; this is only slightly larger than the XA2, but has a really sharp lens without the slight corner drop off the XA suffers, with a slightly faster f2.8 maximum aperture. Again, this really does deliver SLR rivaling results, with more manual control.... For as little as a 27 exposure plastic lens Disposable?!?!?!?!? What more encouragement could you need!;)

Oh, OK... if we are comparing Kodaks... here's another...
dsc_1313_zpsce9abb59.jpg

The Retinette 1a... not as posh as the Retina, the Retinette has no integral meter or range-finder mechanism. Nice pictures from it though.
 
Last edited:
No photos of mine available online and I'm not sure I'll remember them all! For the sake of simplicity, I'll leave out the several assorted film ones I have but don't use and just try to remember the digitals. In approximate order of purchase...
Nikon CP 3100.
Konica Minolta DiMage 5.
Minox M3 replica/model.
Canon D10.
Fuji XF-1.
Fuji X-20.
Nikon touchscreen one which was bought for my MiL but which my wife now uses.
Spent a while today just using the D10 - too blinkin' wet to risk anything else!
 
Hmm, many (not all) of the cameras posted so far simply aren't what I would call "compact". Surely a compact is one which will fit inside your pocket.

I used to have pre-digital SLR Nikon F's and Canon EOS-1 film cameras but sold them and bought a digital compact. I am now on my third generation of Fuji FinePix compact - The F500EXR and will upgrade it to a F900EXR which also can shoot RAW. I see a DSLR in my future too.

Fb_RP_camprofile.jpg
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
Hmm, many (not all) of the cameras posted so far simply aren't what I would call "compact". Surely a compact is one which will fit inside your pocket.
Click to expand...

I only see one that's slightly doubtful on pocket size (the Retinette).

Where do you get "many" from?
 
Most if not all of the ones posted here I'd say fell into the 'compacts' category - sure they might not fit in my 4yr olds trouser pockets but they'd certainly fit into mine (and I'm only a smaller adult) :lol:
 
Alastair said:
I only see one that's slightly doubtful on pocket size (the Retinette).

Where do you get "many" from?
Click to expand...

....I wouldn't fancy carrying around one of the following in my pocket of those posted so far but if you term them as a 'compact' then that's up to you :)

- Konica C35 (a bit borderline and subject to how much the lens sticks out).
- Kodak Retina.
- Kodak Retinette (had one many moons ago).
- Voigtlander Perkeo.
 
RedRobin said:
....I wouldn't fancy carrying around one of the following in my pocket of those posted so far but if you term them as a 'compact' then that's up to you :)

- Konica C35 (a bit borderline and subject to how much the lens sticks out).
- Kodak Retina.
- Kodak Retinette (had one many moons ago).
- Voigtlander Perkeo.
Click to expand...

Yin's Voiglander is probably about the size of my Ziess Icarette, 120 View-Finder.
dsc_1317_zps1a56adc9.jpg


Folded, it measures 7" wide , 3 1/2" tall by just under 1 1/2 " thick.
For comparison, OM4, a compact 35mm SLR, Body-Only, measures just under 6" wide, by 3 1/2" tall by 2" Deep, to the lens mount....

You wouldn't get the Icarette in your front jeans pocket with your car-keys, but does go into the outside pocket of a blazer or over-coat quite happily... which the OM4, with lens wont. I have actually carried it in the back pocket of a pair of jeans... poked out a bit, but it fitted!

The Retinette? Its a tad more bulky than the Retina, as it doesn't fold, but still, the Retina's will be at least as pocketable as the Icarette.

The Retina? As photo'd, in its leather case, with the meter & filter wallet, doesn't make it look particularly pocketable; but slipped from that, it will go in an overcoat pocket. Actually.. I've carried it about in my over-coat pocket in its case, with the strap and accessory cases wrapped around it!

Konica? The body is barely any bigger than that of the Olympus. In picture its propped on three rolls of boxed 35mm film... scale shows that the cameras less than 4 1/2" wide, 3" tall, and 2 1/2" deep, in the soft case, including the lens. Again, wouldn't go in front pocket of a tight pair of jeans; but does slip into a larger pocket on a pair of cargo-pants or an over-coat.

But if you want to get silly about pocketable film cameras....

dsc_1314_zps74e8d012.jpg


That you CAN get in the front pocket of a tight pair of jeans.... "are you pleased to see me or is that a camera in your pocket?":lol: though I don't think she'd get all THAT exited about the bulge it made!
 
Wife bought me this as an engagement present in 1986, always produced a nice photo and weatherproofed too.

Still got the case and clip on tele-converter as well

$(KGrHqZHJBYFI2rh8CyZBSTp!VyFG!~~60_12.JPG
 
Last edited:
Obviously I have a different definition of what size a compact camera is. I'm not claiming I am right but am only saying what constitutes a compact for my own practical use - A camera which is literally on me all the time while I am wearing clothes.

My compact measures 4" x 2.5" x 1.25" at its overall points.

Anything bigger simply doesn't suit my needs as a compact. Bridge size cameras, including Canon's DSLR 100D, aren't small enough and don't deliver the potential of a DSLR and so I will add a larger size DSLR to my arsenal.

So, I have shown my compact as the PO requested :)
 
as far as size goes my Retina is only slightly larger than my x10. Both fit comfortably in my jacket pocket



Ricoh GR, lovely bit of kit.
 
^^^^
Thanks re Ricoh GR. I just read some reviews and it's obviously a quality camera. However, for my needs it falls down because it has no zoom and it's 'macro' close-up is relatively poor.

As with all camera gear, it's horses-for-courses as to what best suits each of us as individuals.
 
Last edited:
Teflon-Mike said:
Yin's Voiglander is probably about the size of my Ziess Icarette, 120 View-Finder.

Folded, it measures 7" wide , 3 1/2" tall by just under 1 1/2 " thick.
For comparison, OM4, a compact 35mm SLR, Body-Only, measures just under 6" wide, by 3 1/2" tall by 2" Deep, to the lens mount....

You wouldn't get the Icarette in your front jeans pocket with your car-keys, but does go into the outside pocket of a blazer or over-coat quite happily... which the OM4, with lens wont. I have actually carried it in the back pocket of a pair of jeans... poked out a bit, but it fitted!

The Retinette? Its a tad more bulky than the Retina, as it doesn't fold, but still, the Retina's will be at least as pocketable as the Icarette.

The Retina? As photo'd, in its leather case, with the meter & filter wallet, doesn't make it look particularly pocketable; but slipped from that, it will go in an overcoat pocket. Actually.. I've carried it about in my over-coat pocket in its case, with the strap and accessory cases wrapped around it!

Konica? The body is barely any bigger than that of the Olympus. In picture its propped on three rolls of boxed 35mm film... scale shows that the cameras less than 4 1/2" wide, 3" tall, and 2 1/2" deep, in the soft case, including the lens. Again, wouldn't go in front pocket of a tight pair of jeans; but does slip into a larger pocket on a pair of cargo-pants or an over-coat.
Click to expand...

....As with all camera gear, it's horses-for-courses as to what best suits each of us as individuals.

I very rarely wear blazers or suits and putting a camera in my trousers pocket whether cargo-pants or otherwise greatly risks damage and furthermore would present problems with my fit in my car's bucket seat.

I literally want a camera on me all the time I'm clothed - More so even than my mobile phone (which I never use for pics). So my compact's leather pouch on my trousers belt with magnetic quick-release cover is perfect.

This narrows down my size options for a compact and that's without any consideration of tech spec. Oh, and it has to be digital - My pictures either appear online or if they are printed it's via a commercial digital press. Do I want to go back to the tedium and expense of using film? - No way! But each to their own.
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
^^^^
Thanks re Ricoh GR. I just read some reviews and it's obviously a quality camera. However, for my needs it falls down because it has no zoom and it's 'macro' close-up is relatively poor.

As with all camera gear, it's horses-for-courses as to what best suits each of us as individuals.
Click to expand...

The Sony RX100 II may be worth a look.
 
Laudrup said:
The Sony RX100 II may be worth a look.
Click to expand...

....Most definitely worth a very serious look! I have just read the online dpreview and there is much to like as far as I'm concerned.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m2

Thanks, Laudrup :thumbs:

I particularly like the around-the-lens control ring, especially natural for zoom and I dislike the usual bar zoom on compacts.

Give or take a millimetre this Sony is the same size as my FinePix F500EXR (and the latest F900EXR is same size too).
 
RedRobin said:
I very rarely wear blazers or suits and putting a camera in my trousers pocket whether cargo-pants or otherwise greatly risks damage and furthermore would present problems with my fit in my car's bucket seat.

I literally want a camera on me all the time I'm clothed - More so even than my mobile phone (which I never use for pics). So my compact's leather pouch on my trousers belt with magnetic quick-release cover is perfect.
Click to expand...

dsc_1362.jpg


That little XA2, is actually smaller than you say you want a camera to be. As pictured, its the size of a generic modern Digi-compact. Was a little tonge in cheek when I said about them not making them like they used to; but 'risk damage'? You'd not, or maybe you would! believe the abuse that particular camera has suffered in quarter of a century of pretty heavy use as my 'carry-around'. Its been dropped 60' from ski-lifts! It's been buried (with me!) in snowdrifts hit at speed as I was too busy looking through the viewfinder than where I was going! It's been thrown across stages at rock gigs, on it's back, on self-timer 'Whejee' style! It's been dropped in the bottom of canoes or inflatable's rafting in the rockies; it's suffered salt-spray yachting off wales; and much much more! There's barely any paint left on the metal film back, and every scratch is almost as much of a memory for me as the pictures it took getting them! Like a Timex... its taken a lot of likin and kept on tikkin! Something that cant be said of the Kodak Franken-Camera! though have to say, it took a fair bit of abuse by my kids before I had to make the best of the remains!

However, I used 'pocketability' as real-world reference of compact portability, and there are a lot of cameras that you can grab and pocket, or as you do, wear on a pouch or a strap, without them being cumbersome or intrusive in what you are about, other than taking photo's....

And for many, who have only ever known digital; the idea of a 'Medium-Format' camera, ever being used as a 'carry-about' is probably quite a revelation... YET, those old folders WERE carry-about or 'Press' Cameras...

Compacts are all about convenience, at the end of the day; and that snap of the Olympus and the Kodak side by side, is a good illustration.

The old Olly XA was always critasised for not being 'so' compact when you put the flash-gun on it.... true.. still pretty pocketable though.... and later incarnations like the Mjui attempted to retail the original XA's dimensions, while packing more and more camera-bag functionality into the same space.

Kodak digital, is pretty good example, 35-105 equivilent zoom lens, in your pocket, and a flash, and whatever else they can cram in by way of features.

But 'grabbing the moment'... I'd have the old XA2 out of my pocket, to my face and fired frames before the Kodak has extended the lens and found focus.... and I'll get full-frame SLR rivalling IQ from it... not rather fuzzy 7.1Mpix digi-shots.

It is about different strokes for different folks...

But its Swiss-Army-Penknife thinking..... yeah great to have so many gadgets in your pocket... but... how many of them are actually used all that often?

And for what IS used most often, would you not be better with a decent simple fishing knife and maybe a pair of kitchen scissors?

That old Ziess Icarette. A wonderful bit of glass, exposing a large bit of 120 roll-film. The quality you can get from it is fantastic. Might not be for every-one; and sure; it lacks a zoom feature, and you'd have to carry extras around like a meter and a flash-gun to do even a fraction of what that pocket Kodak 'might'... but armed with the f16 sunny rule, you COULD head out for a day in the hills and be no more encumbered by that Medium-Format folder as pocket-digital, whose zoom and meter and flash would probably all be redundant 'capability' you didn't need anyway, and get truly stuning photo's of astounding quality, rather than rather mundane snap-shots.

Its all about making the most of the compromise, and unfortunately, few people ever do, and expect the camera to do it all for them.
 
:):thumbs:
 
^^^^
I agree with you, Mike - Different strokes for different folks. For me, a big reason for having a pocketable size compact is being able to grab a shot which is entirely unexpected and in every and any situation be it a candid portrait, an arty shot, or a close-up of an insect.

I have just watched this long but extremely comprehensive video review of the Sony DSC-RX100 II and I'm sold!....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgwdHR8raMw
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top