[cofe]

just out of interest, wondered if anyone had any experience of the current ones, particularly the GF1 or the Pen? what's the sketch? GF1 with the 1.7 pancake looks a particularly capable camera. nice and simple too. 

[JamesD]

just out of interest, wondered if anyone had any experience of the current ones, particularly the GF1 or the Pen? what's the sketch? GF1 with the 1.7 pancake looks a particularly capable camera. nice and simple too.

Tried one, so bulky it kind of defeated the point of a compact, I think you're better off with a small SLR and a low-profile prime of some kind, since these are not really small enough to fit into your pocket comfortably next to your wallet or phone.

Something like this: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-nikon-20mm-f2-8-d-af-lens/p12872

Plus this: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-nikon-d3000-digital-slr-camera-body/p1032940

Would only be a tiny bit larger and offer great image quality.

At some point in the future, I intend to get a Canon S90 or a Ricoh GRdigital III later on down the line potentially, if I do ever commit to owning any kind of compact-ish camera.
GF1 etc give marginally better image quality but not enough to warrant the ridiculously high price IMO.

[Johnny Brown]

Brilliant James - the answer is of course get a nikon cofe.

My Dad has just bought an EP-1. I was roped in to offer sage advice, so got to play with all three, EP-1, 2 and GF1. All capable, the Olys are smaller and nicer to handle, the Pano has better AF. Image quality is pretty identical. Oly lenses are much smaller.

What do you want it for? They are small, but I'd say a compact would be a better companion for a 7D.

[dave]

Tris?

[Paul B]

What dave said.

Where have all the buttons on that Nikon gone?

[Johnny Brown]

Less is definitely more. My best-handling camera only has 5 buttons.

[cofe]

Thanks fellas. I won't be getting another slr. Got one (technically 2 I guess) o them at the moment. 

After a different approach. Maybe one of the little Ricohs is the answer. A good camera I always have on my pocke that's nice and simple. Unlikely to use it for work.
 
P.s. Thanks Tris

[dave]

If its pocket you're after then i recon any of the microforturds will be too big. Might be worth a look at the canon s90 thing. Problem with most compacts is the handling though.

[Johnny Brown]

GX100/ 200 or Panasonic LX3 word. Should be a few second hand by now.

Handling is only really an issue in gloves.

[dave]

I was meaning more like handling as in not having to go into menus for shit, usable manual mode etc. That's where most compacts fail,that and the slow operation generally. I'd be interested to know if the micro43s handle and operate like slrs or compacts.

[Johnny Brown]

Can't speak for LX3, but the Ricohs have mostly got those issues covered.

[cofe]

I like the sound of the fast lens. One focal length. Sturdy with good images. But I'll look at ricohs too.

[chummer]

Had my Ricoh GX200 for while now, love it. Used it loads when craggin, including loads this winter and no complaints. Handling is very good (menus, buttons etc). In fact, I was unsure about the zoom but now am very glad of it and the ricoh battery (it does take AA'a as well) lasts for ages even in the cold. Had no problems with picture quality although a little noisy in low light

[Johnny Brown]

A fixed Ricoh would be probably be a better option than a micro 4/3rds & prime. 28mm equiv is more use than a 35/40mm. That said the EP-1, 17mm & optical viewfinder is really cool. Especially in white.

Or:

[cofe]

X1 it is...

Missed the S90 reminder in JamesD's Nikon advert/post   luminous landscape was very positive at side of LX3. Or GR3.

[dave]

The leica is crazy. You'd think for a compact that costs over 13 hundred mazoolians it'd take a filter.

[cofe]

So looking at LX3 and S90 now. Pros and cons to each I'd say. Anyone?

[Johnny Brown]

Basically its zoom range I guess. Do you need 24mm more than you need a lens longer than 50mm?

The GX100/200 are intermediate - you get the 24mm and a modest tele of 72mm.

I really like the switchable aspect ratio of the LX3 - I'd use that a lot.

[cofe]

Swings and/or roundabouts innit. 28-105 vs 24-60, 2-4.9 vs 2-2.8. Some nice features on the S90 like the control dials. IQ seems to be marginally better, as you'd expect from a newer camera. And it's 2/3 weight of LX3. But no aspect ratios, or 720p video (not a deal breaker).

Will read more again on GX200.

[Johnny Brown]

I think weights will be similar with battery. LX3 is a bit taller, but slimmer.

Don't buy anything you haven't handled - neither of those look like they will handle as well as a Ricoh.

[cofe]

bring your ricoh to the pub tomorrow word. GX200 aren't much more than GX100 now.

weights are from luminous landscape.

can i stick a babby lens on a ricoh?

[dave]

Would I be right in thinking the LX3 fits in one of these?



If so, I'd say that was descision made.

[Johnny Brown]

For me the LX3 would be the winner. But the GX100 has a more useful tele, some nice handling touches (especially with gloves) and (dealbreaker alert!) was HALF the price.

[cofe]

the price is the difference really. If you look hard, you can find an LX3 for less than 300 nuggets. i need to regard them a bit more closely in the flesh.

[JamesD]

Brilliant James - the answer is of course get a nikon cofe.

My Dad has just bought an EP-1. I was roped in to offer sage advice, so got to play with all three, EP-1, 2 and GF1. All capable, the Olys are smaller and nicer to handle, the Pano has better AF. Image quality is pretty identical. Oly lenses are much smaller.

What do you want it for? They are small, but I'd say a compact would be a better companion for a 7D.

Actually I pretty much said what you just said mate, which was basically....why bother getting another bulky SLR type camera if you already have one, and if you want a compact SLR just get one, whereas if you want a camera that is actually compact; as in small enough to fit into your pocket, then buy a compact!
Which is exactly what I intend to do at some point, and will probably go for a GR digital or an S90 when the time comes, assuming nothing better comes along before hand, as I think they represent the best compromise between size/image quality, and something that actually fits into your pocket, because in my opinion if it doesn't fit into your pocket, you might as well get a small SLR, since its just as much of a pain in the ass as carrying an SLR far as I am concerned.
I referenced Canon as I prefer them to Nikon SLRs, however I still think Nikon make shit compacts, so I recommended a Canon (shock horror!) and a Ricoh.

So of course the answer to everything is buy a Nikon, so yes cofe buy a Nikon, unless of course you want a compact in which case don't 

[JamesD]

X1 it is...

Missed the S90 reminder in JamesD's Nikon advert/post   luminous landscape was very positive at side of LX3. Or GR3.

I think in the midst of his lambasting me for the use of the word NIKON  he forgot to read the rest of the post.

If I had to choose GR3 vs LX3 I would go with the Ricoh, one of the best lenses in existence on a compact, and the Image quality is superb up to about iso800 (which is pretty impressive for a compact), although the Canon S90 offers very good image quality, I think the Ricoh is slightly sharper from sample images that I have seen, however the Canon seems to perform better at high ISO's which would be much more handy in low light conditions.

[JamesD]

Ooops just noticed you were talking about the other Ricoh, i'm all for simplicity personally, but if you're going down that route than I don't think I have much to add that hasn't been said already regarding zooms etc.

[Johnny Brown]

I wasn't taking the piss, your advice was good, its just that cofe can never be told too many times that he should have gone nikon...

[cofe]

Genius. I bought a d3 and hold it far away so it looks smaller. 

Had a look at s90 this avo and dlux4 (no lx3 in shop). Some fair differences. Both have things in their favour usability wise. Lens on lx3 noticably shorter but nicely wider. Need another look at ricohs. No hotshoe on s90 but might never use it. S90 v nice and small though with 2 control dials.

What I'd really like is a digi yashica t4. Maybe that's the gr3?

[JamesD]

I wasn't taking the piss, your advice was good, its just that canon shooting pariah's can never be told too many times that he should have gone nikon...

Indeed, oh and Cofe....I would really love a Yaschica T4 as well as a Ricoh GR digital III, I think that would be an awesome little combo to take on holiday or for casual use.
If I was using reflectors and maybe continuous lighting I think I could even use the Yashica for professional use (from what I have heard of the image quality). There is some "flash free" film stuff I have been meaning to get around to trying, but I think I need to spend more getting it dialled in during my personal time first.....what little of it I get.

[cofe]

the T4 is an awesome camera. I had numerous shots published that were taken with that. then I lost it. idiot.

so i'm looking at LX3 vs GX100. Difference is price really (LX3 is bordering on twice as much as a secondhand GX100) but I think you get a bit more camera with LX3. GX200 doesn't seem to be a significant improvement over GX100 and if anything the IQ is worse from the consensus reading I've done. Hmmmm.

[dave]

Why not settle for another T4 and a pocket crammed full of cheddar? I saw one on ffordes at £60 recently.

[cofe]

About £20 more than I paid for mine. Robbers.

Film has had it's day anyway.

[dave]

they seem to be going for £150+ on ebay!

[cofe]

Someone's probably putting their kids through college on the back of selling mine.

[JamesD]

Alternatively I might just get a Nikon F5 since they are cheap as far as SLR'S go and work with all of my existing lenses, could maybe even drag it along as a third body when at weddings etc, anyways back on topic, I would go for the GR digital 3 or the S90 and stop worrying since AFAIK they are better in low light than the others and the both offer excellent lenses, meaning they are way more versatile than the other two mentioned, plus I think Leicas compacts have always been crap so far, much like Nikons piss poor excuses for compact cameras.
GX100 looks ok but general consensus is that the GR digital offers a far superior lense.

[cofe]

GX100 looks ok but general consensus is that the GR digital offers a far superior lense.

it's a much more limited lense for what i'll use it for though. I've seen files from the GX100 and they are very sharp. You can also get a GX100 for less than half a GRD3. On reflection the S90 is too fragile for proper outdoors use, and the dials were too easy to knock, particularly the one on the back. Comparatively, the LX3 is very tough and still wide at 24mm. They're all capable at ISO400, with more money buying performance at 800. They're clearly all versatile cameras. Joe Cornish doesn't carry an LX3 cos it's shit.

Don't buy an F5 - you'll never use it. Same reason I sold my 1v. 

[JamesD]

You're probably right, i'll probably never bother, and this is all just me musing over random camera stuff i'd like to purchase, the yaschica on the other hand I definitely think i'll nab one some time since its cheap enough.
But money spent on a F5 could be put towards a D3s......which would see a lot more use.

[cofe]

if you're a pro, i can't see the point in speculatively buying gear you probably won't use. £50 on a Yashica is different though. That's just the equivalent of two pints darn in Landan.

[JamesD]

if you're a pro, i can't see the point in speculatively buying gear you probably won't use. £50 on a Yashica is different though. That's just the equivalent of two pints darn in Landan.

Yeah, you're right it is pointless.... I keep trying to convince myself that if I buy one decent film camera i'll use it, but I know deep down I am too lazy and don't really have the time to play around with film for work anyway.
For anything where I need really decent quality/high res I usually just hire out a D3x, they're really awesome and fast to use.
If the budget is there or the job requires it I get to use a hasselblad on very rare occasions, but they are bulky, heavy, and slower, so I prefer to work with the Nikon wherever possible, because unless you're printing at huge sizes/huge resolution, after some decent retouching its almost impossible to percieve much difference in the end result IMO.
I know where I have to (and should) spend my money over the next few months, it doesn't seem to stop me pontificating over silly things that I want but don't need though 

[Jim]

this thread has inspired me to dig out our yashica T5.
I'm bored of digital, going back to film for a bit I think.
Might even dig out the F80 as well