P&S recommendations

Tired of hauling my big SLR around at times, so I'd like to get a nice
little P&S film camera to just slide in my pocket. Something like a 28-80 or
so on the zoom. Any thoughts?

Alternatively, I would like to have a digital with similar specs, where
shots would not be enlarged beyond 5x7 or so.

Thanks!

It's not a zoom, but the Olympus Stylus Epic is an incredible little
camera. I am sure mine will be only one of many recommendations. It's
very small and handy and weatherproof, and a very sharp lens (35mm,
f2.8). Pretty cheap, too.

"UncaMikey" wrote in message
oups.com...
It's not a zoom, but the Olympus Stylus Epic is an incredible little
camera. I am sure mine will be only one of many recommendations. It's
very small and handy and weatherproof, and a very sharp lens (35mm,
f2.8). Pretty cheap, too.

Yes the Epic is a great little performer, especially if you make use of the
spot metering and forget the flash mode.

But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders from
the 1970s, which have great (non zoom) lenses and are no bigger than many
P+Ss , but give you full manual control to be as creative as you like, are
perhaps more fun to use, built like tanks, and usually not
battery-dependent e.g. Olympus RC (probably the smallest and my own
favourite) or the slightly larger Canon equivalents.

Norm Fleming wrote:
But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders
from
the 1970s...

I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks
great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry
about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to
justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about
the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders.
It fits handily into a larger coat pocket.

I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we
realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy
and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The
new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax
ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on
it. And I love the lighter weight.

*UncaMikey

"UncaMikey" wrote in message
oups.com...

Norm Fleming wrote:
But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders
from
the 1970s...

I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks
great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry
about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to
justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about
the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders.
It fits handily into a larger coat pocket.

The mercury battery is not really a big problem since it only powers the
meter. The shutter is mechanical. Solution - forget the battery and use
the sunny 16 exposure rule (which works perfectly) or, if you must have
the meter, use a 675 1.4 volt zinc -air hearing aid battery (doesn't last
long, but dirt cheap for a six pack). As for the seals - you can fix them
in 20 min using strips of foam cut from a computer mouse pad. I have not
handled a Pentax ist, but would be surprised if it is comparable in size
with the Olympus RC, which is really small for a full function rangefinder.

Norm Fleming wrote:
I have not handled
a Pentax ist, but would be surprised if it is comparable in size
with the Olympus RC, which is really small for a full function
rangefinder.

According to cameraquest, the Olympus RC is 4.5 x 2.95 x 2 inches, and
15 oz.

Pentax ist body (per Pentax) is 4.8 x 3.3 x 2.5 inches, and 11.8 oz.
The FA 50mm f1.7 adds about 6 oz and another inch.

Those measurements make them sound pretty close, although the lens on
the Pentax will protrude more. As for functions and features, the
Pentax has far more than I will ever master, LOL -- you can go from
full auto to full manual and everything in between, with plenty of
focus and metering options.

But I think both of these are a bit too big for a carry everywhere P&S,
unlike the Olympus SE.

I know there are workarounds and fixes for seals and mercury batteries,
but I dealt with that stuff before, and got tired of it all. Sometimes
modern technology is a Good Thing. YMMV, of course.

*UncaMikey

"UncaMikey" wrote in message
oups.com...

Norm Fleming wrote:
But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders
from
the 1970s...

I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks
great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry
about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to
justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about
the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders.
It fits handily into a larger coat pocket.

The mercury battery is not really a big problem since it only powers the
meter. The shutter is mechanical. Solution - forget the battery and use
the sunny 16 exposure rule (which works perfectly) or, if you must have
the meter, use a 675 1.4 volt zinc -air hearing aid battery (doesn't last
long, but dirt cheap for a six pack). As for the seals - you can fix them
in 20 min using strips of foam cut from a computer mouse pad. I have not
handled a Pentax ist, but would be surprised if it is comparable in size
with the Olympus RC, which is really small for a full function rangefinder.

Norm Fleming wrote:
But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders
from
the 1970s...

I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks
great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry
about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to
justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about
the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders.
It fits handily into a larger coat pocket.

I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we
realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy
and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The
new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax
ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on
it. And I love the lighter weight.

*UncaMikey

Norm Fleming wrote:
But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders
from
the 1970s...

I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks
great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry
about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to
justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about
the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders.
It fits handily into a larger coat pocket.

I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we
realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy
and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The
new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax
ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on
it. And I love the lighter weight.

*UncaMikey

Norm Fleming wrote:
But you might also consider one of the classic Japanese rangefinders
from the 1970s...

I would love to have a rangefinder again, and the Olympus RC looks
great -- but it has the mercury battery problem, and you have to worry
about the seals and such on the older cameras. I've never been able to
justify getting one, since my Pentax ist with a FA 50mm f1.7 is about
the same size (or smaller and lighter) than one of those rangefinders.
It fits handily into a larger coat pocket.

I also think that the newer plastic cameras are tougher than we
realize. I had a Spotmatic for 30+ years, and yes, it was very sturdy
and heavy and metal, but it was easily scratched and banged up. The
new plastics they use are pretty impressive -- I've banged the Pentax
ist around, carried it on several trips, and it doesn't have a mark on
it. And I love the lighter weight.

*UncaMikey