Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > CSC : Digital Compact System Cameras -

CSC : Digital Compact System Cameras - This new category of digital Compact System Cameras with interchangeable lenses was mislabeled for a time as "Mirrorless Cameras" by those forgetting about "Mirrorless" Rangefinder cameras.  Such confusion is easily understandable, since interchangeable rangefinder cameras were only recently introduced in 1932.  hmm.    CSC or Compact System Camera is probably the best category description to date, although I am fond of the old RFF desigation of  CEVIL  indicating Compact Electronic Viewfidner Interchangeable Lens.   This forum is here at RFF because via adapters these cameras offer an inexpensive way to use rangefinder lenses on digital cameras -- in addition of just about every 35mm SLR lens you can think of.  All  offer the photo enthusiast an incredible array of adopted lenses which was not possible before these new digital formats.   This group continues to grow in popularity and new camera models! 

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 06-25-2012   #26
Speedfreak
-
 
Speedfreak is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobYIL View Post
Bear in mind most of those cameras will survive another 40-50 years by delivering quality results, maybe thru some CLA....
If there is anyone left offering a reliable service...


Quote:
Originally Posted by BobYIL View Post
however I wonder what will happen with our digitals.
Trash, move on to the next model.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #27
Speedfreak
-
 
Speedfreak is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickTrop View Post
I - for the life of me, don't get "CEVIL" cameras. Entry-level DSLRs are a much better value. (...)
These cameras aren't "interesting" at all - except, perhaps, to the CFO of an electronics company.
I can use all sorts of manual lenses on my NEX and I have permanent live view through either LCD or EVF. The sensors (at least in the NEX) are high end APS-C. And all are much more compact than competing DSLRs.

I have a NEX-7 and wouldnt want a D300s or EOS 7D instead.

Of course, if you are going "kit zoom only" like many buyers and dont care for bulk, then an entry level DSLR is better value, yes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #28
cosmonaut
Registered User
 
cosmonaut's Avatar
 
cosmonaut is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickTrop View Post
I - for the life of me, don't get "CEVIL" cameras. Entry-level DSLRs are a much better value. The viewfinder comes attached - not an expensive extra. Comes with a grip! Not a 3rd-party add-on. Neither are pocketable, and entry-level DSLRs like, say, a D5100 or a Canon Rebel cost less. Camera companies will market the hell out of them because they're cheaper to produce (presumably). Less (features/"camera") is more (price-wise and margin). A boom for the electronics manufacturers.

These cameras aren't "interesting" at all - except, perhaps, to the CFO of an electronics company.
I agree. I am not sure hard nose pros will ever shoot mirrorless cameras. I think they will always be a market for cameras like the D800.
I couldn't imaging a real pro showing up to an expensive wedding or huge event with a compact system camera.
__________________
Cosmo
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #29
Harry Caul
Registered User
 
Harry Caul is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxElmar View Post
We have a lot of really nice mirrorless cameras available now -- too bad none of 'em can track focus in 3 dimensions for beans.... Oh, except for that little Nikon of which you like to make fun. Still waiting for the good stuff.

Well, with slow lenses and a small sensor (1/2 size of m43, 1/3 size of APS-C)... everything is almost always in focus. You are correct, the "tracking" performance is amazing

And I might add, at least the current gen, is no more pocketable than the small m43 cameras.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #30
loquax ludens
Registered User
 
loquax ludens's Avatar
 
loquax ludens is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 668
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmonaut View Post
I agree. I am not sure hard nose pros will ever shoot mirrorless cameras. I think they will always be a market for cameras like the D800.
I couldn't imaging a real pro showing up to an expensive wedding or huge event with a compact system camera.
I can't imagine a real photo journalist ever using anything but a Leica M camera either.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #31
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,668
^---- Bwahahaha.

Bill Allard and David Alan Harvey have been making extensive use of the GF1 for probably couple of years now. Many others are also using GF1's, X-100s, etc. Apparently these National Geographic and Magnum photographers are not "hard-nosed pros." Comments like that will look so quaint three years from now.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #32
cosmonaut
Registered User
 
cosmonaut's Avatar
 
cosmonaut is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by loquax ludens View Post
I can't imagine a real photo journalist ever using anything but a Leica M camera either.
LOL. You got me there. Another down side to the compacts right now is high end glass. Most all of Olympus m4/3rd lenses are kit quality and a far cry from Carl Zeiss lenses.
__________________
Cosmo
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #33
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 6,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmonaut View Post
I agree. I am not sure hard nose pros will ever shoot mirrorless cameras. I think they will always be a market for cameras like the D800.
I couldn't imaging a real pro showing up to an expensive wedding or huge event with a compact system camera.

But if they say, like all jerk off artists: this is the best and newest camera ever made. They will get the job. And soon we will be done with DSLRs: finally.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #34
Harry Caul
Registered User
 
Harry Caul is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmonaut View Post
Most all of Olympus m4/3rd lenses are kit quality...
They may not be up to Zeiss or Leica standards (or pricing!), but I think most here would disagree with the first part of your statement. Have you ever used the following:

Panny 7-14
Olympus 12mm/2
Voightlander 17.5mm/0.95
Panny 20mm/1.7
Panny/Leica 25mm/1.4
Voightlander 25mm/0.95
Olympus 45/1.8

Most of the above can be used wide open while remaining very sharp. And both the soon-to-be released Olympus 75/1.8 and Panny 12-35mm/2.8 (constant aperture) are reported to be of very good quality.

If you call those kit lens quality I'd like to hear what kit you are using!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #35
celluloidprop
Registered User
 
celluloidprop is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 882
The Nikon V1 is an excellent camera - given that 99.99% of photos taken with even 'enthusiast' cameras are never going to be printed, much less large, its small sensor performs quite well. Good VF, fast AF. There are compromises at high-ISO compared to m43/APS/35, but if you play to the camera's strengths (ie daylight) then that's less relevant.

If the 10mm were f/2 (f/1.4 is probably stretching things), I think it would get a lot of love from street/doc/etc. shooters. Tiny body, v. good sensor, 28mm f/2? SOLD
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #36
celluloidprop
Registered User
 
celluloidprop is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickTrop View Post
I - for the life of me, don't get "CEVIL" cameras. Entry-level DSLRs are a much better value. The viewfinder comes attached - not an expensive extra. Comes with a grip! Not a 3rd-party add-on. Neither are pocketable, and entry-level DSLRs like, say, a D5100 or a Canon Rebel cost less. Camera companies will market the hell out of them because they're cheaper to produce (presumably). Less (features/"camera") is more (price-wise and margin). A boom for the electronics manufacturers.

These cameras aren't "interesting" at all - except, perhaps, to the CFO of an electronics company.
I'm not sure how to detach the EVF from my OM-D.

I've spent time with the crop-sensor SLR bodies. The viewfinders are tiny and dark compared to the OM-D/NEX-7 or even the Fujis.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #37
kknox
Registered User
 
kknox is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 800
The Leica Summilux 25mm 1.4 DG is a super lens. I use it on the GF1. Great fast prime lens for the m4/3 cameras.
__________________
K.Knox
Just some old cameras.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2012   #38
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 7,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmonaut View Post
LOL. You got me there. Another down side to the compacts right now is high end glass. Most all of Olympus m4/3rd lenses are kit quality and a far cry from Carl Zeiss lenses.
Then get some Zeiss glass and put it on the OM-D or other m4/3 body.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2012   #39
vidgamer
Registered User
 
vidgamer is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by clayne View Post
I'm using cameras made in the 1960s and 70s and having zero problems achieving high quality results from them. It's not the gear.
Of course, you've got a bigger "sensor" on those cameras. ;-)

I bought some older cameras, and I'm surprised at how well most of them work. One camera in particular has been in our family for about 40 years and I think it's working fine, once I fixed the light leaks. Hmm, I need to finish running another roll through it....

Meanwhile, my first digital camera died a long time ago. When these electronics go out, it might be possible to fix by swapping circuit boards in a similar way mechanical parts were swapped on old cameras, but I dunno. In my case, a 3mp camera is not worth repairing. :-) Maybe with current cameras they will be worth saving, but will they be repaired?

As for entry-level DSLRs being better, that's a personal opinion. If you prefer a DSLR, by all means, get one! I really enjoy the smaller, lighter camera. I only got a DSLR because I wanted the higher quality of a larger sensor. I'll suffer some compromises to reduce the weight. And I can stick my camera into a pocket.... a big pocket, but yeah.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2012   #40
loquax ludens
Registered User
 
loquax ludens's Avatar
 
loquax ludens is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 668
I got rid of my DSLR after I bought my X-Pro1. It was clear to me after one afternoon of shooting the X-Pro1 that I'd never use my 20D again. I never used it much anyway. I see myself using the X-Pro1 a lot more. In fact, in one month, I'm sure I've used it more than I used my 20D in a year.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2012   #41
Bill58
Native Texan
 
Bill58's Avatar
 
Bill58 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: So. Korea
Posts: 2,977
Quote:
Originally Posted by back alley View Post
this thread is indicative of rff of late...everyone is trying to prove they have the biggest d..k..we gotta stop this fast or this place is going to hit dirt quick.

My old d..k..hit the dirt a long time ago.

Actually, my wife bought a Nikon 1 a short while back and simply loves it. I can't imagine a better kit for her-a fashionable red, small/light, easy to use, and fine color images for flickr/here. She uses the 10mm and the 30-110mm zoom. She's hit a home run w/ it.
__________________
My images of a strange land-So. Korea:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wrs111445/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-07-2012   #42
bigeye
Registered User
 
bigeye's Avatar
 
bigeye is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 1,133
A flapping mirror is obsolete for a bunch of obvious reasons, no?

The question is when will Canon and Nikon come out with a system for pros? By "system", a full range of lenses from ultra-wide to super tele and accessories to handle just about any job, hung on a ruggedized body that will survive a couple years of hard, commercial use (e.g. to replace the D4/D800). It will be nice to have full-frame cameras that are smaller than a Bronica ETRS again.

Removing the mirror box allow the opportunity/justification for a new line of lenses that are smaller - a clean slate. Camera makers might like that. I would reckon that they will add an adapter to space to the old F-mount to maintain backward compatibility and provide a transition for those with an investment in the old SLR lenses.

-Charlie
__________________
Anything that is very simple is apt to be sloppy. - Elliott Erwitt

I bought a new camera. It's so advanced you don't even need it. - Steven Wright
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-08-2012   #43
vidgamer
Registered User
 
vidgamer is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 100
To your point about a professional line, I don't think anyone is looking at mirrorless cameras that way right now. I think if you really need all of the tools that are in the older mounts, you need to stick with that. For some jobs, a DSLR is just going to work better. If you don't need all of the aspects of a full system and just want a smaller system, that's here now, which I think is exciting.

I think you're right that camera manufacturers shouldn't mind selling new lenses all over again, but once they do that, they are allowing people to consider jumping into any other system, so I expect they'll resist that for a while.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2012   #44
hub
Crazy French
 
hub's Avatar
 
hub is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montréal, QC
Age: 39
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by loquax ludens View Post
I got rid of my DSLR after I bought my X-Pro1. It was clear to me after one afternoon of shooting the X-Pro1 that I'd never use my 20D again. I never used it much anyway. I see myself using the X-Pro1 a lot more. In fact, in one month, I'm sure I've used it more than I used my 20D in a year.

Since I have the X-Pro1, I seem to use the 5DMkII mostly with the 70-200.... if I use it at all.
My 20D has been taking dust since I upgraded to the 5DMkII. Cropping in Aperture gave me more pixel than the 20D anyway :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2012   #45
jtm6
Registered User
 
jtm6 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 296
My wife has a Nikon 1. I originally thought she had better options (based on my malformed opinions) but I didn't want to try to change her mind because 1. anything she likes is good with me if it means it encourages her photography interests, and 2. I can't change her mind.

She originally thought she wanted a J1 but went with the V1 because the J1 seemed like a toy to her when she saw it in person. I asked the salesperson almost all of questions about it because I knew I'd end up being her tech support. I was sold on it before she bought it and she also got a great deal on it. The V1 is very slick. If they put it in a melted blob that was 2X larger and heavier, people would probably love it.

Don't knock it until you try it. I'd easily dump all my DSLR gear for something like the Nikon 1 if the lenses get better.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-25-2012   #46
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
Six years. Within three years DSLRs will be an "old people" thing, if they aren't already.
Woohoo, new DSLR user here!
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-10-2012   #47
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 422
Yes, it's all true - like those bogus financial statements they gave the Olympus stockholders. Like I tell my little boy, don't believe everything you see on YT.

Mind you - I'm not saying it's impossible - or even that it won't happen someday soon. Just not yet.
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 13:00.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.