[jheu02]

Once again, 8. Winner will set up and judge next contest. Thats the 'prize' the winner earns.

Ivoire, I like it. Simple, elegant, no heartburn.

Actually... I like that. Don't like the current set of rules? Dopn't go in the contest. Easy.

The problem with the above quote "don't enter if you don't like the rules" doesn't do anything to prevent the bending of them after the fact of someone's entry. You could be totally fine with them when you enter, and then someone tries to get around them. Lest we forget, the simple rule way back, when it was called a "Point and Shoot" competition was fine until some bent that simple rule.

Yes, it shouldn't be taken so seriously, but what's wrong with a simple spelling out of some of the rules already proposed to make it a "Compact Camera Competition."

Then, if you want the judge to be able to alter rules since he/she won the previous contest, have that be an additional rule to the list, i.e. "this competition open to any and all cameras" or whatever. I think that would prevent "back door" entries because it would be listed in advance. Those who don't want to enter based on the "altered" state of the general rules could decide that in advance. It may seem silly to bring this up, or that it should take care of itself anyway, but if that were true, we wouldn't have had the 19 pages of discussions to begin with.

[ivoire]

It's all moot. There isn't and won't ever be a consensus. The next set of rules coming out of the 49th PnS (dare i type it) competition will be determined by the winner. Rule #8 rules!

[Anton Magus]

Many of the people posting to this thread invoke the argument that a "Point & Shoot" camera should limit the photographers actions to 1) Raising the camera and composing the shot, followed by 2) Pressing the shutter release and taking the shot. Any other action by the photographer, to them, is forbidden!

The problem, as I see it, is that this is fine for modern digital cameras which auto-focus and automatically set exposure (f/stop, shutter speed and ISO). If, on the other hand, you are someone who likes carrying and using an older camera then you have a serious problem. The older cameras may have had a built-in meter, but you generally had to turn the shutter speed control and/or the aperture ring until a needle lined up with a marker. Similarly the focus was manually set as well. If you eliminate those cameras which require 1) Raising the camera, 2) Set the exposure, 3) Compose the scene, 4) Focus, and 5) Press the shutter release, then you restrict older cameras to the very basic fixed-focus/fixed aperture Brownies and similar. Meanwhile, the modern digital camera user may, quite legitimately, pre-set the camera for the type of scene expected - which action effectively programs the camera with a set of conditions which would otherwise need to be set manually.

To my mind then the whole "Point & Shoot" concept promoted on this thread is biassed towards the most modern, fully automatic digital cameras and places older film cameras and older digital cameras at a huge disadvantage because their internal processors/programming were either not up to snuff, or were non-existent.

Any fully automatic camera (auto-focus, auto-aperture, auto-shutter speed, auto ISO) can be used as a Point and Shoot camera - aim it and press the shutter release - and is therefore a "Point and Shoot" camera. The term Point and Shoot has no bearing on the size or weight of the camera or its sensor size or the lens it happens to have fitted at the time of taking a picture or that it has an optical viewfinder or phase detection auto-focus. By the same reasoning, any film camera with a fixed focus lens, a fixed aperture and a fixed shutter speed is equally a Point and Shoot camera. In fact it is arguably more of a Point and Shoot than its fully automatic, digital counterpart for the simple reason that the digital camera allows manual settings and adjustments while the simple film camera does not.

After all that, to make matters worse, you want to eliminate the few enthusiasts who want to shoot with old medium format film cameras because they may have an advantage over a brand new fully automatic, backlit sensor, micro-processor controlled camera that will even sense the light, recognise the scene, identify the faces and then adjust the exposure as well as set itself to reduce noise and maximise definition of shadows and hi-lights, and then shoot at a gazillion frames per second! C'mon people. You're smoking too much of the good stuff. Let's keep it real.

I wish you all a very happy New Year and, besides prosperity, which we could all enjoy, my wish is that 2012 ushers in a period of world peace and tolerance for each other's customs, traditions and thoughts. Nevertheless I think the chances of that are very slim when a few people on this thread can't even agree on what is, or what is not, a Point and shoot camera.

[ivoire]

Heres an early example of a compact camera made for the traveler

Montauk Flexo-Front Multiplying Camera

[Anton Magus]

Heres an early example of a compact camera made for the traveler

Montauk Flexo-Front Multiplying Camera

Very nice compact camera and most interesting. Just the thing to carry with you everywhere, bearing in mind that men's shirts had much bigger pockets in 1912. I would say 1-3/4" x 2-1/2" image size, being smaller than MF, should qualify for the Point and Shoot contests, but unfortunately the top picture shows the camera with a different lens to the bottom picture. This clearly places it in the interchangeable lens category so it has to be disqualified....

In all seriousness, I bet you wish you had one of these. It looks in pretty good shape for a 100 year old camera, and if only four were ever made they must have a serious collectors value.

[RioRico]

I would say 1-3/4" x 2-1/2" image size, being smaller than MF, should qualify for the Point and Shoot contests, but unfortunately the top picture shows the camera with a different lens to the bottom picture. This clearly places it in the interchangeable lens category so it has to be disqualified....

(1.75in | 45mm) x (2.5in | 63mm) is slightly larger than 645 and thus is MF. And it's an ILC. Double whammy. Back to the dugout...

[Anton Magus]

Once and for all, the question, "What is, and what is not, a Point and Shoot?" has been answered!



If your camera doesn't look like this, ITS NOT A POINT AND SHOOT.

[RioRico]

If your camera doesn't look like this, ITS NOT A POINT AND SHOOT.

Hmmm, if I put my Conley 8x14cm folder on my supertele shoulder stock, it DOES look like that. Weighs over a kilo though. Ratz.

If I put a webcam or spycam in the toe of my Wellingtons, do I have a point-and-boot?

[Mike Cash]

Hmmm, if I put my Conley 8x14cm folder on my supertele shoulder stock, it DOES look like that. Weighs over a kilo though. Ratz.

If I put a webcam or spycam in the toe of my Wellingtons, do I have a point-and-boot?

Maybe, but careful where you wear them or you will have a sign in your front yard.

[unixrevolution]

Maybe, but careful where you wear them or you will have a sign in your front yard.

I don't know whether to laugh or go build one now.