[Anton Magus]

"People" did not. it was me and my X100 and I withdrew the shot before being told I must (in fact I was told it was perfectly OK), and I have no issue with that. On the matter of the actual entry, it was taken with the topic in mind and was taken on automatic, whilst looking at the LCD screen on the back. Cant get much more point and shoot than that. And I did NOT enter with the intent of gaining any advantage over others. The only time I have won was with an old shot off my C760. Its not the gear that makes the difference.

Truly, this whole thing has gone too far. Its just ridiculous.

@Kyteflyer

When I referred to "people" I was NOT referring to you. As you say, you withdrew your entry voluntarily. If you look at that contest you should notice that there were other entries taken with cameras which did not comply with the rules as published for that contest, and which were not withdrawn or even asked to be removed. What I was trying to do was to simply state the background to this whole situation and I was not having a go at anyone.

As I have said in numerous postings to this thread, I don't believe the X100 with its fixed lens (and fixed focal length) has any significant advantage over any other camera allowed under the rules. Its APS-C sensor should give low light images with far less noise at high ISO. Great, but that doesn't help your entry fit the theme, nor does it help you with composition, or with finding an interesting subject or with any of the factors that the contest is judged on. All that derives solely from the person behind the camera and not from the camera itself.

It is exactly for that reason I would also have no problem with interchangeable lens cameras. There does however seem to be consensus - and it may be the only place there is any consensus - that (D)SLRs should be excluded. I have no problem accepting that limitation if that's what the majority want.

Considering that there are only 25 people who enter these contests, of which maybe 15 can be called "regulars", I think it would be a great pity to drive anyone away because of the discussion about rules. Particularly yourself. I have personally admired many of your entries and have enjoyed your comments in these contest threads. The contests would certainly be poorer without your participation.

Both the Brownie and Q are acceptable to me. Brownie is definitely a film point and shoot and the Q with a 1/2.3 sensor and the kit lens fits the small sensor arena. I'm not sure why there is a no interchangeable lens rule when a small sensor digital that zooms beyond 300mm is acceptable.

Agree 100%. And arguments about the high quality of prime lenses don't make any sense when the contest is not judged primarily on IQ.

But I call for a return to fun and more open standards rather than less. Anything-but-an-SLR is fine with me!

This is probably the most sensible suggestion yet.

[kyteflyer]

@Kyteflyer

When I referred to "people" I was NOT referring to you.

Thanks very much for that clarification, Anton. I guess I was just feeling somewhat paranoid, because it was actually that situation which prompted the whole discussion within that thread and which then moved to this one.

As you might have noticed, I have participated in the current comp and I am going to continue to do so. I really enjoy my compacts and in fact, seem to be enjoying them more than I do the K-5, at the moment (probably hanging out on seriouscompacts.com for way too long)

Thanks again

[kyteflyer]

So, let's have it be settled once and for all and then take it out of the judges hands for changing.

Absolutely agree with this.

I like the set of rules in that last quoted contest, they are very very clear. Theres no room for exceptions and no room to sneak in some other kind of larger format.

[Mike Cash]

In direct reply to no one:

Part of the reason Brownies used what we now know as medium format is that 35mm film wasn't around yet. Sort of like how World War I wasn't WWI until World War II came along. The commonly given reason of negatives needing to be large to make up for crappy lenses was also true, no doubt. Another seldom mentioned consideration is that in those days it was still common , simple, and economical to make contact prints rather than enlargements. That meant the print was often determined by the size of the negative.

If gear-centric factors are to be considered, I believe RR's suggestion is about as simple and appropriate as we're likely to get. We certainly don't want to go with a "the image shouldn't be too good; it should look like it came from a P&S" because rapid technological advancements are likely to quickly rule out newer cameras that even the pickiest person couldn't help but label a P&S. IQ shouldn't be a factor, in my opinion.

[jheu02]

I'm also fine with RioRico's definition, EXCEPT that I'm fine with the Q, the 110, etc being ILCs since they are in-fact "compact" cameras. By nixing (D)SLRs and a weight limit of 1kg (no idea what a Brownie weighs), I think it sets the intent of a Point and Shoot contest.

[Mike Cash]

Box Brownies weigh next to nothing, as they often have bodies made of cardboard...good quality, long-lasting cardboard, but cardboard just the same.

How about RR's suggested rules, with grandfathering of the 110 on "if you're going to go to all that bother..." grounds and inclusion of the Q on grounds of it being a Pentax compact camera, which we certainly don't want to discourage the use of.

[RioRico]

As it happens, I can supply the weights of a few film P&S cams:

Ansco Panda (MF VF): 160g
Ansco Anscoflex (MF VF/TLR): 500g
Argoflex-E (MF TLR): 670g
Canon SureShot 80u (135 VF): 200g
Halina 6-4 (MF VF): 420g
Herbert George Official Girl Scout (MF VF): 210g
Kodak Brownie Box 620 (MF VF): 460g
Kodak Brownie Starlet (MF VF): 150g
Kodak Brownie Starmite (MF VF): 220g
Kodak Brownie Twin 20 (MF VF): 290g
Kodak Monitor 620 (MF folder): 780g
Minolta Autocord (MF TLR): 990g
Olympus XA (135 RF): 210g
Petri 7-S 45/1.8 (135 RF): 630g
Yashica GSN Electro 35 (135 RF): 690g
Voigtlander Vito II (135 folder): 420g
Zeiss B 521/16 120 (MF folder): 550g

The boldface Brownie is a cardboard box cam, as asked about. It weighs just one USA pound.

---

Last edited by RioRico; 12-12-2011 at 04:56 PM.

[jheu02]

After looking at several of the models shown, I'm certainly fine with a rules list such as:

No (D)SLR
No Large format cameras
No cameras over 1kg weight

This list, by my estimation, would keep things simple and in the spirit of "point and shoot." While I wouldn't consider all to be compact cameras, the relatively simpler controls of the sorts of MF cameras that make the weight cut, combined with the fixed lens requirement for these MFs, balances the "advantage" the larger "sensor might have. Allowing truly compact cameras, whether ILCs or not, film or digital, APS-C or smaller also fits with the spirit of PnS. Whether this last portion needs to be spelled out as individual exemptions or not I don't know, or should a "compact" camera also be defined by weight (x100 = 445g, Q = 200g, Auto 110 Super = 164g as examples of compact ILCs). So, perhaps, compact is defined as <= 500g. If that happens though, it would knock out some 35mm RFs (not my intent) since I don't think we should penalize build quality which usually translates into heavier.

I was just looking at some digital rangefinders like the Leica M9 with its 18Mp sensor. It only weighs 585g so it would qualify, but is that reasonably a Point and Shoot at almost $5K price tag? It certainly isn't for the mass market.

[unixrevolution]

After looking at several of the models shown, I'm certainly fine with a rules list such as:

No (D)SLR
No Large format cameras
No cameras over 1kg weight

This list, by my estimation, would keep things simple and in the spirit of "point and shoot." While I wouldn't consider all to be compact cameras, the relatively simpler controls of the sorts of MF cameras that make the weight cut, combined with the fixed lens requirement for these MFs, balances the "advantage" the larger "sensor might have. Allowing truly compact cameras, whether ILCs or not, film or digital, APS-C or smaller also fits with the spirit of PnS. Whether this last portion needs to be spelled out as individual exemptions or not I don't know, or should a "compact" camera also be defined by weight (x100 = 445g, Q = 200g, Auto 110 Super = 164g as examples of compact ILCs). So, perhaps, compact is defined as <= 500g. If that happens though, it would knock out some 35mm RFs (not my intent) since I don't think we should penalize build quality which usually translates into heavier.

I was just looking at some digital rangefinders like the Leica M9 with its 18Mp sensor. It only weighs 585g so it would qualify, but is that reasonably a Point and Shoot at almost $5K price tag? It certainly isn't for the mass market.

I do like the idea of a weight limit, and lens interchangeability determining the P&S eligibility, because it is so much more about how these cameras are used than their sensor size, etc.

The M9, being interchangeable lens, wouldn't really be a P&S by my definition. Again, no matter what blanket rules we set up there will likely be exceptions. The M9 is a professional camera in every sense, despite its size.

I would say No interchangeable lenses on anything APS-C or above, including film cameras. My leica M2 would qualify with those rules, and even though it's film and not digital, I ahve a hard time calling it a P&S.

I also think that, in the case of cameras taking 120 or 620 film (I won't call them Medium Format because of the connotations it brings when connected to those frame sizes), lens interchangeability and/or precision focusing (TLR, Rangefinder) should disqualify them.

Again, that's how it was worded when I got my chance to clarify the rules in P&S Contest 42. But then again, going back to the "anything smaller than 4x5, no SLRs" schtick works for me too!

[Bart]

Damn, I was going to get the M9 as my next P&S since it doesn't have that pesky "Video" thing.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Damn, I was going to get the M9 as my next P&S since it doesn't have that pesky "Video" thing.

If it only has manual focus, it doesn't qualify for "point and shoot"

[Bart]

If it only has manual focus, it doesn't qualify for "point and shoot"

Ow. I thought they hyper-focused. I believed this to be the next generation of autofocus

[jheu02]

I do like the idea of a weight limit, and lens interchangeability determining the P&S eligibility, because it is so much more about how these cameras are used than their sensor size, etc.

The M9, being interchangeable lens, wouldn't really be a P&S by my definition. Again, no matter what blanket rules we set up there will likely be exceptions. The M9 is a professional camera in every sense, despite its size.

I would say No interchangeable lenses on anything APS-C or above, including film cameras. My leica M2 would qualify with those rules, and even though it's film and not digital, I ahve a hard time calling it a P&S.

I also think that, in the case of cameras taking 120 or 620 film (I won't call them Medium Format because of the connotations it brings when connected to those frame sizes), lens interchangeability and/or precision focusing (TLR, Rangefinder) should disqualify them.

Again, that's how it was worded when I got my chance to clarify the rules in P&S Contest 42. But then again, going back to the "anything smaller than 4x5, no SLRs" schtick works for me too!

Are you removing RFs from the allowable cameras, or just those with interchangeable lenses? I like the idea of anything >= APS-C sensor can't have an interchangeable lens. And the 1kg weight limit would rule out large format correct (or are there some large format cameras that weigh in under 1kg?).

[unixrevolution]

Are you removing RFs from the allowable cameras, or just those with interchangeable lenses? I like the idea of anything >= APS-C sensor can't have an interchangeable lens. And the 1kg weight limit would rule out large format correct (or are there some large format cameras that weigh in under 1kg?).

Just interchangeable lens RFs in the 35mm and under category. I'd say any Medium Format RF, fixed lens or otherwise, is ineligible, as those tend to be pro cameras. I'd make an exception for Polaroid cameras from the 60s and before, as they're definitely not pro cameras. This is ONLY if it was my decision...I'm currently backing the "Not an SLR or Large Format" platform.

And Laurentiu, what's this "No manual focus" business? You really ARE anti-film aren't you? That'd disqualify a bunch of cameras from before the Autofocus era, like all 35mm scale-focus and RF cameras, and nearly every Zone-focus and scale-focus brownie and folder.

[jheu02]

Just interchangeable lens RFs in the 35mm and under category. I'd say any Medium Format RF, fixed lens or otherwise, is ineligible, as those tend to be pro cameras. I'd make an exception for Polaroid cameras from the 60s and before, as they're definitely not pro cameras. This is ONLY if it was my decision...I'm currently backing the "Not an SLR or Large Format" platform.

And Laurentiu, what's this "No manual focus" business? You really ARE anti-film aren't you? That'd disqualify a bunch of cameras from before the Autofocus era, like all 35mm scale-focus and RF cameras, and nearly every Zone-focus and scale-focus brownie and folder.

I also have a problem with no manual focus. Since the "flow" of our modern PnS photo taking goes something like this:

See scene, Point Camera at Scene, Zoom if Needed, Let the Auto Focus work, Perhaps Recompose, then Take Photo

I see no reason why MF cameras can't be included.