[Papa_Joe]

Although a little bit more complicated to use, but not much, given the prices on MEs these days (not Supers), not sure why the appeal of a point and shoot at all. The ME is really small for an SLR with all the benefits of an SLR and should yeild better results than a point and shoot. For a 1/3rd of the price of what folks are discussing here. I don't understand the allure of point and shoots, but different strokes for different folks I suppose.

Because a ME is allways in the way, while you can stow away a point and shoot in a waist bag. So if you want a unobstruvive 35mm camera to go with you the whole day, it is a point and shot. I am still using mainly compact digital cameras on my holidays for the same reason. And for the prices - try to get a decent cheaper one.
I have a Pentax Zoom 70 - that you can get cheap - but it is way out of unobstrusive and has not as good a image quality as those here mentioned with fixed three to four element lenses.

[BigMackCam]

Although a little bit more complicated to use, but not much, given the prices on MEs these days (not Supers), not sure why the appeal of a point and shoot at all. The ME is really small for an SLR with all the benefits of an SLR and should yeild better results than a point and shoot. For a 1/3rd of the price of what folks are discussing here. I don't understand the allure of point and shoots, but different strokes for different folks I suppose.

Assuming the ME is roughly the same size as the ME Super (I own the latter, not the former), it's much bigger and heavier than, say, my little Olympus Trip 35, which is truly pocketable. The Olympus µ[mju:] is smaller and lighter still, though doesn't feel as robust.

The ME would represent better value for money in terms of versatility, but it's not always about that. We shoot what we want to shoot, for a variety of different reasons...

[CaT_atomic]

That's a good question...
I used to sell the "regular" Stylus without a zoom for $99 brand new many years ago... and now they sell used for much more than that...

I won't argue that it isn't a good camera - it is... but their prices have gone through the roof... they used to be $30 or so all day long for nice examples...

It's the same reason used K1000s are selling for over $100... name recognition... and a point and shoot gives a nice way into film photography that isn't any harder than using a phone...

-Eric

I like to bring a compact film camera as a companion to my digital cameras. I've had a few of the stylus cameras now and i'd say they are pretty overpriced for how unreliable they are. About 30-40% of the ones I've had got light leaks coming from the front of the lens. I picked up a Fuji DL-super Mini zoom (Tiara zoom) for $145 and haven't looked back. For the price though My favorite compacts have been my Ricoh-TF900 and Pentax Iqzoom735 (the small 90s one) You can find them at thrift stores under $15 and do just fine.

[CaT_atomic]

Although a little bit more complicated to use, but not much, given the prices on MEs these days (not Supers), not sure why the appeal of a point and shoot at all. The ME is really small for an SLR with all the benefits of an SLR and should yeild better results than a point and shoot. For a 1/3rd of the price of what folks are discussing here. I don't understand the allure of point and shoots, but different strokes for different folks I suppose.

I think the ME is really underrated as an slr but one thing I noticed is that it the metering system isn't as advanced as most compacts so it comes out under exposed a lot more. you can compare this pic with one from the IQzoom735 I posted in the thread. (used the pentax-m 50mm f1.4) Also it's nice to have a decent compact in the bag just in case something happens or when you don't want to be noticed.

Attached Images

 

[TwoUptons]

I'd suggest the two example photos just show a meter bias difference, not a difference in level of sophistication...

But I would generally agree that a ME will have an inferior meter to any autofocus compact from the 90s.
That said, it will probably have a much wider shutter range than those compacts, too, so a more flexible range of exposure.

I found 25 years ago that our IQZoom 60x was rubbish with anything slower than 400 speed film... With 400 or 800, though, it was awesome.

-Eric

[CaT_atomic]

I'd suggest the two example photos just show a meter bias difference, not a difference in level of sophistication...

But I would generally agree that a ME will have an inferior meter to any autofocus compact from the 90s.
That said, it will probably have a much wider shutter range than those compacts, too, so a more flexible range of exposure.

I found 25 years ago that our IQZoom 60x was rubbish with anything slower than 400 speed film... With 400 or 800, though, it was awesome.

-Eric

interestingly in those two pics the ME had gold 200 and the IQzoom735 had Proimage 100. So I just think the ME has a smaller in center weighted meter. I do recommend 400 speed film in the compacts I sell though.Here's some xp2 400 in a stylus zoom 80 I had (which also developed leaks soon after i sold it : / )

[Benz3ne]

That's a good question...
I used to sell the "regular" Stylus without a zoom for $99 brand new many years ago... and now they sell used for much more than that...

I won't argue that it isn't a good camera - it is... but their prices have gone through the roof... they used to be $30 or so all day long for nice examples...

It's the same reason used K1000s are selling for over $100... name recognition... and a point and shoot gives a nice way into film photography that isn't any harder than using a phone...

-Eric

I recently had £120 knocked off a second-hand Fuji X-E2 for trading in a so-so K1000 (metal construction). I'd normally not like to be involved with inflating prices like that, but it was too good a deal to miss out on.

[mtgmansf]

I have several of the compact, film cameras that are mentioned above. I am going to conjecture that prices are going up as more and more of these cameras stop functioning and cannot be fixed due to lack of both parts and expertise. However, at some of the prices mentioned on this post, I feel people are probably going to be disappointed when these devices give up their ghost and cease to function, which can happen at any moment. Already, I have had a lightly used Stylus Epic and T4 become bricks after (solenoid motors) failed to wind film or provide other functions, such as moving lenses out behind covers/clam shells. On the other hand, some cameras like the Nikon Ti series, some Contax, Konica, and Fuji- mostly made of metal and with quality parts - cameras were probably built to last for the long-term and, therefore, might justify a steeper acquisition price. If I was looking for such a camera not, I would also Google the camera model to look for viable repair places before spending anything more than several hundred dollars. Lastly, it is my personal opinion that clam shell, digital WR compacts with either m4/3rd, aps-c, or FF sensors are long overdue and Olympus should have followed their long reign in this category with digital equivalents, although I need to praise Ricoh/Pentax for having done a pretty good job with the GR line in lieu of such an effort...*(yet is missing the WR sealing, clam shell, and viewfinder I desire!)

[CaT_atomic]

I recently had £120 knocked off a second-hand Fuji X-E2 for trading in a so-so K1000 (metal construction). I'd normally not like to be involved with inflating prices like that, but it was too good a deal to miss out on.

I'd do the same I use my X100s way more than any of the k1000s I've had. The fuji film sims are amazing. . . . now if only they'd keep making film instead of discontinuing stocks at the slightest inconvenience.

[ChrisPlatt]

The original Olympus Stylus (model mju 1, with fixed f/3.5 lens) is an excellent pocketable AF point & shoot 35.
A few years ago you couldn't give them away.

Chris

[andrewd]

I don’t understand the crazy prices being paid for plastic point and shoots when high end SLRs can be had very cheaply and can mostly still be serviced. Perhaps this will change in a few years when the hipsters realise how much nicer the SLR’s are. An MX with the 40mm f2.8 pancake lens is almost the same size as a typical point and shoot.

[ChrisPlatt]

IMO the best reason to have a good truly pocketable camera is that it allows you to always carry a camera.
Though I like them no SLR is truly pocketable and neither are most rangefinders 35s.

Chris

[CaT_atomic]

I don’t understand the crazy prices being paid for plastic point and shoots when high end SLRs can be had very cheaply and can mostly still be serviced. Perhaps this will change in a few years when the hipsters realise how much nicer the SLR’s are. An MX with the 40mm f2.8 pancake lens is almost the same size as a typical point and shoot.

Bad comparison imo. Even though like my big manual GL690 and I like the MX and Pentax-m 40mm f2.8 you are comparing one of the smallest slr/lens combos which is also fully manual to a fairly average sized point n shoot automatic with AF. They are totally in use.

The prices of the stylus also isn't really that bad when you put them up against compacts from Contax, Ricoh or Yashica

[nickthetasmaniac]

I don’t understand the crazy prices being paid for plastic point and shoots when high end SLRs can be had very cheaply and can mostly still be serviced. Perhaps this will change in a few years when the hipsters realise how much nicer the SLR’s are. An MX with the 40mm f2.8 pancake lens is almost the same size as a typical point and shoot.

Almost, but the difference in this case is enough to make the MX a non-starter. As far as I can tell, the renewed interest in P&S’ is down mostly to automation and *genuine* pocketability. Ie. fitted jeans pocketability.

The MX/40mm combo might be delightfully compact for an SLR, but I don’t think many folk are going to spend a day walking around with it stuffed in their pants...

I think a lot of long-time photography enthusiasts misunderstand the motivations of most of the young shooters trying film at the moment. They just want to have fun with a ‘new’ medium. They’re not interested in high-end SLRs.

[LesDMess]

The MX/40mm combo might be delightfully compact for an SLR, but I don’t think many folk are going to spend a day walking around with it stuffed in their pants...

Ha ha, is that a Pentax MX with a pancake lens in your pocket or are you just happy to see me . . .



Besides it's size, the Olympus Stylus Epic is a very competent shooter as well.