Wide-angle digi-compact cameras

Try the new(ish) Ricoh GX100 it has a 24-72 lens and getting good reviews
for a compact. It is expensive but for those either not wanting to carry a
DSLR or looking for a high quality back up to their DSLR it looks good.

"David Skinner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi folks,

There was a recent thread here that incorporated a discussion about
compact digicams with decent wideangle coverage. Unfortunately I can't
find it.

So, errr, is there a compact digi that goes as wide as 24mm equiv?
Anything wider available? I know there's a Ricoh that does 28mm.

"Doug Scobie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Try the new(ish) Ricoh GX100 it has a 24-72 lens and getting good reviews
for a compact. It is expensive but for those either not wanting to carry a
DSLR or looking for a high quality back up to their DSLR it looks good.

Yes, this is an interesting camera which seems to be getting good reviews -
though some users have mentioned slow autofocus (up to 2 secs), which may
not be too important for landscapes (it also has a SNAP mode). The 24mm
lens really makes it stand out.

I use a Panasonic LX2 (28mm, RAW) for landscapes while walking and like it a
lot. Took these on the Fairfield Horseshoe with it in 28mm wideangle mode:

http://alexandjustine.smugmug.com/gallery/3079952#168067202-L-LB

To my knowledge the 2 sec delay wasn't so much the autofocus but the speed
of writing a RAW file to the card. The camera has no buffer so you need to
wait before taking another, therefore for a long wait between shots. As you
say for landscapes - not an issue.

"Akiralx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Doug Scobie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Try the new(ish) Ricoh GX100 it has a 24-72 lens and getting good reviews
for a compact. It is expensive but for those either not wanting to carry
a DSLR or looking for a high quality back up to their DSLR it looks good.

Yes, this is an interesting camera which seems to be getting good
reviews - though some users have mentioned slow autofocus (up to 2 secs),
which may not be too important for landscapes (it also has a SNAP mode).
The 24mm lens really makes it stand out.

I use a Panasonic LX2 (28mm, RAW) for landscapes while walking and like it
a lot. Took these on the Fairfield Horseshoe with it in 28mm wideangle
mode:

http://alexandjustine.smugmug.com/gallery/3079952#168067202-L-LB

In article <[email hidden]>, David
Skinner <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Hi folks,

There was a recent thread here that incorporated a discussion about
compact digicams with decent wideangle coverage. Unfortunately I can't
find it.

So, errr, is there a compact digi that goes as wide as 24mm equiv?
Anything wider available? I know there's a Ricoh that does 28mm.

When I went digital I gave up wide-angle: the technology just doesn't
support it as easily.

I took up photo stitching instead and now have some great wide angles of
my landscape photos ...
--
Bernard Hill
Selkirk, Scotland

Bernard Hill said:

In article <[email hidden]>, David
Skinner <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

There was a recent thread here that incorporated a discussion about
compact digicams with decent wideangle coverage. Unfortunately I can't
find it.

So, errr, is there a compact digi that goes as wide as 24mm equiv?
Anything wider available? I know there's a Ricoh that does 28mm.

This might help you find your ideal camera
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp

Quoted message said:

When I went digital I gave up wide-angle: the technology just doesn't
support it as easily.

Compact cameras have never really supported wide angles. 28mm lenses
on 35mm cameras were rather rare and often of relatively poor quality.

Quoted message said:

I took up photo stitching instead and now have some great wide angles of
my landscape photos ...

I have some seriously wide angles here
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/pans/pans.htm

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So, errr, is there a compact digi that goes as wide as 24mm equiv?
Anything wider available? I know there's a Ricoh that does 28mm.

When I went digital I gave up wide-angle: the technology just doesn't
support it as easily.

I took up photo stitching instead and now have some great wide angles of
my landscape photos ...

Cheers for the answers guys. I might just treat myself to the Ricoh. My
main reason for wanting a wide compact is for the sorts of day trips
where a bagful of SLR and glass is overkill, but I don't want to go
without a camera altogether.

This was brought-home when I took a load of kit on a quick walk around
Lincoln with my mum the other week. Took two pictures.

David Skinner said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So, errr, is there a compact digi that goes as wide as 24mm equiv?
Anything wider available? I know there's a Ricoh that does 28mm.

When I went digital I gave up wide-angle: the technology just doesn't
support it as easily.

I took up photo stitching instead and now have some great wide
angles of my landscape photos ...

Cheers for the answers guys. I might just treat myself to the Ricoh.
My main reason for wanting a wide compact is for the sorts of day
trips where a bagful of SLR and glass is overkill, but I don't want
to go without a camera altogether.

This was brought-home when I took a load of kit on a quick walk around
Lincoln with my mum the other week. Took two pictures.

Alternative approach is to get a 28mm or 35mm lens and stitch photos
together for panoramas.

I've done this for years with a film camera (Konica Hexar, 35mm fixed focal
length), and expect to do the same with a digital compact.

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

In article <[email hidden]>, Nigel Cliffe
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Alternative approach is to get a 28mm or 35mm lens and stitch photos
together for panoramas.

I've done this for years with a film camera (Konica Hexar, 35mm fixed
focal length), and expect to do the same with a digital compact.

Yes that works fine, but I find that using a (35mm equiv) focal length
of nearer 50mm makes stitching easier. 28mm is certainly harder because
of the distortion nearer the edges.

--
Bernard Hill
Selkirk, Scotland

Bernard Hill said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Nigel Cliffe
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Alternative approach is to get a 28mm or 35mm lens and stitch photos
together for panoramas.

I've done this for years with a film camera (Konica Hexar, 35mm fixed
focal length), and expect to do the same with a digital compact.

Yes that works fine, but I find that using a (35mm equiv) focal length
of nearer 50mm makes stitching easier. 28mm is certainly harder because
of the distortion nearer the edges.

It gets harder because you aren't rotating the lens about it's optical
centre (aka entrance pupil or nodal point) so the images fail to line
up properly. To achieve good results with hand held stitching make the
overlaps generous. The problems in getting images to align are much
harder when you have foreground detail.

Some of the panoramas on my site are hand held. Some were done using
a walking pole as a virtual tripod bu lining up the shadow of the pole
with a suitable stone or tuft of grass. An even more portable version
is this http://www.philohome.com/tripod/shooting.htm but there could
be problems trying to shoot in a hoolie on a mountaintop!
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Angletarn Pikes via Beda Fell.
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/May07/martin9.htm

Doug Scobie said:

"David Skinner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There was a recent thread here that incorporated a discussion about
compact digicams with decent wideangle coverage. Unfortunately I can't
find it.

So, errr, is there a compact digi that goes as wide as 24mm equiv?
Anything wider available? I know there's a Ricoh that does 28mm.

Quoted message said:

Try the new(ish) Ricoh GX100 it has a 24-72 lens and getting good reviews
for a compact.

DP Review have just posted an in-depth review
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ricohgx100/
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Angletarn Pikes via Beda Fell.
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/May07/martin9.htm

In article <[email hidden]>, Phil Cook
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Bernard Hill said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Nigel Cliffe
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Alternative approach is to get a 28mm or 35mm lens and stitch photos
together for panoramas.

I've done this for years with a film camera (Konica Hexar, 35mm fixed
focal length), and expect to do the same with a digital compact.

Yes that works fine, but I find that using a (35mm equiv) focal length
of nearer 50mm makes stitching easier. 28mm is certainly harder because
of the distortion nearer the edges.

It gets harder because you aren't rotating the lens about it's optical
centre (aka entrance pupil or nodal point) so the images fail to line
up properly.

That may be a reason too, but the barrel distortion to reality means the
edges are curved with reference to the true landscape.

Quoted message said:

To achieve good results with hand held stitching make the
overlaps generous.

I took that as axiomatic. All stitching software advises it too.
Basically you are simply using the centre area of the picture.

Quoted message said:

The problems in getting images to align are much
harder when you have foreground detail.

Another benefit of 50mm... there's not much foreground!

However for stitching foreground often has to be cut off. Grass waving
in the wind it particularly troublesome...

Quoted message said:

Some of the panoramas on my site are hand held.

Almost all the panos I've used, printed and displayed have been
handheld. It works OK as long as there is no foreground, as you say.

--
Bernard Hill
Selkirk, Scotland

Bernard Hill said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Phil Cook
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Bernard Hill said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Nigel Cliffe
<[email hidden]> writes
>Alternative approach is to get a 28mm or 35mm lens and stitch photos
>together for panoramas.
>
>I've done this for years with a film camera (Konica Hexar, 35mm fixed
>focal length), and expect to do the same with a digital compact.

Yes that works fine, but I find that using a (35mm equiv) focal length
of nearer 50mm makes stitching easier. 28mm is certainly harder because
of the distortion nearer the edges.

It gets harder because you aren't rotating the lens about it's optical
centre (aka entrance pupil or nodal point) so the images fail to line
up properly.

That may be a reason too, but the barrel distortion to reality means the
edges are curved with reference to the true landscape.

All the stitching software I've used has had a "correct barrel
distortion" option.

Quoted message said:

However for stitching foreground often has to be cut off. Grass waving
in the wind it particularly troublesome...

I have often had to save a stitch as a layered photoshop document
(filesize = "yikes!"😉 and then mess about with where the boundary
comes.

--
Phil Cook, last hill: Angletarn Pikes via Beda Fell.
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/May07/martin9.htm

David Skinner said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So, errr, is there a compact digi that goes as wide as 24mm equiv?
Anything wider available? I know there's a Ricoh that does 28mm.

When I went digital I gave up wide-angle: the technology just doesn't
support it as easily.

I took up photo stitching instead and now have some great wide angles of
my landscape photos ...

Quoted message said:

Cheers for the answers guys. I might just treat myself to the Ricoh. My
main reason for wanting a wide compact is for the sorts of day trips
where a bagful of SLR and glass is overkill, but I don't want to go
without a camera altogether.

I've started carrying around a Sony DSC-R1 which has a (35mm equiv)
24-120mm zoom. I also have the wide angle extension lens which brings
it down to 19mm (35mm equiv), and I find that so useful for landscape,
especially close landscape such as buildings and bridges, that I often
carry that along as my first extra accessory. I'd certainly hate to be
restricted to less than a 24mm (35mm equiv) wide angle. I far more
often zoom wide and hit the buffer wishing I could go wider than I
zoom far and hit the buffer wishing I could go further.

The problem is the difficulty of making a really high quality zoom of
ratio greater than around 5x. Since the mass market wants a good long
zoom and a big zoom range you lose wide angle at the bottom end and
also lose the sharpness, contrast, lack of chromatic aberration,
etc. of a really good quality lens.

It's possible to make seriously good quality compacts, e.g. the Ricoh
Caplio GX100, but only at the cost of losing the big numbers on the
packaging that the public want to see. It's not technological
limitations which mean you don't usually get wide angle on compacts,
it's the marketing numbers game.

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]