Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/11/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I bought a used XA long ago because I loved amusement parks. The XA would fit in a blue jeans pocket as well as a shirt pocket. Even a small camera dangling around the neck was a no go on rollercoasters, and there was no one to hold equipment when I rode. It's still around, though I have not broken it out in a year or so. The 35/2.8 is impeccable. ric On Nov 24, 2012, at 7:53 PM, Don Dory <don.dory at gmail.com> wrote: > I still have three XA's in various iterations. However, I've come to terms > with carrying an M; if I want smaller I will mount a 35 2.8 Serenar which > is really thin making the M pocketable. I just won't give up the precision > and repeatability of manual focusing. > > > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Bill Pearce <billcpearce at cox.net> > wrote: > >> While I understand that the size of the XA is probably too small to house >> both a FF sensor, electronics and a battery of useful size, It wouldn't >> take much more. The FF Sony compact is a good example, and , at a more >> affordable price could be the deal. It would seem that we have reached a >> time when the FF sensor compact is a possibility as the flange to film >> plane distance problems seem to have been solved. I would think that >> applying the same solutions to the E1 and 3 would make them truly >> competitive. That camera was probably a little too soon and that was what >> made it too similar in size to conventional DSLR's. >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Richard Man >> Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 1:29 PM >> To: Leica Users Group >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Olympus XA (OT) >> >> >> The XA was my first camera out of school. I still have it. The rewind >> crank >> broke so a few years ago, I bought another one, just because >> >> As I said earlier, I think the RX-1 is too little, too late, but if they >> make a digital full frame XA, I will buy it, for up to 2012 $1500. >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Howard Ritter <hlritter at bex.net> >> wrote: >> >> Reading early releases on Sony's forthcoming ultrapremium-priced non-SLR >>> non-interchangeable, non-zoom-lens finderless full-frame digicam, the >>> RX1, >>> I couldn't help but think about its nearest film equivalent, and one of >>> my >>> favorite past cameras, the little Oly XA. I'll bet a lot of LUGgers past >>> a >>> certain age used this little gem. How many of you still have yours? Use >>> it? >>> When I think about it, it just annoys me that this new, smallest FF >>> digicam >>> is twice the depth and box volume of the XA, and not pocketable. And that >>> the smallest "serious" digicam, the Sony RX100, is the same size as the >>> XA >>> and yet can't manage a sensor that's more than one-third the dimensions >>> of >>> the XA's frame. >>> >>> [For those too young to have seen one, I'll describe it as the size of a >>> pack of cigarettes (remember that antiquated comparison?), rugged plastic >>> construction, sliding door covering the integral 35mm f/2.8 Zuiko lens, >>> rangefinder focusing with a lever on the bottom of the lens, aperture >>> selected with a vertically sliding tab on the front of the body, and >>> aperture-priority autoexposure?with the shutter speed indicated by a >>> needle >>> in the viewfinder. But you had to set the ASA yourself. Powered by a >>> watch >>> battery in a recess in the bottom, and it takes a screw-on flash unit on >>> one end if you need it. And it took full-frame 35mm pictures. The >>> camera's >>> almost exactly the same size as my Sony RX100, which has a collapsible >>> pancake 3x zoom lens and is a few mm shorter?but which has a sensor >>> that's >>> about 35% of the linear dimensions of a 35mm frame and about 14% of the >>> area. I started wondering where mine was and when I had used it last?must >>> have been 10 years. I got it over 30 years ago when I was stationed with >>> the USAF in Wiesbaden, Germany, and so many of my fellow members of the >>> Wiesbaden American Ski Club got one too that it became the "official" >>> trip >>> camera of WASKI. Then, I came across it yesterday quite by accident while >>> searching for something else somewhere entirely different. Serendipity. >>> No >>> film in it, unfortunately, but the battery still powers it up. So it's >>> off >>> to Walgreen's we go...] >>> >>> So I'm thinking, if anyone other than LUGgers would be willing to accept >>> a >>> non-zoom, integral-lens manual-focus camera with no built-in flash, in >>> return for maximum pocketability, how small could a FF digicam be? Why >>> can't it be the size of the XA and even include a RF? Obviously it would >>> need a lot of electronics that the XA doesn't, but then the XA has all >>> that >>> space in the film cassette and takeup-reel chambers for circuitry and a >>> big >>> battery. The need to have light rays strike the sensor at as steep an >>> angle >>> as possible apparently imposes certain constraints on lens design, and >>> therefore size, but then a FF CMOS sensor is so sensitive that you could >>> obviously settle for an f/4 lens, as is the case with FF DLSRs with >>> typical >>> zooms, and maybe correct for the light fall-off far from the axis in >>> software, which should loosen the constraints. The Sony RX1 is a step in >>> this direction but the body is about 1 cm larger in height and width than >>> the RX100, and the big lens gives the camera twice the depth?without >>> being >>> interchangeable, or a zoom, or f/1.4. >>> >>> I'm just sayin'. >>> >>> ?howard >>> >>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See >>> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for >>> more information >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> // richard >> <http://www.richardmanphoto.**com<http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >>> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See >> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for >> more information >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See >> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for >> more information >> > > > > -- > Don > don.dory at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information