Re: Leica Minizoom

[Godfrey DiGiorgi <ramarren@apple.com>]

>My question for you, and the LUG (and the Rollei group), is: Is the Minizoom
>lens appreciably better than the Olympus, or than other P&S's. Also, what
>about the Rollei Prego with Schneider optics?

I have a little bag full of compact 35mm cameras. In this class, the
ones that fit the description you specify are the Olympus Stylus, the
Nikon 35Ti and the Leica Minizoom.

I've owned the Olympus for about 5 years now. It's traveled with me
all over the world, occasionally the only camera I've taken but more
often a handy pocketable in conjunction with one of the higher end
cameras. It takes a great picture, has a fine lens. Control is
minimal, but I can't say anything terrible against it, presuming that
you will nearly always be using it for snapshots processed at a
minilab and rarely looking for big enlargements. It will occasionally
produce a negative that does justice to a 20x24 picture, but not
reliably.

I bought the Nikon in early '94 because I wanted a more sophisticated,
auto everything mini 35 that also had a top flight lens and full
override control of focus, exposure, etc. It also has gone with me as
my sole camera on trips around the world. If I carry it, I rarely
carry the bigger cameras. The exposure and focus systems, the lens,
are top notch, the equal for the most part of my Leica M and Nikon SLR
lenses for the results they produce. The Leica Minilux and the Contax
T2 are its primary competition (the Konica Hexar as well). If you're
looking for this kind of quality and control capability, all four of
these cameras are a good pick. If you don't want or don't use the
extra control they afford, they're overkill and too expensive. You can
obtain professional quality negatives or slides from all of them,
reliably.

Last year, I was out visiting a friend of mine in Nevada. He has a
Nikon FE2 and a Leica Mini II. I was curious about the difference
between the Mini II and the Olympus Stylus so I borrowed it and ran a
roll of film side by side. The Mini II lens was just head and
shoulders above the Olympus lens. The images had that Leica depth and
presence, were sharp, and the exposure system was spot on flawless. I
was very impressed. But what I wanted was a camera in this class with
a little longer lens capability, so I picked up the Minizoom. I've
been using is as my all around, carry it all the time camera for the
past 6 months now and I'm very pleased with it. It was my only camera
for the road trip I took to Daytona and back in Feb-March of this
year. High quality negatives, perfect exposure, just the right level
of simple overrides for this type of camera. The lens gives that Leica
look, and resolution seems excellent. I'd recommend it for what your
wife seems to want.

Recently, I had occasion to use another friend's Rollei Prego (35-70)
so I could capture a few pictures for her roll of film. She sent me
some copies of the prints afterwards. It also seems to be a very
crisp, sharp lensed camera with excellent focus and exposure
automation. Again, very easy to use and very simple, equivalent to the
Leica Minizoom but about $100 cheaper.

Both the Minizoom and the Prego seem to be a healthy notch above the
Olympus Stylus Zoom with respect to lenses and the exposure systems
seem a hair better.

I wouldn't knock a person's choice of a PnS camera too much. The
little buggers are so unobtrusive and easy to use, I find I get much
better results in people pictures with them than I do with the
bigger cameras ... the subjects are not intimidated by the little
camera the way they get with the big SLR, you work quickly and
naturally, you can turn the flash off and not leave daylight echoes in
their eyes. They're a perfect match for a lot of picture taking, and
they can be with you always. Just get one with a good lens and
exposure system.

Hope that helps. 

Godfrey