|
|
Post by GeneW on Aug 22, 2006 21:44:46 GMT -5
I bought an Olympus XA when they first hit the market and I used it for years and years. Last year I sold it, thinking I wouldn't want to use it much anymore. I was wrong. I've missed it constantly. While I enjoy my little Stylus Epic, I want to be able to set my own ASA, focus, and aperture. The good news? I bought another one tonight from an RFF member. Can barely wait for it to get here! Gene Here's a pic of my old one. The new one should look pretty much the same  Such a tiny little cam...  |
|
|
|
Post by herron on Aug 23, 2006 9:06:35 GMT -5
Never been a big user of P&S. Probably my loss. Mamiya made a lot of them, but I only have a few...and those I hardly ever use. Once, I would have felt the urge to immediately surf evilBay after a statement like that but, today, nothing! Perhaps counting my cameras and lenses was not the right thing to do.........  |
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Aug 23, 2006 10:45:07 GMT -5
The XA is a heck of a camera with a fantastic lens. The only reason I don't have one now is I can't use all the cameras I already have. If I was going on a scenic tour and only could take one camera and it had to be compact, the XA would be my choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by GeneW on Aug 23, 2006 14:31:43 GMT -5
Ron, the XA is not quite a P&S. It's a manual-focus RF, aperture priority. The electronic shutter is the only auto feature. It's an amazing little cam, from the original designer of the OM-1.
Wayne, fully agree. It's a great little lightweight and the fixed 35mm/2.8 lens is pretty good. I like it for city shooting.
Gene
|
|
|
|
Post by byuphoto on Aug 23, 2006 16:04:21 GMT -5
I have an excellent little XA and need to get it out and use it
|
|
|
|
Post by jennyandernie on Aug 23, 2006 17:15:31 GMT -5
We have an XA and an XA2. They are great little cameras with good optics and a small very sturdy clam style case. When we travel overseas we always agonise over which film cameras to take........wish we could take them all but there is something called baggage allowance. Last Easter we went to Tunisia and the XAs were the cameras we took; and they were chosen because of their small size and excellent performance. Here are a couple from the XA2   Ernie |
|
|
|
Post by Just Plain Curt on Aug 23, 2006 23:07:16 GMT -5
Very nice Ernie. The XA is one camera I've admired since I first saw a friend's many moons ago and yet strangely enough I've never owned one....yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Vincent on Aug 25, 2006 23:05:03 GMT -5
Like Ernie, I have an XA and XA2.
They are amazing little cameras and take excellent pictures.
They were very popular in the 70's and '80's and can be found in pristine condition.
Most photographers want the XA because it is a rangefinder while the XA2 is zone focus but it does an excellent job.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Vincent on Aug 25, 2006 23:05:43 GMT -5
Like Ernie, I have an XA and XA2.
They are amazing little cameras and take excellent pictures.
They were very popular in the 70's and '80's and can be found in pristine condition.
Most photographers want the XA because it is a rangefinder while the XA2 is zone focus but it does an excellent job.
|
|
|
|
Post by GeneW on Aug 26, 2006 8:36:22 GMT -5
I like those shots with the XA2, Ernie. I've heard it's quite an excellent cam, but I too prefer a rangefinder. I'm eager for my replacement XA to arrive...
Dan, which one do you prefer?
Gene
|
|
|
|
Post by byuphoto on Aug 26, 2006 9:16:55 GMT -5
 Here's mine. I too had bothe the XA and an XA2 but sold the XA2 because I had other P&S cames. I got it out this morning and it still has 1 shot of a 24 exp roll to go. No idea what is on it. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Vincent on Aug 26, 2006 11:30:00 GMT -5
Gene, I prefer the XA because it has the more complicated rangefinder focus and you can select your lens setting.
The XA has a f2.8 lens whilst the XA2 is a f3.5.
Whether the XA actually takes better pictures or not would be best judged by taking identical pictures with each camera at the same time.
Sometimes a slower lens will yield a better image so I can't really say the XA is a better choice.
Maybe I'll pick up two rolls of 12-exposures and take some test shots.
I enjoyed using the little Olympus XA and XA2 cameras so that would be a plus.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Vincent on Aug 26, 2006 11:31:29 GMT -5
I just remembered some other differences between the XA and XA-2.
The XA has a little lever on the bottom that allows you to add 1.5+ exposure for backlighting.
The XA lens has six elements and the XA-2 has four.
One problem I'm having in taking identical shots is that the XA has a choice of lens openings so you can pick your f-stop which also allows you to observe the shutter speed in the upper left corner of the viewfinder
The XA-2 has a preset f-stop and to be fair in comparison shooting I should set the XA lens to the same f-stop. Trouble is I can't seem to find out what the XA-2 lens f-stop is. I'm thinking it is probably f5.6 to f8.0
I went to a local Target store today to pick up some 12-exposure film rolls and they don't sell them any longer. Now I have to beat the bushes to find the short test rolls.
|
|
|
|
Post by GeneW on Aug 27, 2006 8:09:37 GMT -5
Rick, you'll have to take that last shot on your XA and find out what's on the mystery roll...
Thanks Dan, there's more difference between the XA and XA2 than I realized. I've always liked that little 'backlighting' lever at the bottom of the XA. It comes in handy.
Gene
|
|
|
|
Post by byuphoto on Aug 27, 2006 12:55:36 GMT -5
I think the XA2 was an f3.5
|
|
Such a tiny little cam...
