Is there anything the humble rubber band can't do????
Originally Posted by brucemuir
The Plastic Fantastic (that's what it's called in CanonLand) AF 50 1.8 is the closest thing I believe.
Originally Posted by zsas
I'm pretty sure the 45 was only available in manual.
Some of the Olympus IS-series were pretty small. These were fixed-zoom lens 35mm SLRs.
I think pentax made the smallest AF SLR.
That said, small can be too small. I prefer the AF slrs with a little more of a grip, such as the nikon N80. Its not the best at anything but it fits me fine.
Go not to the elves for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.
I think small is very relative, even for me (i think as an average size asian, i qualify as small ) the EOS rebel Xs feels to small and needed a battery holder just to make it right.
Add to that none of the zoom lenses are considered small, there's light zoom, but I don't think there's a small AF zoom.
So i guess if small is the question any of the entry level ( EOS rebel, up to n65, pentax *st, etc) paired with any of the 50mm 1.8 or 1.7 would be the one I choose ( that being said the likes of mid class body like elan7 and F80 is not larger and with better functions)
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Pentax MZ-5/MZ-5N - small bodies - spot average metering(from memory), auto (aperture/shutter) and full match needle (well match LED) manual. I used a couple for a few years. Pentax 50/1.7 and the old F (early series) 70-210 are great/cheap lenses...
I went from using Canon New F1's to these, adn they were easy to change over to as they have actual shutter speed dials and aperture rings you can move....
Nikon hasn't made any AF Pancakes, i'm not sure if there was enough room for the screwdrive coupling.
Alright all you N65 haters out there, be nice, my 3 year old daughter has an N65 that I got for her with a plastic 28-100 zoom on it and she loves it. I think it has something to do with it weighing less than her Kodak Cameo Motor P&S, this weight difference puzzles me as well.
So put it in perspective, if you were a 3 year old girl that was only using an overweight P&S, or disposable cameras, you would love the N65 too. *L*
"Would you like it if someone that painted in oils told you that you were not making portraits because you were using a camera?"
"Shouldn't it be more about the joy of producing and viewing the photo than what you paid for the camera?"
No hatin' here.
To add insult to injury when I bought that N65 body I got burned by one of the Brooklyn scammers.
Shows you how far we can come
To clarify, small-EST doesn't matter. Small may matter, but if say, the Komica F72 and a half was
"The world's smallest EVER 35mm SLR, measuring 1/10oz LESS than our competitors!"
Would you rush out to buy it? Woo hoo! Look at me, I got THE SMALLEST 35mm SLR Ever!!! All I'm saying is any of the small SLRs are small, and the smallest isn't a selling point. That extra 1/10oz don't mean diddly. Or does it?
"Man, that bear wouldn't have caught him if he had been carrying the Komica F72 and a half. That extra 2/10oz did him in."
When I want a lightweight camera I take my N75. It's probably not THE smallest. But small. And like everyone has mentioned, you do need a lens on the camera. So small loses even more relevance.
In life you only get one great dog, one great car, and one great woman. Pet the dog. Drive the car. Make love to the woman. Don't mix them up.