Cheap Point n' Shoots

Introduction⌗

A few years ago when I was just getting into film photography, around 2017, I found a lot of YouTube videos about the Olympus XA. It’s a tiny point n’ shoot featuring a rangefinder focus system. Great, huh?

The only problem is its price. It’s been hyped up over the years and they’re now quite costly if you want one in good condition and working order — and you do. Since they’re all electrical cameras, you can’t simply get them fixed if you receive a broken one or if it ends up breaking.

I chose to go another route, instead buying the Olympus XA2 on eBay for about 22 euros. It’s a lot cheaper because they threw out the rangefinder in favour of a zone focus system and an f3.5 lens instead of the XA’s 2.8. To cut it short - I love it. It was my favourite point n’ shoot, until I found the Minolta AF-C. Now things aren’t as clear.

After looking around for other cameras on the Swedish equivalent of eBay, I wound up purchasing a Minolta AF-C for about 100 Swedish crowns (roughly 10 dollars/euros). The Minolta AF-C sports an f2.8 lens and an early 80’s auto focus system. The point of this post is to compare these two fairly inexpensive point n’ shoots to see what they have to offer.

Like with my previous (and first) post on this blog, I’d love it if you were to check out my photography work. You can find my portfolio here.

Olympus XA2⌗

I’ve chose to begin with the Olympus XA2, as it’s the one I’ve had the longest and have the most experience with.

Build and functions⌗

The camera is very small, compact and made entirely out of plastic. However, it’s very dense and “built like a tank” despite its plastic build.

Everything in the camera’s inner workings is entirely electronic and it’s therefore not possible to have it fixed if it were to break down. This is the reality for most point n’ shoots, though.

Underneath the camera, there’s a small lever with two settings — battery check and self timer. It also works as a small stand for the camera when using the self timer.

Directly to the left of the lens is the focus slider. On this, you have three settings to choose between. Flower, person or mountain — macro, normal portrait distance or infinity focus. My biggest gripe with this is that once you shut the clamshell, the focus returns to the middle option. If you’re out shooting and need to use the macro or the landscape focus distances and shut the camera, you have to remember to set the focus every time you open the clamshell up. This has cost me quite a few images as I always tend to forget.

Underneath the lens, when the clamshell is opened, is a small lever to set the ISO. It goes up to 800, so it’s possible to shoot slightly faster films. No DX coding.

Lens & photos⌗

It sports a 35mm f3.5 lens that’s, in my opinion at least, very very sharp. I’ll attach a photo below.

If we look at a slightly zoomed in version of this photo, it’s very easy to make out the lettering on the sign that says “FRISÖR” in the distance.

The only downside I can find to the lens is really the maximum aperture of f3.5. It can be a downside in darker environments. There is quite an easy remedy, though.

Darkness capabilities⌗

If you buy this camera, I would strongly advise you to get one with the screw-on flash attachment. There are two different ones — the A11 and the A16. The A16 is stronger and recharges faster, but is also bigger. The A11 is the one that most usually comes bundled with the camera at auctions.

The flash attachment makes it possible and easy to take photos in lower lit situations.

As seen in the photo above, it’s quite capable in dimly lit situations as long as the flash’s attached. The flash isn’t overbearing and renders quite good results. Granted, I’ve only shot black and white. I doubt it’d work as well for slide film.

With the ISO going up to 800 you can shoot higher speed films and maybe, with a little bit of luck, get decent photos even in dimly lit situations. Most AF-C’s only come with a max ISO of 400, which makes the XA2 a clear winner.

One really good thing about it, however, is that it doesn’t block you from taking photos if it deems the scene too dark. It lights up with a green LED to notify you that it’s too dark, but then it fires the shutter at the longest possible shutter speed and the largest possible aperture.

Ergonomics⌗

Well, it’s small and comapct as can be. It may not be the most ergonomic camera in the world, but it’s also not bad in any way. You can open it and set any settings one handed when you get used to handling it.

It has a small red touch button on the top right that acts as a shutter button.

Ease of use and quirks⌗

It’s very very easy to use. Apart from the focus, it’s an all automatic point n’ shoot. Since the focus is divided up into three zones, it doesn’t require a brain surgeon to figure out what setting to use.

One of the quirks is most definitely what I mentioned earlier, how it resets the focus distance once you close the clamshell up. I fucking hate it. I’ve lost several good shots over the years by forgetting to set the focus again after closing it and opening it up again.

Minolta AF-C⌗

I’ve not owned the Minolta AF-C for as long, but I’ll do my best to give a short summary over its specifications, quirks and quality.

Build and functions⌗

Unlike the Olympys XA2, the Minolta AF-C is definitely not built like a tank. It feels significantly more plasticky and some parts of it can sometimes feel a bit loose and creaky.

Also unlike its counterpart, it’s not a clamshell design. It features a downward sliding door to protect the lens and the viewfinder. Unlike the XA2, the door feels very flimsy and the little “lens cap” that retracts when pulling it down has gotten stuck on me a few times.

It has a very big advantage over the XA2 in its autofocus system. It uses an IR blaster and receiver in some very smart way to find its focus, which means it isn’t dependent on light as it instead works similarily to the bio sonar that bats use to navigate, but with IR light instead of echoes.

The downside comes at what speeds of film you can use. Just like the XA2, it lacks DX coding and you set the ISO manually on the front of the camera. There are two models of the AF-C. The most common one is capped at an ISO of 400, which means you won’t be able to shoot higher speed films and will also not be able to push regular films like HP5+. There is, however, another model of it that comes with an ISO-cap of 1000, a fairly odd number to cap it at, as there is no way to choose 800. I own one of each model and wouldn’t recommend the ISO 400 to most people, as being able to shoot higher speeds is very important, at least for me. I always tend to push my film and shoot at higher speeds.

Lens & photos⌗

The lens of the AF-C is quite capable. One thing that pulls it down, however, is that all my photos tend to come out slightly underexposed. I shot this roll at ISO 1000 and developed it as per ISO 800, but adjusted the time for the extra quarter of a stop.

A simple snapshot from when I got parked in by a truck.

If we take a closer look at the photo, there is quite a lot of detail. The detail that’s missing is most likely from the push processing.

I don’t have a lot of complaints apart from the apparent dim exposures I got, but that could also be due to user error when correcting for the extra 200 ISO points between 800 and 1000. I have however heard from other people online that this is a “problem” (in quotation marks as it can easily be adjusted for when developing).

Darkness capabilities⌗

I don’t have a lot to say, as I actually haven’t tested it out with the flash on. It does however have a flash accessory that just like the XA2 takes two double A batteries. Mine works and I’m sure it’s on par or at least somewhat on par with the XA2’s flash.

With a max ISO of 400, you won’t be doing much indoors or evening photography. Hence my recommendation to specifically look for an ISO 1000 model. Since it seems to underexpose most shots, most ISO 1000 shots come out as being metered for ISO 1200-1400 or so. This means that its low light capabilities actually extend quite far beyond the otherwise somewhat limiting max ISO of 1000. This also means that the ISO 400 version of the camera isn’t that far off from ISO 800 in real life use. You do however have to take this into account when developing.

It also holds the advantage of sporting an f2.8 lens as compared to the XA2’s f3.5 maximum aperture.

Ergonomics⌗

Being a bit bigger than the XA2, the ergonomics are automatically a bit better. Unlike the XA2’s touch button for the shutter, the AF-C sports an actual button that’s much more satisfying to click and also much easier to tell when the photo will actually be taken.

When you hold the AF-C in the hand, the decent enough ergonomics are kind of overshadowed by the flimsy feel of it, though. The viewfinder is large and bright however, and features framelines to make composing easier.

Ease of use and quirks⌗

It’s extremely easy to use. Being an all automatic camera with automatic exposure and autofocus, the only thing you need to set is the ISO. After that, you literally just point and shoot.

If you half press the shutter button, it locks the focus and a green LED lights up in the corner of the viewfinder. After that you can move the camera around and compose your shot with the focus set at whatever subject you’re shooting.

There are two significant quirks. The first being the underexposure of most shots, which is easily fixed. The other is sadly that the light seals seem to be of quite bad quality. I brought the first AF-C I bought with me to Slovenia for a trip and when I got the scans back from the lab (I only do B/W at home), they all looked like this:

A restaurant on the outskirts of Ljubljana, covered in light leaks.

I bought two working AF-C’s (I bought the ISO 400 version at first and then got my hands on the ISO 1000 model) and got two broken ones from a fellow analogue shooter. On top of this, I bought a data back for it on the Swedish equivalent to eBay. ONE, and I repeat, one (1) of these film doors had its light seals intact. The rest had light leaks. If you buy one, count on having to replace the light seals.

Conclusion⌗

They’re both very capable cameras. If I were to go for one of them, I have the most experience and feel the most at home with my Olympus XA2. It’s a bit smaller, the lens is amazing and it’s built like a tank.

That being said, I don’t shy away from grabbing the Minolta AF-C, mostly due to the autofocus. I’ve run a few rolls through mine and I’ve only missed the focus once or twice. The autofocus system on it is truly excellent, and I’ve lost way more shots due to it resetting its focus every time you close it up.

I’d honestly give these two cameras a draw. They’re both EXCELLENT choices for cheap point n’ shoots, but for the novice I’d stay away from the Minolta AF-C due to its bad light seals.