Old fashioned digital camera?

[ernesto]

I wonder how a few people bleating on a forum (and I count myself as one of those bleaters) measures up against the real market for such cameras?

And as everyone has different needs just as they do with current digital models would there need to be a whole load of different models, with of course Canon and Nikon producing most of them to keep the internet arguments going.

Anyway, put me down for an OM10 with digital sensor as that fits my needs perfectly...

 

[Phil V]

If I had my x100s with the same aperture and shutter speed controls and the Exposure compensation dial replaced with an ISO dial I'd be happy. I'd like to keep the back LCD screen for image review but other than that get rid of everything else!

Not sure that would infringe on many patents, it sounds like most of us are after a simpler digital camera not a more complex hi-tech one?

How about lifting the SS dial to alter the ISO?

In an ideal world I'd love a digital F1 and T90, so a 1Dx and then a simple manual only digital would be great. I'm happy with a front control wheel to alter the aperture, and if we're having an AV mode a shift button to use the wheel set exp comp.

 

[HoppyUK]

If I had my x100s with the same aperture and shutter speed controls and the Exposure compensation dial replaced with an ISO dial I'd be happy. I'd like to keep the back LCD screen for image review but other than that get rid of everything else!

Not sure that would infringe on many patents, it sounds like most of us are after a simpler digital camera not a more complex hi-tech one?

I would like something like this too, but four main dials - shutter speed, aperture, ISO and comp - all with an A position for automation at will.

One idea that I think would really simplify even the most complex cameras would be a DIY menu - and would be easy to implement I think. Instead of the endless string of record, playback, AF, metering and heck-knows-what-else menus, I'd like just three options to customise myself - Essentials, Useful Stuff, and Other Sh!te.

Along the same lines, I'd like to be able to assign my own custom functions to every button, with a tiny back-lit LCD next to each one so I know what's what, and can re-assign anything any time.

Nobody ever uses every camera function, but we all have different priorities, and mine change according to what I'm shooting.

 

[fracster]

One idea that I think would really simplify even the most complex cameras would be a DIY menu - and would be easy to implement I think. Instead of the endless string of record, playback, AF, metering and heck-knows-what-else menus, I'd like just three options to customise myself - Essentials, Useful Stuff, and Other Sh!te.

Along the same lines, I'd like to be able to assign my own custom functions to every button, with a tiny back-lit LCD next to each one so I know what's what, and can re-assign anything any time.

Nobody ever uses every camera function, but we all have different priorities, and mine change according to what I'm shooting.

What a bleddy good idea...........

 

[HoppyUK]

What a bleddy good idea...........

The custom menus thing need only be software/firmware thing wouldn't it? I don't know, but couldn't the likes of Magic Lantern have a go at that?

 

[fracster]

The custom menus thing need only be software/firmware thing wouldn't it? I don't know, but couldn't the likes of Magic Lantern have a go at that?

#

You would think so.

I don`t believe that most people use the myriad of menu options, I sure don`t. So it would be good, for me, to have a simplified version that was easier to change and/or access.

 

[HoppyUK]

#

You would think so.

I don`t believe that most people use the myriad of menu options, I sure don`t. So it would be good, for me, to have a simplified version that was easier to change and/or access.

The thing is, a lot of the regular menu options I want are under different tabs - in record, playback, AF settings or CFns or whatever - so you have to go in, scroll down (hoping you've remembered correctly it's under tab option 2 and not 4, or was it 5? ) and find whatever it is. Then for the next thing, you have to come out of that menu and into another, and so on and so on. I just want all the regular stuff that I use in one easy place.

Nikon has a Recent Settings tab that's along the right lines, saves your last 20 menu selections under one heading. It just needs a more customisable version of that really. Edit: I guess it's also pretty similar to Canon's My Menu set up. Perhaps I'd better take a closer look at that! LOL

 

[Phil V]

The thing is, a lot of the regular menu options I want are under different tabs - in record, playback, AF settings or CFns or whatever - so you have to go in, scroll down (hoping you've remembered correctly it's under tab option 2 and not 4, or was it 5? ) and find whatever it is. Then for the next thing, you have to come out of that menu and into another, and so on and so on. I just want all the regular stuff that I use in one easy place.

Nikon has a Recent Settings tab that's along the right lines, saves your last 20 menu selections under one heading. It just needs a more customisable version of that really. Edit: I guess it's also pretty similar to Canon's My Menu set up. Perhaps I'd better take a closer look at that! LOL

The My Menu setup doesn't hold enough functions for me. And I'm not a tinkerer.

I don't even take advantage of the C1-C3 set ups (I've tried, I forget what I thought I needed them for)

 

[Richard King]

MF with a digital back?

 

[woof woof]

Why is it so difficult for the geniuses/genii of the camera design world to create a 'proper' old fashioned style camera with a digital sensor?...

I've been waiting for two camera...

A DSLR that can be a direct replacement for my SLR's.
A compact digital that can replace the RF's and quality compact cameras I used to own.

To date neither has happened to my satisfaction. I had high hopes for MFT but I'm getting as frustrated with Panasonic as I was with Canon and I've pretty much accepted that cameras just aren't going and will now never go in the direction I want and my ideal DSLR and quality compact will never exist.

That's mostly why I've pretty much stopped spending money on photography, I'm just so disappointed with the bodies and lenses coming to market and these days all I buy is cheap legacy lenses to use on my G1.

 

[ndwgolf]

Just buy a Leica M (240) its old looking and digital..............and arguably takes the best looking pictures in the world

 

[Steve Smith]

and arguably takes the best looking pictures in the world

I'm sure plenty of people would like to argue with that!


Steve.

 

[ndwgolf]

I'm sure plenty of people would like to argue with that!


Steve.

Lets hear them Steve

 

[Cagey75]

It was the retro look that attracted me to the X100s over it's competitors. Or at least one of the reasons, for a more casual side camera. Plus all the reviews stating it was pretty handy with high ISO and had great AF speed. And that hybrid VF is just great.

Though I find it still a bit sluggish in low light situations, especially with 'macro' on, the ISO performance statements were all true. It really is remarkable. I can happily stick this into Auto ISO, set it from 200-6400, with a min shutter speed of 1/125th and just go shoot! Just change the aperture as required. Otherwise simply assigning the ISO to the Fn button when shooting full manual, I have all I really need on the body pretty much, just a quick look at the screen to change ISO every now and then when desired - couldn't be simpler.

 

[Laudrup]

Just buy a Leica M (240) its old looking and digital..............and arguably takes the best looking pictures in the world

It's not even going to take the 'best looking pictures' in the Leica range, never mind the world.

 

[ernesto]

And I am not worthy of a £5,000+ camera and lenses (or at least I have other things I prefer to spend it on)

 

[Richard King]

It is the photographer working the camera that determines if a photograph is a good one or not. The next biggest variable is the lens, then the qualities of the film or sensor. A good photographer will pretty much shoot anything and take an excellent shot

 

[robhooley167]

and arguably takes the best looking pictures in the world

What a load of utter rubbish

 

[PMN]

and arguably takes the best looking pictures in the world

Yep, because of course the photographer has sod all to do with the whole image making process...

 

[Laudrup]

Basically Fuji (or Somy) just need to make a full frame autofocus camera that retains usable and smooth manual focus and styled to look like a Leica that costs as close to £1k to £1.5k as possible.

 

[Steve Smith]

A good photographer will pretty much shoot anything and take an excellent shot

Good photographers have been known to take rubbish shots too.

In much the same way as good musicians sometimes play wrong notes... even if they have got a perfectly good Gretsch guitar!


Steve.

 

[Cagey75]

True ^ I think it takes a balance of both, good gear, and good photographer. You don't even have to be good or great, just enthusiastic. I think a lot of full time pros lose that over time.

Only in photography do we see the likes of "I could take same with a cheaper, crappier gear" - You'd not see a musician say "I could play that easily with an Argos guitar" or a builder "Ah sure I would have done the very same with a cheap hammer and rusty nails!" - they just do the job. they get the best tools for the job and just go do it.

 

[PMN]

Good photographers have been known to take rubbish shots too.

In much the same way as good musicians sometimes play wrong notes... even if they have got a perfectly good Gretsch guitar!

Isn't that more to do with being a human being and how we generally learn though rather than being directly related to ability? The more experienced and knowledgable people are the less they screw up (at least usually), but they still screw up every now and then. You might even screw up in different ways; I know I don't usually make the same mistakes now that I did when I started in music 20 years ago because experience has taught me not to make them, but I do occasionally make other mistakes which I learn from and so the whole process continues. I don't really see the process in photography as being any different.

You'd not see a musician say "I could play that easily with an Argos guitar"

You would actually! Most of the serious musicians I know have this philosophy, frankly because they've worked too damned hard to hand most of the credit over to a nice instrument. It very definitely isn't exclusive to photography.

 

[Steve Smith]

You'd not see a musician say "I could play that easily with an Argos guitar"

I gig once or twice a week. Usually with a £1600 Gretsch. Sometimes I take my £70 Squier Telecaster instead.

Either is fine (although the Gretsch suits the music better and it has a Bigsby).

So give me an Argos guitar (whatever that is) and I will gig with it.

Isn't that more to do with being a human being and how we generally learn though rather than being directly related to ability?

Most definitely. I would much rather be a human prone to the odd wrong note than a mechanical, always correct, guitar playing robot.

I know of one local musician who once rehearsed for a month before a gig trying to get it perfect. He played a couple of things wrong which no one else noticed, then didn't play again for three months.


Steve.

 

[PMN]

I know of one local musician who once rehearsed for a month before a gig trying to get it perfect. He played a couple of things wrong which no one else noticed, then didn't play again for three months.

He needs to get a life. Unless there's a reason like a genuine personality disorder (in which case I have every sympathy for the guy) then he's just missing the point completely.

I gig once or twice a week. Usually with a £1600 Gretsch. Sometimes I take my £70 Squier Telecaster instead.

Either is fine (although the Gretsch suits the music better and it has a Bigsby).

So give me an Argos guitar (whatever that is) and I will gig with it.

Exactly. It's the same with sound, the mixing desks I use on my travels range in cost anywhere between a few thousand quid to around a quarter of a million but I still sound like me on all of them...

...Sodding awful...

 

[ernesto]

I gig once or twice a week. Usually with a £1600 Gretsch. Sometimes I take my £70 Squier Telecaster instead.

That's because even lowly Squiers are actually pretty good these days. Just like entry level DSLRs are pretty good.

The difference with something like a guitar is that the critical part (pickup) and the way it plays (setting them up to play as preferred) can be changed.
Would be like taking a cheap camera but swapping out the sensor and fine tuning the cpu, focus speed etc,. so not comparable at all.

 

[PMN]

That's because even lowly Squiers are actually pretty good these days. Just like entry level DSLRs are pretty good.

The difference with something like a guitar is that the critical part (pickup) and the way it plays (setting them up to play as preferred) can be changed.
Would be like taking a cheap camera but swapping out the sensor and fine tuning the cpu, focus speed etc,. so not comparable at all.

Talk about missing the point...

 

[Cagey75]

I gig once or twice a week. Usually with a £1600 Gretsch. Sometimes I take my £70 Squier Telecaster instead.

Either is fine (although the Gretsch suits the music better and it has a Bigsby).

So give me an Argos guitar (whatever that is) and I will gig with it.

Y'see, you missed the point. Of course you'd play well still on the cheapo guitar, better than any of us who can't play well at least [I know all the basic chords, yay] But you won't go announcing you done so great on such a cheap axe, would you? I have never seen a big deal made about a musician playing cheap instruments, yet check youtube and you'll find all these 'Famous photographer, cheap camera' videos.

You've either got a good eye for a photo, and know how to get the best from whatever you're using ... or you don't. The reason they don't use the cheapies more often, is because good or not, it makes life a little tougher to acieve the perfect results.

The tools do matter to a certain extent. Otherwise why not all use a D40 and a 50mm 1.8D?

 

[PMN]

Of course you'd play well still on the cheapo guitar, but you won't go announcing you done so great on such a cheap axe, would you?

You wouldn't see people announcing they played a cheap instrument any less than you'd see them announcing they play an expensive one. Unless they're endorsed by a company and 'have' to advertise what they play it's just their instrument, it doesn't matter whether they openly say it's cheap or expensive.

I really don't understand your point here, not even one tiny little bit. if you get great results from a Squire P Bass, cheapo Shine guitar, Nikon D40, 1100D or anything else on the cheap side then who cares?

 

[Cagey75]

Well you do, because you just said it. A musician doesn't harp on about the gear they use. That WAS my point. And pun intended.

 

[PMN]

That wasn't the point you just made in the post you edited that I quoted.

 

[PMN]

Ah alright, you actually left that bit in. I'll give you that one.

But it still doesn't change the fact I have no idea what point you were trying to make by saying a good player wouldn't advertise the fact they'd played great on a cheap instrument. In my book that shows just how good a player they actually are if they can get such great results from low end gear. I also don't think Steve's missed any point whatsoever, in fact I think he understands the concepts we're discussion absolutely perfectly!

 

[Cagey75]

I edited to change it from D3000 to D40, to make it even oldier ... nothing more. And you should probably read back to where I began my point. Someone else mentioned that experienced photographers can make mistakes just like lesser experienced

I didn't edit anything to change my point.

 

[woof woof]

It is the photographer working the camera that determines if a photograph is a good one or not. The next biggest variable is the lens, then the qualities of the film or sensor. A good photographer will pretty much shoot anything and take an excellent shot

I suppose it depends on what "the shot" is.

I'd like to believe that the kit desn't matter but for some subject matter and shooting situations and conditions it clearly does matter and when the kit matters so will the sensor and the other electronic gubbins.

Fact is that in situations when any kit will do the photographer will make the difference but when the kit matters even the best photographer will not get the shot if he hasn't got the right gear.

 

[PMN]

I didn't edit anything to change my point.

As I just said above when I corrected myself, I know. Calm down.

I mentioned experienced photographers can make mistakes earlier just as anyone experienced in anything can make mistakes. To me this entire thing can be summed up very easily by saying whoever's working the gear is far more important than what the gear actually is. It really is that simple.

 

[Cagey75]

Lol, I'm perfectly calm. I had that post same time as yours so didn't see

Why do these things always go astray when someone mentions a Leica??

 

[PMN]

Lol, I'm perfectly calm. I had that post same time as yours so didn't see

Alright, I'll give you that one as well!

Why do these things always go astray when someone mentions a Leica??

I'm not too sure it's necessarily when a particular brand is mentioned, it's more when people make ridiculous claims that xxx camera takes the best photos in the world. I reckon there should be a worldwide 'shoot with only your phone' day where we put our proper cameras down for an entire day and only shoot with whatever phone we have. It would be interesting to see who came out with what!

Then again there'd probably still be N95 users saying those with an iPhone 4S had an unfair advantage...

 

[ndwgolf]

they just do the job. they get the best tools for the job and just go do it.

thats my point............you dont see Tiger Woods playing with Chinese knock off golf clubs he uses the best there is. Thats why i shoot Leica........the best there is

 

[ernesto]

Talk about missing the point...

The point is not clear enough to miss!. I was just generally commenting on the analogy to a musician and their gear, that is all.

 

[Steve Smith]

Thats why i shoot Leica........the best there is

You are entitled to that opinion.


Steve.