A dSLR that works like a film SLR?

<p>Mark, could you post a photo of the Nikon F1, I've never seen one.</p>

<p>Ummm, no, I suppose not. I could probably post a photo of a Nikon F, but not a <em>Nikon F1</em>, huh? Ray, my deepest and most sincere apologies for fuddling up my model numbers. I can see it is a serious faux pas, huh? Boy howdy, you really got me there sir. I promise I'll be more careful with with my model numbers. It'd be a shame to confuse anyone, wouldn't it? I thank you Ray for being generous enough to point out my error!</p>

<p>@ Mr. Kampo--<br>

Yes, good advice. Good article there although I'm not just now switching to digital. I got rid of my film cameras in 1999. I have no problem at all embracing the bits, and digital photography conceptually. I just am not terribly fond of the digital cameras I have. I think my question has been a bit misunderstood to be one of not liking digital. That's not it at all. I like it just fine. I don't like the <em>specific gear</em> that I have. It doesn't suit my aesthetic for how machinery ought to work. It was just an inquiry to see if there was something out there I hadn't been aware of that would be more to my TASTE. Turns out there is, but it's miles out of my price range. Just my luck.</p>

<p>Mark, I will also wait with you for this mythical digital camera. I fear that Lex is right, and we will never see a DSLR that is simple/traditional/not ridiculously expensive. But I keep casting my eye in the direction of Cosina or Zenit, hoping that they can fill this niche. I wouldn't mind if it was a rangefinder either; a digital Zeiss Ikon at half the price of the Leica would be tempting...</p>

<p>You can make the new digital cameras as simple as you want. Just because it has lots of menus and settings doesn't mean you have to use them, but it would be to your benefit to learn them at some point. You don't have to learn it all at once, you learn it over time. I got a 20D 4 years ago and was totally ignorant to digital cameras, but now I know my 40D like the back of my hand and can make it do anything I want it to, without opening a manual. I can even tell my friend how to set up his camera over the phone without having it in front of me. My point is, that although digital cameras seem very overwhelming at first, you shouldn't resist the change. Embrace it and be eager to learn more. With all the new digital cameras and features, photography is progressing faster than ever, and if you refuse to jump on the ship, it will be very hard to stay up to par. It would be like a farmer refusing to use a tractor b/c it has too many controls, so he sticks with the horse.</p>

<p>But to answer the question about a simple DSLR, no, there isn't one except the M9, which you mentioned, and its so expensive b/c there isn't another camera like it, so the people that really want it have to pay the price b/c there is no alternative.</p>

<p>@ David Scott-<br>

Ok then---now I know I am not crazy.<br>

<em>Note to self: Go find out about Cosina and Zenit.</em></p>

<p>Mark,<br>

I used a D50 until I wore it out and now use a D90.</p>

<p>I run the camera manually except for AF. The lack of focus aids and the fact that I shoot moving subjects rules that out. But I pick WB according to the lighting, mode M, spot metering, auto ISO off, automatic image preview off, beep off. I will change focus modes from AF-S to AF-C and I sometimes use points other than the center one, but almost always use single-point focus. I even (listen for the gasps) shoot .jpeg.</p>

<p>I don't know if that is what you're looking for; it's how I get the camera's automatic stuff out of the way where I find it more distracting or inconsistent than useful. You're stuck having to move from aperture ring to button-spin combo with the D50, but after a bit I forgot about that. I had a MF Pentax before the D50 so I was also used to an aperture ring.</p>

<p>I have a few ideas which may fly, perhaps not. First, I agree completely w/Mark. Second, I'm going to stick my neck out of my shell a bit further and venture a guess that could be entirely offbase, is it possible that there is a basic age difference between the thought pattens swirling around here? My position in siding w/Mark is that I feel as he does, in fact I will take a step further in asking, what's wrong with simplicity? Those of us that have managed to endure 'til now do not have the same skill set(generally speaking)as 2-3 generations later. Many of you will see that catch up to you some time in the future. Is anyone getting my drift here? I have come to the digital age kicking and screaming because it took something away from me without providing adequate return. Granted, I'm still trying but it is frustrating to see children master things beyond my level, a level that requires extreme dedication to learning a process that is foreign to my mind. I worked in a pro lab and have shot seriously since 'bout '66. I could do things with film and paper that I have yet to master in a digital environment and my K/M 7D is 4-5 yrs. old. I have taken tech school Photoshop, I read extensively, and support my lack of knowledge with numerous technical books, yet I still stumble along. If my idea is correct here this is parallel to authors who write how to's on computer use claiming if they can do it anyone can, except they forget to realize the idea I've presented above, age. Don't get me wrong here, it is not that I can not do this I just need a different teaching method than is being popularly provided. I suspect that there will be comment on this and in fact am looking forward to it but remember this is not the whole story, of course!! Terr.</p><div></div>

<p>I agree that simplicity is a good thing, but you can make today's advanced DSLRs as simple as you want. Just ignore all the extra features.</p>

<p>"I agree that simplicity is a good thing, but you can make today's advanced DSLRs as simple as you want. Just ignore all the extra features."<br>

-------<br>

Yup. That's a useful workaround. But, it doesn't address the underlying virtue of simplicity, or the potential evils of complexity. All things being equal, a complex system will have a higher failure rate, it will have more inherent bugs, and often involves sacrificing fundamentals to achieve the complexity.<br>

The aesthetic of simplicity isn't that less is less, it is that under the right intentions, less is more.</p>

<p>@ Terri---<br>

Ha ha - - yeah, I am a very old geezer, true enough! But as a retired engineer, I can still usually find my way through the toys - I just find a lot of it is tedious and not enjoyable.</p>

<p>mark: Short answer: If you want a film camera, go buy a film camera and spend an extra $200 on a scanner. Everything you want, including digital output to share online. </p>

<p>Longer answer: To some degree, digital is always going to have more options & settings. It's the nature of the beast. FWIW, I found the D40 to be very easy to use. Select A or S, go shoot. </p>

<p>I now shoot a D300, bit more to set up. I also still shoot with a couple of FM2n's, a Canonet QL17, a Holga, and I actually use the workflow I recommended in "Short answer" above. I develop all my own B&W and scan it. I don't print. If I need prints I send out the scans to be printed.</p>

<p>Both workflows are enjoyable (to me). :)</p>

<p>I guess I'll add in my opinion here as well mark. I also grew up on fully manual cameras that make you slow down and double check everything. A couple of things really helped me.</p>

<p>First, I turned off the auto-review, so I'm not tempted to check every single picture that I take. I think that this instantaneous feedback takes away from time that many people should just keep shooting.</p>

<p>Second, I really only think about the basics with my canon 20D (focus, aperture, shutter and ISO).</p>

<p>Other than that I'm not really sure about what you're trying to say about simplicity. I bought a DSLR so that I would be able to have control of the many variables that there are in photography.</p>

<p>In terms of the potential evils of complexity you said</p>

<blockquote>

<p>a more compex system will have a higher failure rate</p>

</blockquote>

<p>While I understand what you mean by this, and I believe it to be true for mechanical devices (such as vehicles) most of the complexity today in cameras has been added to the electronic / computing side of things, the basic mechanics of SLR's has remained pretty constant. There is still a lens, shutter, aperture etc.</p>

<p>In my opinion if you think your nikon is too complicated, check out some older used canon dslr's to start. My experience with the nikon DSLR's that i've used is that they are only run by menus on the back of the camera and it drove me nuts. My Canon 20D has screen on the top that is for showing shutter/fstop/iso. All of these can be controlled using a few dials.</p>

<p>Actually, I've seen numerous sites for several yrs. now displaying a basic division between those that naturally attune to computers, digital cameras, cell phones, et cetera and another group who do not and the afore mentioned never seem to understand the nature of the complaint voiced by the latter. But they do defend their position with vigor. My idea, if(and I believe many are)they are as they claim why not teach those who have yet to embrace the learning fully? Now, that would be a worthy challenge! Mark replies, "alot of it is tedious...". Then Erik adjoins with the one feature I truly love, the review. I no longer need to go back another time when something was not as I wanted it. Yet he finds review a distraction. The simple, yes simple, question still remains, why so complex? Mark's analysis is spot on and something I would expect from an engineer. I believe part of the answer lies where we find it in other machines and devices. If it is not necessary as a safety priority or as a design feature of the bottom line why take the effort to build something with simplicity when complicated is so easy, menu after menu, after menu? And if you truly think you need these features to produce quality then I would assume(I know the caveat)you think today's photography is head and shoulders above the preceding decades. As it plays out I do not think we have to concern ourselves that simple will be on those menus anytime soon. It simply would be to great a challenge for today's manufacturers to rise to, beside they sell all they can make as is. In addition, the suggestion to use a film camera and a scanner although solving one problem will present others which digital has eliminated. A major one is finding a decent processor and it will become more problematic as the years go on. For those who process their own which I highly recommend chemicals will phase out soon as well. Another difficulty, film has become more expensive and the selection less extensive, it really is no solution for the long term. I won't even bring in the environmental issue!</p><div></div>

<p>A starter dslr camera could be difficult for a film user, however, I found this aspect to be fascinating. I don't use Nikon. However, I set the ISO manually, set the white balance as auto, always shoot RAW in aperture priority during the day and shutter priority at low light situations. Trust me, it is not that different when you are only playing with two or three variables!</p>

<p>Not sure about the M9's but the M8's have 2 menus, the one you get to with the Menu button (more long term settings) and the set button (the sorts of things you change quickly). To some extent is is unavoidable, the digitals just have more things to set (iso, image type, and so on). But there is no avoiding the higher complexity with digital. But you CAN stay with film. Nothing simpler than a Leica M (film) such as the M2 or M3. I like the M8 though, a little more complex but not bad.</p>

<p>Among a lot of cameras that I have and a lot more that I know, I find that the film SLR Maxxum 7 made by Konica-Minolta in the last millenium is the most difficult camera to master it all. It was and it is still one of my most favorite cameras but after many years, I still dont remember well everything about it. It is obvious (to me) that the Maxxum 7 is more complicate than many DSLRs. I may be wrong but I believe it is the first SLR that has a big LCD in the back. It has a lot of dials, wheels, buttons, switches, and menus</p>

<p>Film and Digital SLR can be very similar too. Like the Maxxum 7 and 7D, Nikon F5 and D1, Pentax *ist and *istD. We dont have to (and should not try to) know everything, remember everything about our cameras but instead just concentrate on what we really need. If we think something is important, we 'd feel ok to spend time learning it.</p>

<p>Just look at what we are doing everyday. They are all in a similar situation. We read the newspaper everyday, but we read only our favorite columns and ignore the rest. We watch our fav TV shows but we skip the commercials, and turn it off before the next show starts. We dont pay attention to all the posters on the highways, mainly read the traffic signs only. We dont master all the software installed in our computers. Definitely, we are not trying to enter all the site on the internet (mainly go to photo.net, I guess). Even I go to my fav restaurant a lot, I never remember all the "menus"; just stick to some favorite items ....</p>

<p>Mark, as you've noticed, digital photography is a more computer-oriented discipline than film photography. There's no way around it. The "desktop" replaces the darkroon.</p>

<p>I'd suggest that you do one of the following.</p>

<p>(a) continue to shoot film and enjoy the process with which you're familiar, or<br>

(b) roll up your sleeves and dive into a big learning curve, or<br>

© do a little of both and learn the digital side at your own pace.</p>

<p>Digital WILL be worth the investment, but you'll have to learn a bit before it becomes intuitive. Good luck!</p>

 

<p>As you have found out Less is really More so you would have to pay for it accordingly.</p>

"The "desktop" replaces the darkroon"

 

I used to have my own wet darkroom but for vacation shots etc. I would just drop the film off at the lab and pick up my 4x6 prints later. .I do the same with digital. i just drop the media card off at the lab and later pick up my 4x6 inch vacation shots. People may now chose to work on their own photos in Photoshop since it it easier than setting up a wet darkroom, but I wonder why so many people insist that they have to if they shoot digital. .

<p>Mark,</p>

<p>If you're interested in finding a dSLR that is easier to use than your D50 I'd suggest looking for a D300 to play with. I don't know about any other Nikon dSLR because I've never owned one.</p>

<p>I'm an electrical engineer. Graduated in 1978 and purchased my SLR Nikon FE a month or two after graduation. I used the FE for 30 years. Shot in aperture priority mode 99% of the time. Had to manual focus and manually set the ISO. In 2008 I purchased my first dSLR, a Nikon D300.</p>

<p>I waited til the D300 came out because I read about the complicated menu systems on earlier models. I also wanted to be able to use my old AI lenses. I kept the D300 in program mode for the first 6 months with no real problems. I then switched to aperture priority mode. I pretty much spot meter and spot focus most of the time. I'm never quite sure which control changes the focus or meter mode until I try it.</p>

<p>The front (lens side) thumbwheel controls the aperture. The ISO button on top, in conjunction with the rear thumbwheel controls the ISO. The expose comp button on top in conjunction with the rear thumbwheel controls the EV. I pretty much don't change anything else. When I do choose to review some photos in-camera, I sometimes mash the control wheel do-hicky on the back and end up with 4 previews, the histogram, or some other nonsense I wasn't looking for. It's not too bad to set back the way I want. I have yet to read the Nikon manual.</p>

<p>Where I really appreciate the under-the-hood complexity of the menu system is when I purchased my SB-900 flash. I drop into the menus, set up the in-camera flash as commander, set the flash EV, etc. Then I hold the flash by hand, hang it from the kitchen cupboards, etc. No wires, no muss, no fuss. I did have to open the manual to learn how to do this.</p>

<p>I also use my manual focus 50/1.4 AI lens. Had to dig into the menu to set it up, but once done it's simple to use.</p>

<p>95% of the time I don't need to dive into the menus, but they sure are nice (at least on the D300) when I need them.</p>

<p>Good luck - Mark C.</p>