Ideal digital camera.....for old farts.

<p>I guess my perspective is that if someone produced this, I wouldn't bother to buy it. My Canon cameras allow me to set to "M", and without taking my eye away from the viewer to set aperture, shutter speed, iso, pop the flash and focus the lens. That's good enough for me, and would mean I'm not a buyer for whoever might produce this body.</p>

<p>And, BTW, I'm defintely old enough to qualify for the "old fart" badge of honor.</p>

<p>That is what I want <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=7150947">Francisco Salaquanda</a>.....I would buy it.</p>

<p>For this old fart, the perfect solution (had it worked) a number of years ago would have been a 35mm cartridge based sensor insert, then I could have used all of my my favorite bodies and lenses. Unfortunately, it was a sham!</p>

<p>New tech cobbled onto old tech seldom works as well as hoped. It was tried with the earliest dSLRs built on Nikon 35mm film bodies. A digital camera built from the ground up as a digital camera is more likely to provide satisfactory performance, even with the type of minimalist old school interface folks occasionally express a desire for.</p>

<p>Personally I'd like to see Nikon retool the V1, rather than dumping it altogether. Add a simple yet versatile control interface comparable to the Ricoh GRD, GX100 or GXR, but keep the same basic body design which is compact, solid and feels comparable to some 35mm compact film cameras. But I don't particularly need or want aperture or focus rings on lenses - with a well designed camera everything essential can be operated with the right hand while the left just steadies the camera other than when operating the zoom ring.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What would you want if you could have your perfect digital camera?<br />Being a old fart with mainly film knowledge this would be my wish list camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Personally, I think I've about found mine. The Canon EOS 7D...</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />A metal body, with a canon FD mount.<br />A dial to set the asa, another dial on top of the body to set the shutter speed. The F-stop would be set by the lens of course. A match need type exposure meter, not coupled in any way.<br />Basically a digital Canon F1........with a full frame chip.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>With the exception of the FD mount (Canon left that behind 25 years ago when they developed the EF mount), everything you mention can be done with a modern DSLR. The match-needle may not look exactly like you recall, but there is absolutely nothing preventing you from putting the camera in full-manual mode, and making all your selections yourself.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />I hate menus or any other play things on cameras........just a camera that lets me photograph what I want, how I want it to look. <br />Oh yes a shutter that fires when I push the button, not when the camera decides its right.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you think using a modern DSLR is all about menus and button pushing to get things right, you could not me more wrong. Yes, DSLRs do have a plethora of menus, but in the vast majority of cases, once you've sorted them, you rarely need to go back to them. Maybe at the start of a shoot, to tweak some things, but rarely during a shoot. I shoot birds quite a lot, and I can't recall the last time I actually delved into the menus on my 7D in the middle of a shoot. Nearly everything I need is available from the camera controls, sometimes with a single button press to go in,then out of the setting mode. It is very simple once you've done it.</p>

<p>That's not to say you don't use the display, you will, to review your shots, and to check things like the battery life remaining.</p>

<p>As for taking the shot, the delay of a DSLR is no worse than that of a mechanical SLR. I went to the 7D for that reason, my P&S digital had a mind of its own when it came to making the shot.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br /><br />I dislike plastic cameras with plastic lens.....and one that everything is automatic.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Frankly, today's industrial plastics are very good, quite good enough to maintain the registration distance for an SLR. Plastics are used in some lens manufacture, but not, so far as I know, in the optics of any major manufacturer lens. There's absolutely nothing preventing one from putting a $500 DSLR on a $13,000 lens...</p>

<p>Of course, if you insist on a metal chassis, you'll need to pony up for the more expensive lines of cameras.</p>

<p>No DSLR that I'm aware of forces you to let the camera do it all. They often have modes that do this, but if you want to go it alone, there's nothing preventing you from using Sunny 16 or a CdS light meter with your DSLR...</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><br />I like to be THE photographer when I photograph.<br /><br />Am I the only one?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I should think not! But "being the Photographer" is a LOT MORE than saying that one made all the settings themselves, or worked without menus, etc. There are many good and great photographers who embrace the DSLR, and create great photos with it. I'm sure many use some of the "automatic" settings at least occasionally, because it gets them the result they want or need at that particular time.</p>

<p>There's no profit in selling a stripped-down DSLR, no matter what mount. You still have to provide the sensor, and the chip (computer) to process the sensor data and write it to a card, plus other functions, so any cost saving would be minimal. Even if there was a substantial savings, I doubt there would be a lot of takers. Everyone says they don't need or want video, and for some I'm sure it is 100% true, but for most, having that extra feature that doesn't get in the way is a great asset.</p>

<p>(Some years ago, I was involved with a small European car club, and the die-hard masses were clamoring for a "stripper" version of one of the cars, to harken back to the days when power everything wasn't even an option. Well, the maker was persuaded, and a few of them leaked out, but overall, it was a tremendous flop, because it was a dead end. You could have the stripper, or the fully-optioned car, but you couldn't "upgrade" anything on the stripper to get someplace in between. And, the "die hards" who clamored the loudest still didn't buy them...)</p>

 

<p>As a longtime member of the Old Fart's Club, all I want is a larger viewfinder image in my 5d2.</p>

<p>I could see a digital body being simplified without all the menu system as a sort of Holga-ist or retro-grade item. On more occasions then I want to remunerate I've had the camera setup wrong and wound up with something like small files when I wanted raw ones or a particular white balance. This happens usually from either rushing, or forgetfulness, a common old fart syndrome. What I most dislike about certain cameras is the plethora of buttons that can be activated inadvertently by ones hand. So a simple straightforward digital camera, limited buttons, with of course a 100% real viewfinder would be something I'd be interested in. So in the vernacular of us old farts I'd say cut the crap.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>As I stated this was about what I would like to see in a camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>... and yet you started out by asking...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What would you want if you could have your perfect digital camera?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>... presumably for old farts, from the title of the thread. So were you <em>asking</em> fellow old fart(esse)s, or were you <em>telling</em> us? Does your query have right and wrong answers? I didn't think so at first, but apparently my answer was wrong.</p>

<p>In answering, I tried to point out that there is ALREADY a fully manual, metal camera hiding inside the (upper-tier) metal-bodied dSLRs, and you can put the old manual focus lenses on them if you wish. I personally find it easy to ignore buttons and settings I don't care to use. What does the mountain skier setting do on my 40D? I haven't a clue, and that doesn't bother me. I know what M means (and also Av and Tv), and that's enough.</p>

<p>I also pointed out the old-fart benefit to high tech plastics. (They are light and easy for gimps like us to carry.) I didn't point out the old-fart benefit to auto-focus, being that many of us don't have the eagle eyes we had when we were young.</p>

<p>I honestly don't understand why people get so hot under the collar about cameras with too many features. If you don't like a feature, just don't use it! Heck, my car has an ashtray and a cigarette lighter, and yet.... I DON'T SMOKE! I don't send pissy letters to the auto manufacturers that they should produce cars without ashtrays for people like me, and I don't bemoan on automobile forums that there's no car without an ashtray. So I guess I just don't get it.</p>

<p>Anyway, the plastic body "problem" is easy to solve. Solution: Don't buy a plastic body. Buy a metal one instead.</p>

<p>Sorry Sarah........I was not trying to offend anyone. Just stating what I would love in MY idea digital camera.<br />I figured maybe someone else would like the same, maybe not?<br /><br />It is clear that most want auto everything........thats fine, I do not.<br /><br /><br /></p>

"It is clear that most want auto everything......"

 

That's not even close to what people have actually been saying, but since you seem to have little interest in others' views, it's probably not worth the effort of explaining them again.

<p>Russ, FAIW, the Canon EOS 5D (the original one) is very good at being a basic camera -- no built in flash, a minimum of auto modes, etc. It seems to be built for people like us who just want the camera to be a box and sensor with a controllable shutter. It's made of metal, too. The new 6D seems to be another basic camera that might fill that bill -- with better imaging capabilities.</p>

<p>...I put my 30D on manual and just shoot away, but in saying that, my Mamamiya (sic)645e, and it's lenses (sic) are a delight to me; as it's a basic MF camera though, it would be nice to have a digital back but I'm too much of a tight arse too expend that sort of money...that's my personal choice.</p>

<p>"I dislike plastic cameras with plastic lens....."<br>

Solution? Spend more money. You said you appreciate Hasselblad, so you know you get what you pay for.<br>

"and one that everything is automatic."<br>

Only the cheapest and oldest P&S cameras can be described this way. <br>

"I like to be THE photographer when I photograph. Am I the only one?"<br>

Pretty inflammatory statement on Photo.net given the company we keep.<br>

"Oh yes a shutter that fires when I push the button, not when the camera decides its right."<br>

Do you <em>really </em>believe the camera makes that decision?<br>

"What would you want if you could have your perfect digital camera?"<br>

My idea of a perfect digital camera would be one that I never need to replace. One that I could build a genuine affection for. One that I could use for the rest of my life and reflect fondly upon thirty years from now as I recall how it accompanied me on all my remaining adventures. I would love to be able to 'modernize' this body at various times with new sensors as they become available but not have to replace it. I have a real aversion to discarding things that still function and contributing to the wanton consumerism that is the modern world. My Minolta SRT 202 still functions as new and is the camera of choice for both my daughters. That body is<em> loved</em>. I am very fond of my D2x and am slowly warming to my D700, but I fear neither will stand the test of time that I may have left as I approach serious fartdom.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Although a lot of young farts use them as well, the Leica rangefinder digital camera has the manual operation simplicity you want, but you need to have vintage Leica or V-C optics, deep pockets and/or not worried about cost. If I had a batch of FD lenses I might bite the bullet, brave the technological knowledge acquisition hurdles and purchase a Canon lens adapter and a NEX-7 or an eventual Sony FF mirrorless camera, or something equivalent. Some automation won't impede your photographic approach, whether or not you learn to override it.</p>

<p>Great Subject! Think about it all the time. I'm 75 this month. I just bought 5 bags of Dektol and 5 bags of D76......<br>

Will keep me in stock for a couple of months. I've used several digital cameras over the last few years. But they do not satisfy me like enjoyment of the 35, TLR, and Large Format cameras I use.<br>

What I miss in digi-photography is the hands-on, and hand-made aspect. Nothing like lining up a shot on ground glass. Nothing like watching a print come up in the darkroom.<br>

For this old fart, computer photography is amusing, but it ain't the real thing!</p>

Like Gene, I shoot b&w film in small and large format. It's what I have wanted to do from the start. I also own and use occasionally a

d70, but rarely print, or have printed by a lab, digital photographs. Still, to an extent, the d70 satisfies the desire for taking pictures.

My favorite 35mm film camera is the f100, so my ideal digital camera would be the current nikon dslr closest in feel and operation to

the f100. It's probably more a comment on my skills than on cameras themselves, but late model cameras often make better

exposure-making decisions, finer distinctions, than I do. As someone with so-so--well, poor--eyesight since birth, I love auto-focus

capability.

<blockquote>A dial to set the asa, another dial on top of the body to set the shutter speed. The F-stop would be set by the lens of course. A match need type exposure meter, not coupled in any way.<br />

<p>I hate menus or any other play things on cameras........just a camera that lets me photograph what I want, how I want it to look.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Minolta 7D have dials more than any digital and film camera<br /> - Exposure mode dial.<br /> - Dial for Exposure compensation and flash compensation and also in a different values.<br /> - Focus area switch.<br /> - Focus mode dial.<br /> - Metering mode Dial.<br /> - Bottom for quick ISO selection.<br /> - Dial for WB selection.<br /> - Dial for Drive mode.</p>

<p>What it can be more than this?. Harry, Amazon still have one in a good condition for about $600.</p>

<p>Museeb - You're pretty much describing my Nikon D300.</p>

<p>Mark</p>

<p> </p>