Which DSLR

Hello

 

I am new here so if this post is in the wrong thread please let me know.

 

I am not a beginner in photographic terms - but in digital camera terms.

 

I am not a fan of batteries and screens so would like to know if there are any DSLR cameras that do not rely on any batteries or screens particularly if they are a few years old and can be purchased as a body without lenses (so I can purchase lenses at will ie I am not interested in 55 mm lenses).

 

I know most cameras need batteries for almost everything, rechargeable and small watch type. At most I do not mind a small battery for the light meter if its internal.

 

Ideal would be something I can use manually without too much fuss (ie I can set the fstop and shutter speed manually with a knob and No autofocus and no auto - exposure). No screens.

 

I suppose I want the digital memory without the LCD screen operations. It must be D SLR not simple shoot cameras.

 

I know it might be a tall order - but somebody may have a solution.

I wouldn't think it possible to record digital images except electronically - which means either battery or mains power. Mains would be extremely restrictive, so I think you are stuck with batteries, I'm afraid.

As Tony said, it's an electronic device, so you need power. All digital SLRs have batteries. It's not a big deal; I rarely have to use more than one on a shoot, and it's easy enough to charge them.

 

Re the screen: every DSLR that I have ever seen has an LCD screen. Smaller cameras often require them for controls. Larger ones don't. You need one anyway to look at the histogram, which is an essential tool.

I think to get on with the times, honestly. What you ask for doesn't exist, why it should?

Hello

 

I am new here so if this post is in the wrong thread please let me know.

 

I am not a beginner in photographic terms - but in digital camera terms.

 

I am not a fan of batteries and screens so would like to know if there are any DSLR cameras that do not rely on any batteries or screens particularly if they are a few years old and can be purchased as a body without lenses (so I can purchase lenses at will ie I am not interested in 55 mm lenses).

 

I know most cameras need batteries for almost everything, rechargeable and small watch type. At most I do not mind a small battery for the light meter if its internal.

 

Ideal would be something I can use manually without too much fuss (ie I can set the fstop and shutter speed manually with a knob and No autofocus and no auto - exposure). No screens.

 

I suppose I want the digital memory without the LCD screen operations. It must be D SLR not simple shoot cameras.

 

I know it might be a tall order - but somebody may have a solution.

 

First there is no digital camera without battery yet. I always think you can make the film advance level on the digital camera acting as a generator that create sufficient charge to take one shot. But of course nobody makes it yet.

Now you want no screen then there is no DSLR without the screen although you don't have to use it. There is Leica rangefinder that doesn't have the screen though.

Perhaps someone will make it but are you willing to pay the price? Without all those features it would be more expensive rather than less expensive.

Some kind of battery is always needed to power digital cameras. For an extended photoshoot - continously over a few hours - I usually carry two fully charged batteries (one as a back up just in case the first one runs out). I've very rarely needed the backup.

 

DSLRS (and also mirrorless cameras) need 'setting up' at least once. You need a LCD screen to do this via menus/settings. For example: setting the correct date and time that you may want to have in your digital file info, choosing the digital image file format (RAW/Jpeg) and quality level (resolution) that you want your photos to be stored with in the camera.

 

Having set up your basic preferences once, you can either choose to use menu options and LCD displays when shooting or not. I usually don't. I can manually dial in aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. What I see in the viewfinder tells me all I need to know about the exposure so I can adjust these settings. I can also switch off AF and just use manual focus.

 

There are some digital 'bells and whistles' that are worth having, such as exposure metering modes, exposure compensation, 'burst mode', etc. But it's always your personal choice whether to use these or not. Having set-up your DSLR once via the LCD, you're completely free to use it as a fully manual camera (without ever needing to look at the LCD again).

 

Having said this, you may gradually discover that DSLRs offer some additional and useful options.

 

Modern DSLRs are like all tech (TV's, computers, etc). They offer many more sophisticated 'options' than most people ever need. But you can always choose to use just the 'basics'.

 

I hope this sets your mind at rest:)

 

Mike

I think the "film advance lever" on the Epson RD-1 served that purpose. Not to be the only power to operate the camera, but to add additional power without consuming the battery.

 

Nope it only serves to cock the shutter but the power needed for the capture is still by a battery.

Although there is no such camera but if there is it would be around $10000. I am not sure the OP wants to pay for it.

Every modern digital device requires either a battery or a connection to electrical mains delivering power. Bebu's desire for a digital camera powered by something like the film advance lever on film cameras is shared by some of us, but it's a fantasy. It underestimates the power required by these cameras and overestimates how much can be produced by a half or three-quarter turn of a rather short lever--a crank such as those found on old telephones and emergency flashlights would be more appropriate. Many potentially wonderful photographs may be lost while you're cranking up enough power for a single shot.

 

And you don't like screens either? Perhaps you should avoid digital cameras. Some very fine cameras can now be purchased used, in good condition for ridiculously low prices, and good lenses for not much more. There are still good films available, albeit fewer than in the past.

Remember the outrage when Nikon brought out a professional camera (F3) that required a battery to operate. It had one mechanical setting of 1/80 a second for emergencies.

If you plan to travel there are a lot of small cameras (not DSLRs that I know of) that run on AA batteries which you can find everywhere. No need for chargers, adapter plugs, voltage converters.

If you’ve got the budget, the Leica M10-D is probably as close as you’ll find:

 

Leica M10-D // Leica M-System // Photography - Leica Camera AG

 

OK, its not an SLR, and it does take a battery, but the working controls are all analog, and there’s no LCD.

Yes. But making the shutter to be manually wound saves power to the battery compared to if the shutter was electronically wound.

It does but my idea was to make in generate sufficient power to charge a super capacitor which holds enough charge to do a capture and a write.

Remember the outrage when Nikon brought out a professional camera (F3) that required a battery to operate. It had one mechanical setting of 1/80 a second for emergencies.

I do remember and I was one who thought it was not so good an idea. At the time I owned an F2AS but then I bought the F3 for its motor drive and it grew on me. Now I love the F3 electronically controlled shutter.

Remember the outrage when Nikon brought out a professional camera (F3) that required a battery to operate. It had one mechanical setting of 1/80 a second for emergencies.

I do--and pros soon figured out that you brought spare batteries to a job, just as you did for flashes or spare bulbs for lights. The F3 and equivalent Canon and Pentax pro cameras were great cameras that worked well and stayed in production for a long time.

 

Having set up your basic preferences once, you can either choose to use menu options and LCD displays when shooting or not. I usually don't. I can manually dial in aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. What I see in the viewfinder tells me all I need to know about the exposure so I can adjust these settings. I can also switch off AF and just use manual focus.

 

......Having set-up your DSLR once via the LCD, you're completely free to use it as a fully manual camera (without ever needing to look at the LCD again).

 

 

Thanks, It looks like the only option if I want to use the digital recording aspect without electronic controls. Can you recommend a basic Canon with reasonable spec where i can set-up once using the LCD and use it as a fully manual camera and/or it has a manual dial for aperture, shutter speed, and ISO plus switching auto focus off. Something where this is done easily without reading pages of info or screen menus. I think I saw some EOS models? with some manual knobs? Second hand several years old would be ok, as a body only and usable with most older canon or suitable non-canon lenses.

Edited March 16, 2019 by jomeer

I have a Lumix G7 and it has a full flippy screen. The screen being able to flip around a lot can be turned so that it faces inwards if you do not wish to use it or even see it. It has manual operation as well as manual focus. The manual focus through the electronic viewfinder will enlarge the center portion of the picture so you can focus accurately. It also has a focus peaking system built in that verifies exact focus. A camera such as the Canon SL2 and others with a flippy screen will have the same screen that will turn inwards. The Canon will have full manual operation also. I do not know what system the Canon would have to aid you with manual focus but it would be different then the G7 with electronic viewfinder. All digital cameras have batteries that need to be charged often.

Hmmmm...an $8000 camera for someone who does not know a digital image requires a battery to create it.

@jomeer, I don't think there's much difference between the menu's/settings on different Canon DSLRs. Lenses intended for DSLRs (Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc.) have an AF switch on the lens that you can turn on or off. I'm not sure whether pre-DSLR lenses even have AF.

 

I'm hesitant to recommend specific cameras without knowing more about the types of photography you do and your budget.

 

This Wikipedia page lists the Canon DSLRs, past and present. As you can see, they fall into 3 broad categories:

- 'entry-level' DSLRs with 3/4 digits before the"D" (a.k.a. the "Rebel" series); these all have an APS (crop) digital sensor

- semi-professional and mid-range cameras with 1/2 digits before the "D"; many have an APS (crop) sensor, some have a "full-frame" sensor

- professional: the 1D series

 

My guesss is that many more amateur photographers use cameras with an APS sensor than a FF. The jury is still out on how noticeable the difference is between post-processed photos taken with crop sensors vs. FF. In general, photos taken with FF cameras have less noise (and better definition) at higher ISO levels. So photos taken with higher ISO levels require less noise reduction in post-processing. The Canon APS sensors have 1.6x magnification compared to a FF sensor. This can be an advantage for wildlife and sport photographers because it effectively increases their telelens range by 60%. For photographers who work a lot with wide-angle or low-light shots, an APS sensor can be more of a disadvantage.

 

Lenses that are designed for FF cameras (EF lenses) will work on crop cameras too. The reverse is not true. Lenses that are specifically designed for crop cameras (usually the kit lens) won't work on a FF. If you have older lenses you want to use, you may need to buy a lens mount adapter.

 

I've never owned any of the rebel series but I've had a few in my hands. Compared to the mid-range cameras, they were physically smaller with the controls closer together. A bit less 'solid' too. I'm sure everyone gets used to this but I liked the 'fit' of the mid-range in my hands. more. They also felt more balanced with a heavier lens.

 

If you're looking to buy a used DSLR, a couple of websites you might want to browse just to get an idea of used DSLR models/prices are:

- Adorama

- KEH cameras

- B&H cameras

 

I suggest you look for a used 'previous model' that was introduced 3-7 years ago. A few suggestions are:

entry level (APS): EOS 1200D (2014) or 1300D (2016)

mid-range: EOS 70D with APS sensor (2013) or for FF: 5D mk iii (2012) or 6D (2012)

Mike

 

Thanks, It looks like the only option if I want to use the digital recording aspect without electronic controls. Can you recommend a basic Canon with reasonable spec where i can set-up once using the LCD and use it as a fully manual camera and/or it has a manual dial for aperture, shutter speed, and ISO plus switching auto focus off. Something where this is done easily without reading pages of info or screen menus. I think I saw some EOS models? with some manual knobs? Second hand several years old would be ok, as a body only and usable with most older canon or suitable non-canon lenses.

Hmmmm...an $8000 camera for someone who does not know a digital image requires a battery to create it.

 

For what the OP want he must prepare to pay. He must realize that what he want is expensive not cheap. I have the problem that many asked for similar things but expect the price to be lower than a regular camera. Take the Epson RD and see what the used Ebay price is. And the camera is not that close to what the OP want. It still have the screen, not a DSLR and still need battery.

The modern Leica offering has no screen but still need battery and not a DSLR.

Some company may be able to build what the OP want for perhaps $1,000,000 for 1 camera I think.

Thanks, It looks like the only option if I want to use the digital recording aspect without electronic controls. Can you recommend a basic Canon with reasonable spec where i can set-up once using the LCD and use it as a fully manual camera and/or it has a manual dial for aperture, shutter speed, and ISO plus switching auto focus off. Something where this is done easily without reading pages of info or screen menus. I think I saw some EOS models? with some manual knobs? Second hand several years old would be ok, as a body only and usable with most older canon or suitable non-canon lenses.

Remember especially for a Canon that although you make the setting by turning something yourself it's drive by wire that is it's electronically controlled.

I'm not sure whether pre-DSLR lenses even have AF.

 

For the record, there is a "long" history of AF lenses on film cameras. Canon, Nikon, Konica, and many others.

I did a whole series examining early (pre EOS for the most part) here on this site.

 

 

The Minolta Maxxum was the revolutionary turning point of a really useable AF camera, but the "race is not to the swift.."

Here's a list of some of the Canon reports:

 

EOS 650 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Vlot

EOS 620 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Vv2v

EOS 630 http://www.photo.net/modern-film-cameras-forum/00YFVd

EOS-1 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WvBD

EOS 10S http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WxgJ

EOS 700 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Wn8K

EOS 5 =A2e http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Wrxy

EOS-3 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WyuM

EF-M - http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00Zyz7

 

I would have thought it needless to say that all of thee require a battery.

Edited March 16, 2019 by JDMvW

@BeBu Lamar, [uSER=10955656]@Ludmilla[/uSER]

 

I respect your valuable opinions (which may well change the questions of the OP!) but the OP's question was about DSLR's.

[uSER=10955656]@Ludmilla[/uSER], yes this might well be the best solution and welll worth mentioning!

@BeBu Lamar: I don't share your view that a (used) DSLR needs to be expensive (in the $1000 range); Many used DLSRs go for much less. Used film cameras are indeed much cheaper. So it depends on how important 'digital 'is

 

Mike

@BeBu Lamar, [uSER=10955656]@Ludmilla[/uSER]

 

I respect your valuable opinions (which may well change the questions of the OP!) but the OP's question was about DSLR's.

[uSER=10955656]@Ludmilla[/uSER], yes this might well be the best solution and welll worth mentioning!

@BeBu Lamar: I don't share your view that a (used) DSLR needs to be expensive (in the $1000 range); Many used DLSRs go for much less. Used film cameras are indeed much cheaper. So it depends on how important 'digital 'is

 

Mike

 

I said $10000 not $1000. I bought fully functional DSLR for $30. Yes if the OP wants all those stuff and it doesn't exist but some camera manufacturer want to make it they will have to charge $10000 at least.

My Leica M6 has auto focus that works pretty good. As soon as I bring it up to my eye I automatically focus it every time. Auto focus of that type runs on pancakes and coffee.