[Closed] Digital SLR question

They are not hard to ignore though, so I'm not sure what the benefit would be in mssing them out?

easy to ignore ? I dunno, mine has 16 buttons and 3 dials not counting the menu system which would have elfin running round in circles screaming when he really wants clockwork...

I can hand the camera to someone else to get a picture of me without needing to give them a 20 minute lesson.

I'm not sure I'd want to give 3k of camera to someone who'd need a 20min lesson. I'm not sure I'd let anyone use 3k of my camera. [dreams of EOS5d] 😉

I'm not sure I'd want to give 3k of camera to someone who'd need a 20min lesson.

how hard can it be ? "Look through here. Turn this. Press here" Job done 🙂

Well, my FM2 has a mechanical shutter, which is 'wound up' like a clock before each firing. Over 30 years old, still bang on after thousands and thousands and thousands of shots. No current digital cam would last that long. Not designed to anyway; next year's model has 32 Megabastards or something. 🙁

No current digital cam would last that long

too right, I'm on 91000+ exposures after 2 years. It's only rated to 150,000 so I have a year before it may crap out 🙁

no fripperies such as built-in flash, 'sports' and 'portrait' modes etc, silly built-in shitty digital effects and all that bollocks.

No current digital cam would last that long

Elfin, you're raving a bit there I'm afraid.

a) You've no idea how long digicams will last
b) You're perfectly at liberty to ignore any features you don't like. I've never taken a single shot in the 'art' modes on my camera, but I don't complain about them.

Sticking with something just because it's old and slagging things off because they're new is stupid.

Sticking with something just because it's old and slagging things off because they're new is stupid.

There's no way on Earth owt but the pro DSLR models wooduv survived the punishment my FM2's had:

Been left in rain
Been hit by police baton
Been dropped onto concrete pavement (more than once)
Been in 100ºF heat
Been in -30ºC cold

And other abuse.

I'll be willing to take your DSLR and subject it to that sort of punishment, see if it'll survive. Any takers?

You're perfectly at liberty to ignore any features you don't like. I've never taken a single shot in the 'art' modes on my camera, but I don't complain about them.

I'm just saying I'd like a cam with the layout and the robustness of my FM2. Granted it'd need things like ISO control, white balance and resolution settings, but that's it. Won't need loads of other useless settings. IE, a pro cam but simple. For people who know what they're doing... 8)

Been in 100ºF heat
Been in -30ºC cold

Why is the warm temp figure in ºF and the cold in ºC? Continuity please, old chap!!

There's no way on earth your crappy old film camera would take 1000 images on a tiny memory card and let me see what I'd taken the instant I took it...

What's your point, caller? Just having a whinge about the modern world? There there, soon today will be the good old days, and you'll be able to like all this stuff 🙂

Elfin's ideal camera:

[img] ?0.1004751809355326[/img]

Have to agree with Elfin on this one, old film SLR's i'm sure would withstand much more abuse than a digital version (must say he picked a very tough one too in that FM2)

Same as my old Seiko automatic watch, been bashed crashed and submerged, can't imagine the latest digital gizmo taking that sort of battering and still be working thirty years on

too right, I'm on 91000+ exposures after 2 years. It's only rated to 150,000 so I have a year before it may crap out

Mine is on approx 70k from a projected 100k so potentially even nearer going shutter up than yours

Because the warmest was in England, where we use Fahrenheit, and the coldest in Norway, where they use Centigrade.

I know, I know.

What's your point, caller? Just having a whinge about the modern world?

Just because your wife beat you at Risk!

No; I'm asking for a digital cam that's like my favourite film cam. So simple and easy to use. Cams don't have to have loads of silly features; they're added to entice buyers,and add 'value'. I'd rather pay for sturdiness and simplicity, than frippery I'll never use.

All I'm asking for is a sturdy, simple digital cam. Stripped of frippery and idiot modes. Like cams used to be.

What would be nice, is a replaceable back/sensor unit, so you can keep the main body, and just upgrade the sensor as more megabastards are added.

But I don't think the [s]greedy bastard[/s] camera manufacturers see it the same way...

Elfin's ideal camera:

are you [b]mad[/b] ?? Where do the plates go ??

Same as my old Seiko automatic watch, been bashed crashed and submerged, can't imagine the latest digital gizmo taking that sort of battering and still be working thirty years on

So you think dozens of tiny intricate moving parts is somehow more robust than NO moving parts? Ok.

Jeez.. wtf is it with these rose tinted glasses? Are they now mandatory or what?

There's no way on earth your crappy old film camera would take 1000 images on a tiny memory card and let me see what I'd taken the instant I took it...

Because the warmest was in England, where we use Fahrenheit

Do we bloody hell.

But I don't think the greedy bastard camera manufacturers see it the same way...

What do camera manufacturers do with their profits? They reinvest them into inventing even better stuff. That's my camera, and yours too.

Gah.. I can't abide cloudy thinking!

And the new breed need 1,000 images on a tiny memory card so they can f*ck up 999 times, erase them and have 1 good picture, whereas the photographer who learnt on film has learnt how to take pictures properly.

AARGH!

So I need to take some photos and then wait a week to see if my pictures were done right, then consult my notes and see what I did wrong... then somehow try to get back to the same spot and subject in the same light and conditions to try something else..?

Is that a better learning process than to take the pic, look at the back of the camera and see straight away what you did wrong, change it and immediately take another picture, and another and another, thereby completeing the lesson in minutes rather than years?

I bet you'd rather learn to play chess by playing postal chess right?

Do you have your mail delivered by stagecoach? To teach yourself the value of wasting time?

Good god.

AARGH!

Logical response.

Gah.. I can't abide cloudy thinking!

Stop doing it then! Have a read of my posts, then [i][b]think[/b][/i].

whereas the photographer who learnt on film has learnt how to take pictures properly.

I learnt on film 1973-2004. Digital is way better and I'd never want to go back 🙂

I am reading your posts Elf. Yes, you want a more robust camera. Fine.

Why can't you ignore the new features you don't like? Why does new stuff offend you?

So you think dozens of tiny intricate moving parts is somehow more robust than NO moving parts?

And the electrical circuits mix well with water do they?

Swiss Military Watches seem to survive ok for an old school product with lots of moving parts

Couldn't agree more for those who want to learn, but it does allow lazy folks to just pick up a camera, take a picture, erase it, take another, erase it, take another, deicide it'll do, learn nothing then talk photography bollox about their DSLR and their photography hobby.

Because I'm expected to pay for stuff I have no need for, when what I want is being provided.

I've had a look at various digital cams in shops, with a view to buying one. All bar the D300 up are too flimsy and plasticky for my liking, and having seen a fair few busted plastic-bodied cams, I don't want something that could fall apart. The police baton strike would've busted a D70 or whatever.

Plus, the D700 is a weighty beast. Don't need something that large really. I've got an F5, and it's a proper bastard. The FM2 is perfect; small, not too heavy, and built like a tank. I want a digital version of that please.

So don't call me a luddite just cos your wife beat you at board games. 😐

Pentax and Sony both have weatherproof DSLRs, the Pentax has a metal body and rubber protective corners...

Oh oh oh oh and;

Betcha can't get a digital SLR cam in [b]Titanium[/b], can you? Eh? Eh? No, thought not!

See? I win.

[img] ?zz=1[/img]

And the electrical circuits mix well with water do they?

And tiny gears and cogs do? A rubber o-ring keeps water out at a cost of 1p. Sorry - you can get a watch and calendar that's waterproof, never needs winding and keeps better time than any box of cogs for less than £5. You aren't gonna convince me that old is best when it comes to watches.

but it does allow lazy folks to just pick up a camera, take a picture, erase it, take another, erase it, take another

And? So what? WGAF if some people dont' want to mess with settings?

Buying something expensive because you want to show off is a totally different argument.

Now you've lost me!

D700; lovely cam, but what a lump:

[img] [/img]

See my point now?

Betcha can't get a digital SLR cam in Titanium, can you?

[img] [/img]

Trumped by catalogue boy, eh Elfin? 😆

See my point now?

What? Nikons are big? I know, that's why I didn't buy one 🙂

Trumped by catalogue boy, eh Elfin?

I think not, actually....

Hmm, research shows that that's a titanium [i]finish[/i], rather than actual titanium metal. Indeed, it's price suggests it's probbly not real Ti. Because it would cost a lot more.

So I still win.

Right, Mol(lost to his wife at Scrabble)grips; find me a digital cam, the size and robustness of an FM2, that doesn't cost a fortune.

Of you go!

It is rather nice tho 🙂

My old DSLR was (and still is) a Pentax manual focus. When I got a digital (compact effectively) in 2000 I kept it for those special photography outings.

I never used it again. Actually, I never used it through choice again. I broke my compact, and had to take it on a holiday and realised what a right ballache film actually was. Something wrong with the focusing or alignment or something, resulting in most of the landscape photos (at inifinity) of that trip being slightly out of focus. I only found out a week after I'd got home.

Anyone want it?

I dunno about cost Elf - I never said digital was cheaper than film. I just said that it was better 🙂

Yes please! It can be my prize for win. 😀

Love old cams, me.

Really? It's not especially old, 1999 really, and it's a basic model. Won't be the quality of your current one.

Which one is it?

I've got an old Pentax K1000; the student's special. Now that really is indestructible.

This is an Epson RD1-x. A digital rangefinder cam, with essentially just manual controls (and a little AE setting). Lovely. Leica do something similar.

Why can't Nikon do something like that, but an SLR? Is it too much to ask?

[img] [/img]

Ooh, I found it 🙂

[img] [/img]

It's very plain, but it is indeed very very light. Mine's also MINT condition too - the infinity focus thing notwithstanding. Not really got to the bottom of that, might've been me doing something wrong not sure.

Looks like it could be worth £55 🙂

It replaced the camera my dad had that he passed on to me, but that got pinched in a burglary. That was a sad day.. that camera had documented my childhood. Although it was a cheapo Chinon thing, it was a thing of awe to my 8 year old self when my dad bought it.

Why can't Nikon do something like that, but an SLR? Is it too much to ask?

You know that the scene modes and crap are just software, that cost virtually nothing to add, right? And you are also aware that Nikon et al want to sell cameras, and that romantic minimalists like you are in the minority...

that cost virtually nothing to add, right?

but think of the mental cost to Elfin's tortured brain 🙁

You can donate it to the Elfintography museum of old cams..

Leica M9:

[img] [/img]

Leica M7:

[img] [/img]

Not a great deal of difference, other than the fact that one uses film, the other is digital.

That's what I want Nikon to do.

but think of the mental cost to Elfin's tortured brain

It's a very, very high cost. As youser discovering.

[img] [/img]

One film from 1966, one digital from 2009 🙂

PS why Nikon?

Nice. I like the current trend of doing simple yet quality compacts, I just wish Nikon would do an SLR in that same style.

When it were film, you could buy an FM2, or an F3/4/5 etc, and they'd be of a similar quality. Sadly, the lower end models suffer from basic build quality, and an overabundance of idiot modes. Plastic lens mounts ffs.

Why Nikon?

Cos I've got Nikon gear. Perfectly good kit, that I want to keep using. FX full frame sensor is the important bit, to retain original lens focal lengths.

Oh well. 🙁

Maybe it's a Nikon thing. Olympus seem to be good at the lower end. I certainly don't have a plastic lens mount!

As for idiot modes - I've got three art filters that I can ignore, the rest is normal.

You really want that Pentax btw?

Titanium, you say?

[url= http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5106053912_72c313b098.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5106053912_72c313b098.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuartie_c/5106053912/ ]Oly OM4-Ti[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/stuartie_c/ ]stuartie_c[/url], on Flickr

Interesing DOF in that shot, are you being creative? 😉

Creative?!

No way man! My eyes are just not working as they should be. Not swivelly enough, or something.

Sadly, the lower end models suffer from basic build quality, and an overabundance of idiot modes. Plastic lens mounts ffs.

Plastic where?

My D80 "enthusiast level" body doesn't have a plastic mount.

In fact looking at the cheapest entry level D3100:
[img] [/img]

I'm not sure if that is plastic or not. Looks pretty metallic but I've not seen one in the flesh so I don't know.

No way man! My eyes are just not working as they should be. Not swivelly enough, or something.

😆 ROFL 😆