Maybe not next year...but the move is on....

GaryW said:

Henry Richardson said:

Check out the Pentax K7. They did it.

Click to expand...

As small as the Maxxum 7000? If not, then they still haven't matched the small sizes possible with film!

Click to expand...

I have the 7000i, 7xi, 707si, 7, and used to have the 9xi -- my AF SLRs -- had MF SLRs before 1988. I remember the size of the 7000 and the Pentax K7 is, I think, a bit smaller than it. The K7 is a bit higher level model than the A700 and also built even better, I would say.

GaryW said:

I've used a Maxxum 7000, which to me is impressively small for an SLR. There were film cameras that were smaller, but some RFs from the 60's were the same size (or bigger?). I think that's just a sign of the miniaturization that was occurring through the 70's. It just seems to me that throughout all of digital SLRs, none have been nearly as small or similarly-designed as the Maxxum 7000.

Click to expand...

The 707si was a bit smaller than the 7000 and the 7 too, I think. If not, then they were pretty much the same.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

WaltKnapp said:

I actually began shooting digital with setups that grabbed video frames and digitized them into grayscale in the mid 80's. With the mac plus. For a long time I shot film and scanned it to digital.

Click to expand...

Those of us from Ork were just so far ahead. Shazbot, if I had known you were anxious to enter the digital era back in the '70s I might have been willing to secretly share a bit of our tech.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

GaryW said:

Perhaps a Sony HX5V is a better idea. It's not a big zoom, I don't think, but it does have some cool features, and it is definitely a smaller camera if you have to keep it in your pocket.

If I wasn't so paranoid about ruining film, I'd consider taking a cheap RF camera, if I was really worried about theft. Go ahead, take my $10 camera! ;-) But seriously, digital is so much more convenient, it's hard to go back.

--
Gary W.

Click to expand...

Or I could take the digital Range Finder look alike I bought off Ebay last week for A$20- the Minollta Dimage S404. Shame it only has 4X zoom though.
Renato

tbcass wrote:

Fair Enough.
Cheers,
Renato

Simply not so Walt. Yes there were plenty of Nikon F1s around and they built a legend for toughness. But that is not what was being discussed. My post was in response to a previous post that had dismissed RF cameras in that period as a "niche." My point was "It was some niche.) I lived through that period and was at University tossing up whether I was going to become a teacher or photographer (teaching won, although I am now qualified to teach photography and (although retired) now make a living from photography. If you do some Googling you will find that the Leica was still the camera to have in Vietnam (some carried both.) And yep, as a young 20 year old when image meant rather more than it does to me today, I wanted to be like those blokes in the combat gear with the Leicas.You will find more reading on this if you check the Luminous Landscape site.
--
Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

Mike Fewster said:

Simply not so Walt. Yes there were plenty of Nikon F1s around and they built a legend for toughness. But that is not what was being discussed. My post was in response to a previous post that had dismissed RF cameras in that period as a "niche." My point was "It was some niche.) I lived through that period and was at University tossing up whether I was going to become a teacher or photographer (teaching won, although I am now qualified to teach photography and (although retired) now make a living from photography. If you do some Googling you will find that the Leica was still the camera to have in Vietnam (some carried both.)

Click to expand...

As a Vietnam era vet I got mine up close and personal. Finished my masters one hop ahead of the draft board. And managed to enlist going into med lab tech in the Army literally one hop ahead of being draft board cannon fodder. Traded a extra year for a slightly safer thing to do in the Army, though my primary MOS was combat medic. And if you were draft eligible in those days all kind of excuses would be invented why you could not be hired as a teacher. So it was after getting out that I taught photography at Junior College level. Along with a whole pile of other temp teaching jobs.

I'll agree that RF were not down to niche then, but not center of attention either.

Walt

Henry Richardson said:

WaltKnapp said:

I actually began shooting digital with setups that grabbed video frames and digitized them into grayscale in the mid 80's. With the mac plus. For a long time I shot film and scanned it to digital.

Click to expand...

Those of us from Ork were just so far ahead. Shazbot, if I had known you were anxious to enter the digital era back in the '70s I might have been willing to secretly share a bit of our tech.

Click to expand...

Would have been a welcome break from environmental impact models which was my primary money in those days. Air pollution, stormwater runoff, noise pollution, and occasionally even got to do some field biology. Computer models produced a lot of plotter graphics and cartography, but that's not photography. Had to invent and program a lot of specialized models in those days.

Walt

WaltKnapp said:

DSLR in the early 70's!!!!. Try the early 90's. In the early 70's it was film and those are called SLRs.

Walt

Click to expand...

Did you hear that? It's the sound of it going right over your head. Whoosh! LOL!
--
I dont care what you think of me. In fact, I LOATHE you!

The mind set between composing a still shot and a movie scene are different I think, so getting a fantastic still shot from a movie scene is much less likely than planning and composing a still shot. Getting a good family snap from a movie perhaps, but a great still photograph is unlikely.

That said, there is no reason a device cant be made that can do good movies and yet be used for good still shots. I think such a device that I would be happy with isnt too far away, but if we are going the way of EVF finders I think they still need a bit more improvement. Though mirrorless designs do have potential advantages, such as more accurate and consistent focus, and contrast AF has come a long way.

Needless to say, I will be looking into buying a NEX5 to play with as a pocketable camera with movie capability (its not all that expensive). Movies are not as important to me (secondary to still photography), mostly used for family outings, but would save carrying two devices and that is good.
--
Regards
Nik