Is the Basic SLR dead and gone?

[Parisis]

I decided to start a new thread after reading yet another thread about live preview.

Do you folks feel that wishing for a basic Digital DSLR is futile? I am so tired of the bells and whistles that so complicate a camera and also make it prone to electronic meltdown. Don't get me wrong , I love and accept Auto focus and some auto exposure but I want to otherwise keep things simple. I guess by current D50 is the "new" basic DSLR and I'm afraid that the lust for more "features" will drive the manufacturers to bring out more Mirror shaking, Live preview , 6 inch LCD , Face focusing DSLRs with built in printers!

Help me friends , In the future I want a cheap , well built basic Camera body to use my old and new lenses on. Am I a dinosaur?
--
Check my Photo Blog
http://parisea.blogspot.com/

 

[cellartroll]

No, you are a photographer. Unfortunately the average consumer is not and therefore requires bells and whistles to be persuaded to upgrade every six months to the latest and greatest.

Remember that companies can make a fortune by selling DSLRs to people who just want to demonstrate that they can afford a DSLR. That is why they come with straps that allow you to see a "CANON EOS DIGITAL" carrier, even from behind.

--
http://www.pbase.com/thecellartroll

 

[Ominous]

That more features for less money is a bad thing????

No, you are a photographer. Unfortunately the average consumer is
not and therefore requires bells and whistles to be persuaded to
upgrade every six months to the latest and greatest.

Remember that companies can make a fortune by selling DSLRs to
people who just want to demonstrate that they can afford a DSLR.
That is why they come with straps that allow you to see a "CANON
EOS DIGITAL" carrier, even from behind.

--
http://www.pbase.com/thecellartroll

--
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen

 

[RickS]

If you mean D*SLR, yes. Well, actually no, since there's never been a consumer level basic DSLR. The early Kodaks might qualify but they're not exactly in the consumer category.

By basic, do you mean no AF, no rear LCD, no white balance correction, no histogram, no myriad of other useful features? How would you define basic ?

Just how many do think would sell? Certainly not enough to cover the R&D, not to mention marketing and other infrastructure requirements.

You can't go back. But, you can make your D50 as "basic" as you like.

Rick

 

[bugeyed]

film, you need to be able to change settings that corespond to using different film. Stripping down a DSLR wouldn't appeal to enough people to make it cheaper & it would still have the processing engine. It's easy enough to ignore buttons, once you get the camera set up to suit your needs, if you like. I understand the sentiment though.
--
'It ain't what they call you, It's what you answer to!'
F3, Contax G1, FZ5, D40, SD1000
18-55, 70-300VR, 28mmf/2.8, 50mmf/1.4, 43-86mmf/3.5, 105mmf/2.5, i9900

 

[K1000Photographer]

I would say the K110D and K100D are as close as you are going to get. They do have a good feature set but are simple to use and well built. I went from a K1000 to an *ist DS and strongly prefer the DSLR's operation. The new Pentax models are quite similar to my old one but have faster AF and the K100D has AS.

 

[Parisis]

No , I consider the D50 pretty basic in todays world. I just do not think a camera like the d50 or even the XTI will exist in the next coupole of years.

BTW I do feel more features for less money is bad. when they are features for features sake with no real value. For me and I think others, having the sensor shake everytime the camera comes on is a waste of time and I have to believe will eventually hurt the camera. ( I have no proof of this)
--
Check my Photo Blog
http://parisea.blogspot.com/

 

[Edwaste]

No , I consider the D50 pretty basic in todays world. I just do not
think a camera like the d50 or even the XTI will exist in the next
coupole of years.

BTW I do feel more features for less money is bad. when they are
features for features sake with no real value. For me and I think
others, having the sensor shake everytime the camera comes on is a
waste of time and I have to believe will eventually hurt the
camera. ( I have no proof of this)

If you have no proof, and can site no examples of cameras damaged by self cleaning sensors, why even be concerned about it?

So having to use a blower to clean a sensor not a waste of time? Or retouching dust spots from the image? Or sending the camera back to a service center for cleaning...not a waste of time?

Can you give one example of a feature that has no real value to someone?

 

[David Hughes124436]

That more features for less money is a bad thing????

Yup! If just want a milk shake then you shouldn't have to buy a cow...

Regards, David

 

[jfinite]

I decided to start a new thread after reading yet another thread
about live preview.

Cool.

Do you folks feel that wishing for a basic Digital DSLR is futile?

Depends on what 'basic' is.

I am so tired of the bells and whistles that so complicate a camera
and also make it prone to electronic meltdown.

Today's bells and whistles are tomorrow's standard features.

Don't get me wrong ,
I love and accept Auto focus and some auto exposure but I want to
otherwise keep things simple. I guess by current D50 is the "new"
basic DSLR and I'm afraid that the lust for more "features" will
drive the manufacturers to bring out more Mirror shaking, Live
preview , 6 inch LCD , Face focusing DSLRs with built in printers!

This is bad???

Help me friends , In the future I want a cheap , well built basic
Camera body to use my old and new lenses on. Am I a dinosaur?

They get cheaper because they're always coming out with new ones.
So what's the problem? You can always buy last year's model.
--



http://www.pbase.com/jfinite

 

[Ominous]

why complain
--
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen

 

[Parisis]

Sorry if I did not make myself clear. I don't care what others want or buy. Purchase all the bells and whistles you want. I am just speculating as another poster said that they will become the norm and if and when my d50 breaks or wears out I will not be able to buy another Nikon like it.

One thing that comforts me as a big KEH buyer is that there always will be a good supply of cheap used bodies. Take care all.
--
Check my Photo Blog
http://parisea.blogspot.com/

 

[Glen Barrington]

If I recall, it's an optically pure transparent plate in front of the sensor.
--
Never trust a man who spells the word 'cheese' with a 'z'

 

[Hennie de Ruyter]

Parisis wrote:In the future I want a cheap , well built basic

Camera body to use my old and new lenses on. Am I a dinosaur?

What!!! Are you telling me you dont want face-recognition!!! Or even more mp. What about a tiltable screen (who cares if the view-finder is so dark you cant use MF).

Or are you like me who started with a Ricob KR10 and now wish there was a DSLR with a really decent focussing screen (the old Ricoh had a circle with a diagonal line and only when in focus were the 2 halves alligned - manual focus was easier on this old camera than selecting the appropriate focus point on a modern DSLR).

Still, I love digital.

 

[jfinite]

My Olympus E-500's dust-buster has been shaking for over a year, never had a speck of dust on a picture.
--



http://www.pbase.com/jfinite

 

[john farrar]

Are you a dinosaur? Nope. And always remember Crocodiles have been around since before the dinosaurs - they're masterpeieces of design for function!

I detest menu driven cameras. Perfection for me would be something like the old OM2 with shutter speed and aperture dials on or at the throat of the lens and a focusing ring - all accessible to the hand holding the lens. The next best thing we have today are two control wheels for the hand that works the shutter (perhaps Canon have implemented that best in the 30D as less finger contortion is required than on a Nikon)

Is the Basic SLR dead and gone? I guess so thanks to the cellphone disaster bringing in design for nano people.

If I need 1/500 and f8 at ISO 200 then I want to be able to dial it in quickly, not mess around with stupid buttons and menus.

--
John.
Please visit me at:
http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/digital_dartmoor
http://www.flickr.com/photos/18726664@N00/

 

[BobTrips]

I decided to start a new thread after reading yet another thread
about live preview.
Do you folks feel that wishing for a basic Digital DSLR is futile?
I am so tired of the bells and whistles that so complicate a camera
and also make it prone to electronic meltdown. Don't get me wrong ,
I love and accept Auto focus and some auto exposure but I want to
otherwise keep things simple. I guess by current D50 is the "new"
basic DSLR and I'm afraid that the lust for more "features" will
drive the manufacturers to bring out more Mirror shaking, Live
preview , 6 inch LCD , Face focusing DSLRs with built in printers!
Help me friends , In the future I want a cheap , well built basic
Camera body to use my old and new lenses on. Am I a dinosaur?

You and the other half-dozen or so people who want a stripped down dSLR can pool your money and get one of the companies to produce one for you.

I'd guess they could hand make a few cases that lack some of the buttons and disable some of the firmware functions.

I'll bet they could deliver your camera for under $100k per unit.

Heck, they could just paste a patch over the place where those extra switches used to be and bring your camera in for less than $50k.

Drop them a line.

;o)

--
bob

Sleepers
http://picasaweb.google.com/Bobfwall/Sleepers

The Blind Pig Guild - A Photo/Travel Club
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips

 

[Edwaste]

I detest menu driven cameras. Perfection for me would be something
like the old OM2 with shutter speed and aperture dials on or at the
throat of the lens and a focusing ring - all accessible to the hand
holding the lens.

If I need 1/500 and f8 at ISO 200 then I want to be able to dial it
in quickly, not mess around with stupid buttons and menus.

I'd like to see you change to ISO 200 film from ISO 400 film and back again to ISO 100 quickly with your OM-2. Or switch from color to B&W and back again without swapping unfinished rolls of film.

There are a few digital cameras that have Analog style controls like the Epson R-D1 or the Panasonic DMC-L1...guess what NOBODY BOUGHT THEM.

 

[tko]

Trouble is, in this age of mass production, tremendous production volumes are needed to keep the cost down. Stripping down the features and making a niche product might, double, triple, or more, the price. Look at the Leica.

It's much cheaper to put every feature in that everyone could want, than to leave some out and create different models.

So, you're just have to ignore the bells and whistles. Now, the trick is to get them to put in the features photographers want, and the features the mass market thinks they want.

And remember, that feature you think is useless some other very good photography might be dying for. Don't write everything off! They're never going to make a camera just for you : )

 

[Bananas in Paris]

I am reading some of the answers and I cannot believe my eyes.

Don't you guys (or gals) realize that all of these extra features totally distract you from the primary objective: photography!!!!!?????

I have been taking pictures for now almost 30 years, and all I need is: Shutter speed selection, Aperture selection, Iso selection and a few other features. Not 100+ features but maybe 10 the most. This includes AF. Yes, there is somethin g like MF out there, and its good to have too.

I have now a Canon DSLR and an Epson D_rangefinder (RD-1). The Epson has manual everything within a Digital body. I use it more often than the DSLR. Why? Because now I can concentrate on my primary objective: photography.

Now I learn again to make pictures instead of taking pictures or having them being taken by the camera.

I never ever used the Green thingy on my Canon DSLR. What is it? Guess that it must be some superior automatic mode. Guess what: I never needed to use it. I like to drive my camera instead of having it driven by an auto mode.

I do find all of these extra features simply distracting

Cheeers
Andrzej

I decided to start a new thread after reading yet another thread
about live preview.

Cool.

Do you folks feel that wishing for a basic Digital DSLR is futile?

Depends on what 'basic' is.

I am so tired of the bells and whistles that so complicate a camera
and also make it prone to electronic meltdown.

Today's bells and whistles are tomorrow's standard features.

Don't get me wrong ,
I love and accept Auto focus and some auto exposure but I want to
otherwise keep things simple. I guess by current D50 is the "new"
basic DSLR and I'm afraid that the lust for more "features" will
drive the manufacturers to bring out more Mirror shaking, Live
preview , 6 inch LCD , Face focusing DSLRs with built in printers!

This is bad???

Help me friends , In the future I want a cheap , well built basic
Camera body to use my old and new lenses on. Am I a dinosaur?

They get cheaper because they're always coming out with new ones.
So what's the problem? You can always buy last year's model.
--



http://www.pbase.com/jfinite

--
Andrzej
http://lowflyingbananas.zenfolio.com/