K1000Photographer
Veteran Member
The *ist D, *ist DS, *ist DL, K110D and K100D are all about the same size as a K1000 but a little heavier due to the batteries.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Is the Basic SLR dead and gone?
- Thread starter Parisis
- Start date
Steve Russell
Forum Enthusiast
Errrr.... Last time I looked you can stick any DSLR into manual mode and transport yourself right back to the 1960's if you so wanted (and yes I do)
Steve
Steve
jpfisher
Forum Enthusiast
I should have clarified -- I'm more concerned about the thickness. I have a couple of 35mm bodies (KX, I believe -- perhaps I made a bad assumption that this body is about the same size as the K1000?) at home that are very thin -- especially when compared to my *ist DL.
I'd like something with a flat front, not the protruding grip on the right. More of a classic, retro look -- oh, here is a picture of the KX -- http://www.ne.jp/asahi/japan/manual-camera/kx1.htm
It would be great for street photography. I'm already planning on keeping my DL when I move up to a K10D as a backup, but I just like the idea of having something a little more compact.
--
http://www.downeffect.com/jim/gallery
I'd like something with a flat front, not the protruding grip on the right. More of a classic, retro look -- oh, here is a picture of the KX -- http://www.ne.jp/asahi/japan/manual-camera/kx1.htm
It would be great for street photography. I'm already planning on keeping my DL when I move up to a K10D as a backup, but I just like the idea of having something a little more compact.
--
http://www.downeffect.com/jim/gallery
Master o Photo
Well-known member
I wish I could hit the 60's button. Unfortunately, I cant find it in the menus... although that has nothing to do with he conversation.
Here's your 60's "button" - leave exposure dial forever on M and mount good ole MF lens with an aperture ring. Any modern Pentax DSLR will do. You will also have to set and forget ISO for the next subsequent 36 shots but then you had to do same for film as well. Consider switching or erasing memory card as akin to unwinding the film. How's all that different from something like Pentax K1000? Oh, I know, manually cocking film advance will be dearly missed
--
http://www.pbase.com/klopus
Peter Khor
Forum Enthusiast
Well , there's the RD-1 (okay, RF, not SLR)Oh, I know, manually cocking film advance will be dearly missed
Steve Russell
Forum Enthusiast
Oh happy days ;-)Well , there's the RD-1 (okay, RF, not SLR)Oh, I know, manually cocking film advance will be dearly missed
Steve
K1000Photographer
Veteran Member
Yes it is thicker but not as wide. The volume is similar, it is just moved around. I actually prefer the DS / DL body. It fits the hand better and works better with M lenses than the old K1000 does.
It is a matter of preference. The K1000 always felt to me like a vinyl covered box and having the DS for comparison makes it feel even cheaper.
It is a matter of preference. The K1000 always felt to me like a vinyl covered box and having the DS for comparison makes it feel even cheaper.
Tim the Grey
Veteran Member
Until they die. Folk just don;t believe me that they do everything I want, and STILL outperform the operator!
Oh, you must want more MP, faster aF, faster processing, etc, etc.
Maybe I do, but not enough to flash THAT much cash!
I'm happy with bulletproof build, weatherproof, dustproof, and pin sharp optics (When I use them properly. Not the camera's fault there's a fool my end!), and just the wonderful ergonomics of these things.
Oh, and it IS fast enough for me. I don't have much use for video frame rates, you know?
--
Oh, you must want more MP, faster aF, faster processing, etc, etc.
Maybe I do, but not enough to flash THAT much cash!
I'm happy with bulletproof build, weatherproof, dustproof, and pin sharp optics (When I use them properly. Not the camera's fault there's a fool my end!), and just the wonderful ergonomics of these things.
Oh, and it IS fast enough for me. I don't have much use for video frame rates, you know?
--
- ######
- ####_O Tim Yorath
- #### />
- #### @ UK.
- ### # \
Jay Turberville
Forum Pro
You might want to take a look at the E-410. Unfortunately it is missing the pancake lens - and I don't know of any legacy substitute that will work well. You could adapt a pancake 40mm, but that would give you a short "telephoto."
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/olympuse410/page3.asp
--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
jpfisher
Forum Enthusiast
Thanks for the link. I like the form factor from the photos, but I'm not eager to invest in a new system. I have a nice set of 30-year-old-or-so Pentax manual primes ranging from 28mm up to 300mm.
I'd have to get out my ruler, but I think those old 35mm bodies might be a little skinnier than 2.1". I just like the idea of something that I can pull out of a pocket (a big pocket, obviously, or else I'd get another Elph point and shoot).
Oh well, I'm a niche market, what can I say?
--
http://www.downeffect.com/jim/gallery
I'd have to get out my ruler, but I think those old 35mm bodies might be a little skinnier than 2.1". I just like the idea of something that I can pull out of a pocket (a big pocket, obviously, or else I'd get another Elph point and shoot).
Oh well, I'm a niche market, what can I say?
--
http://www.downeffect.com/jim/gallery
K1000Photographer
Veteran Member
Any 6MP Pentax DSLR with a pancake will fit in a large coat pocket.
rsn48
Veteran Member
When I moved from Konica to Canon in 1990 purchasing the 10s model, at that time the second model down from the top Canon camera I was intimidated by all the features. The Konica T3 was a shutter speed only preferred camera, with the basics and not much else; I can still remember envying those with motor drive and aperture preferred as well. When I got the Canon, I don't recall how many times I read the manual, I still managed to forget how to do something.
The extra features are by and large not for this crowd, but are put there for the newbies. I think the extra features create a reliance on the "auto" everything mentality however I would be lying if I said I haven't used the auto features.
When I was shooting some dog shots, I wanted to work in a hurry and catch the older pups running around, playing with each other, etc. To be frank, it was just easier to put the camera in "sports" mode rather than prove I was a photographic genius. The same when a kid asked me to shoot him jumping with his bike in an incredible sunset night in Parskville BC.
When I shoot macro, particularly early on, I would decide what to shoot. After setting the shot up, I would turn on the macro mode to see what the camera was telling me to shoot. Interestingly enough, it often chose a more wide open f stop than I had. After wondering why and asking around, I discovered the camera was trying to put me into the sweet spot of the lens performance and not necessarily maximizing - or in this case, going to the lens closed down completely - as I was want to do. The macro mode taught me more about photography.
A great number of options make the camera more difficult to use, but by going at them one at a time, I find I eventually am a better photographer. For example, people say a "pro" camera shouldn't have in body flash; I can't imagine why. Yesterday I was testing out a macro 100mm lens with a Tamron 2X TC loaned to me from a buddy. I took a pill out of my pocket and shot some tests to see if the image would be too soft. I set up the flash this way. I cut a 35mm film canister that was opaque white to slide over the flash head, I then rubber banded on a double layer of Kleenex over the film canister; the set up looked ridiculous but it worked; it diffused the light so I didn't have a harsh image with lots of shadow. If I hadn't had this in camera flash, I wouldn't have had enough light; and I have yet to upgrade my old flash units, I'm afraid to use them on my Digital Rebel.
Or how about IR remote firing of the shutter; talk about useful. The 10s originally came with this option as did my digital Rebel. I use the same remote for the digital Rebel that came with my 1990 camera; it works fine. I can't imagine why a "pro" camera doesn't come with some type of built in remote firing system. Why do I like it; again lets turn to macro. I go to a public garden and set up the shot; invariably the light isn't perfect and I want to punch it up a bit. So I grab my white and gold litedisk and focus the gold concentrated light on the flower(s). Now in a strange gyration I hit the remote with one hand while roughly focusing the disk in the other hand. The camera doesn't go off for around 4 seconds giving me enough time to get the litedisk focusing just right on the plant. Yes I could have hit the self timer but this way I can be standing further from the camera with out having to run over and back.
And look at Nikon's brilliant in camera flash wireless unit; hope Canon gets the hint.
One photographer's worthless features are another's little gems.
--
'Got to location, Found the shot, Checked the tripod for stability, Dusted the lens with brush, Attached said lens to Camera, Turned the camera on... Oh No!... the batteries.'
Inner Discourse
The extra features are by and large not for this crowd, but are put there for the newbies. I think the extra features create a reliance on the "auto" everything mentality however I would be lying if I said I haven't used the auto features.
When I was shooting some dog shots, I wanted to work in a hurry and catch the older pups running around, playing with each other, etc. To be frank, it was just easier to put the camera in "sports" mode rather than prove I was a photographic genius. The same when a kid asked me to shoot him jumping with his bike in an incredible sunset night in Parskville BC.
When I shoot macro, particularly early on, I would decide what to shoot. After setting the shot up, I would turn on the macro mode to see what the camera was telling me to shoot. Interestingly enough, it often chose a more wide open f stop than I had. After wondering why and asking around, I discovered the camera was trying to put me into the sweet spot of the lens performance and not necessarily maximizing - or in this case, going to the lens closed down completely - as I was want to do. The macro mode taught me more about photography.
A great number of options make the camera more difficult to use, but by going at them one at a time, I find I eventually am a better photographer. For example, people say a "pro" camera shouldn't have in body flash; I can't imagine why. Yesterday I was testing out a macro 100mm lens with a Tamron 2X TC loaned to me from a buddy. I took a pill out of my pocket and shot some tests to see if the image would be too soft. I set up the flash this way. I cut a 35mm film canister that was opaque white to slide over the flash head, I then rubber banded on a double layer of Kleenex over the film canister; the set up looked ridiculous but it worked; it diffused the light so I didn't have a harsh image with lots of shadow. If I hadn't had this in camera flash, I wouldn't have had enough light; and I have yet to upgrade my old flash units, I'm afraid to use them on my Digital Rebel.
Or how about IR remote firing of the shutter; talk about useful. The 10s originally came with this option as did my digital Rebel. I use the same remote for the digital Rebel that came with my 1990 camera; it works fine. I can't imagine why a "pro" camera doesn't come with some type of built in remote firing system. Why do I like it; again lets turn to macro. I go to a public garden and set up the shot; invariably the light isn't perfect and I want to punch it up a bit. So I grab my white and gold litedisk and focus the gold concentrated light on the flower(s). Now in a strange gyration I hit the remote with one hand while roughly focusing the disk in the other hand. The camera doesn't go off for around 4 seconds giving me enough time to get the litedisk focusing just right on the plant. Yes I could have hit the self timer but this way I can be standing further from the camera with out having to run over and back.
And look at Nikon's brilliant in camera flash wireless unit; hope Canon gets the hint.
One photographer's worthless features are another's little gems.
--
'Got to location, Found the shot, Checked the tripod for stability, Dusted the lens with brush, Attached said lens to Camera, Turned the camera on... Oh No!... the batteries.'
Inner Discourse
Jay Turberville
Forum Pro
I use a 50mm f/1.4 Takumar and a 50-300mm f/4.5 ED Nikkor on my Olympus DSLRs. Lots of adapters are available. Of course you get a FOV factor of 2x.
I just checked my Minolta SRT-100. It measure 1 15/16". So yes, it is thinner, but not by much. Definitely in the same class. If you pick up the E-410 and hold it, I think you get that "old SLR" feel.
I think that if Olympus made a super-compact 17-35 zoom and allowed themselves to break their telecentricity rules, they'd have a winning combo.
--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
BraveUlysses
Senior Member
Wouldn't be much of a cow, neither. Ooh-arr ooh-arr.
(c:
Rob
If you're bored...
http://braveulysses.deviantart.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Have the courage to be ignorant of a great number of things, in order to avoid the calamity of being ignorant of everything.' Sydney Smith (1771-1845)
(c:
Rob
If you're bored...
http://braveulysses.deviantart.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Have the courage to be ignorant of a great number of things, in order to avoid the calamity of being ignorant of everything.' Sydney Smith (1771-1845)
I learned on a very basic yashica fx3 and would love a dslr that had the same level of features (ie not very much) with the addition of AF which I now cannot do without.
Unfortunately I don't think it will ever happen, and I am stuck with video modes, picture scenes, direct printing etc that I never use. At least on some cameras eg Canon 5D, most of the rubbush his hidden in menus.
Unfortunately I don't think it will ever happen, and I am stuck with video modes, picture scenes, direct printing etc that I never use. At least on some cameras eg Canon 5D, most of the rubbush his hidden in menus.
dennis tennis
Veteran Member
My basic DSLR is my first DSLR, Canon XT. Haven't felt the urge to buy other DSLR. Heaven knows I spend all my money on photography but not on another DSLR body. I rather spend money on lenses. So, maybe, I will get the 30D (7 fps one day?) or 5D (16mp FF one day?) replacement but really, I'm not thinking about that. I just want more lenses.
If you know where a Contax Zeiss 21mm or Nikon Ai-S 300 F2 can be had please tell me.
--
if I made sense, I'm sorry
If you know where a Contax Zeiss 21mm or Nikon Ai-S 300 F2 can be had please tell me.
--
if I made sense, I'm sorry
Robotnik12356
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 461
- Reaction score
- 2
I think not liking fiddley menus might be part of it. The D200 is simpler to control and has more buttons maiking it faster to get to its fucntions than the D50.
phototext
Forum Enthusiast
When I was looking for a DSLR I would have been more than happy to just have been able to change the back on my old Minolta SLR for a digital capture back.
Variable ISO, a small screen showing the histogram, ISO and shots left. Shoots only in RAW.
Then in a few years time replace it with the new back with a higher MP count.
Heaven.
Imagine all those lovely analogue cameras sitting out there gathering dust we could re-use if such a thing was available.
Variable ISO, a small screen showing the histogram, ISO and shots left. Shoots only in RAW.
Then in a few years time replace it with the new back with a higher MP count.
Heaven.
Imagine all those lovely analogue cameras sitting out there gathering dust we could re-use if such a thing was available.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum