Case study - digital OM/FM - would you buy?

[Igor.Burshteyn]

one can always dream 🙂
but seriously - major camera manufacturers produced niche manual focus professional cameras for decades - Nikon F3 end of production was in 2001, and Olympus OM4ti ended production in 2002. By then they were not either best sellers or cache generators - but it required digital revolution to stop producing them. Their customer base were professionals, students (rich students I must admit) and amateur purists, and this customer base didn't come away - yes professionals switched from Nikon F5 to Nikon Dxy or Canon xD mark XXV, but still tasks and requirements are the same. As the ashes of digital revolution settle, and full frame sensors become commodity, we will see come back of purists digital cameras... well, one can always dream 🙂

 

[Jamie Pillers]

I was thinking that if a company like Fuji or Ricoh gave the no-LCD idea a try, then they might also start rethinking other aspects of digital camera design. My hope is, and always has been, that these companies move away from the big black DSLR form and return to the smaller, simpler designs of old. Replace film canister with a digital sensor. Done. 🙂

 

[Tompas]

(...) After a while I found that I liked having the LCD off. How about a compromise position, a LCD that can fold out and rotate around, so you can have it facing out or in. (...)

Actually, I almost bought a Nikon D5000, which has such an LCD. I'm sure I would have liked that feature very much, but unfortunately my oldish Nikkor lenses are very poorly supported by all but the highest end Nikon cameras.

I bought a Pentax K-x instead. Works perfectly with most of my oldish Pentax lenses (Pentax-A and newer). The non-flippable LCD is just turned off. Pentax smart, Nikon not.

 

[Tompas]

(...) When I shoot portraits for publications I'm always checking to see if I got the right moment with smiles and no blinking etc (...)

Don't do that -- it doesn't look cool.

Just pretend you know what you're doing. 😉

 

[ColinW]

You mean like this? 😀

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19944

I'd really not bother because I prefer film. I've got a couple of digi's, but prefer the buzz of waiting to get the film back and see if I got it right (usually not!). I feel that I learn more that way as well, but that's probably just me.

 

[Gary E]

A digital F2 with plain finder or F3HP would just about end my search... 🙄

 

[mgeary]

I would start saving for it the day of its announcement.

 

[Gary E]

Yeah even my 5d seems a bit small after using my 1n for a while...

I'm surprised at the amount of people saying "they'd never make it" when the fuji x100 is basically the same thing, in point and shoot form, and it seems to be selling extraordinarily well.

Exactly, but they'd be only selling digital bodies with no new sales in lenses. I've read they make most of their money in the sale of lenses, so that's why no mfg would make a digital body only to satisfy a legacy market (like for some Leica R users 🙁)

 

[gavinlg]

Exactly, but they'd be only selling digital bodies with no new sales in lenses. I've read they make most of their money in the sale of lenses, so that's why no mfg would make a digital body only to satisfy a legacy market (like for some Leica R users 🙁)

Which is why I suggested a new line of OM digital lenses with screw drive AF to keep the size small, with the same build quality, look and feel as the originals.

 

[rxmd]

Which is why I suggested a new line of OM digital lenses with screw drive AF to keep the size small, with the same build quality, look and feel as the originals.

Screw drive AF is basically a technological dead end. Its only advantage is that you can keep the lenses a little bit smaller and cheaper.

Otherwise it makes a lot of things more difficult - it's hard to get the right combination of precision, torque and speed for fast and accurate focusing, it's hard to get full-time manual focusing right, it's tricky to build a universal motor and transmission for focusing small pancakes and large zooms, it's hard to get it silent, and it makes the body bigger.

 

[gavinlg]

Screw drive AF is basically a technological dead end. Its only advantage is that you can keep the lenses a little bit smaller and cheaper.

Otherwise it makes a lot of things more difficult - it's hard to get the right combination of precision, torque and speed for fast and accurate focusing, it's hard to get full-time manual focusing right, it's tricky to build a universal motor and transmission for focusing small pancakes and large zooms, it's hard to get it silent, and it makes the body bigger.

I'm not sure... compare the af-d nikkors to the G nikkors. Most of the comparible prime G's are literally twice the size as the af-d's, sometimes more. Then look at the DA* pentax limiteds - absolutely tiny, and screw drive AF. USM focussing means the lens must have a motor in it, screw drive means that the body has the motor, and the lens can be made smaller.
It's also generally accepted that the screw drive nikkors focus faster than the G nikkors too...

To use screw drive AF would be a compromise for smaller size rather than ultimate AF performance.

 

[jsrockit]

Honestly, do we think we will ever see a DSLR that is as retro as the M9 is? It would have to be a pet project like the X100 I would think. I'd love to see it... but I don't think we will.

 

[gavinlg]

Honestly, do we think we will ever see a DSLR that is as retro as the M9 is? It would have to be a pet project like the X100 I would think. I'd love to see it... but I don't think we will.

This would all be avoidable if the m9 wasn't so pricey :angel:

 

[jsrockit]

This would all be avoidable if the m9 wasn't so pricey :angel:

For many of us at RFF... but are there people who are primarily SLR users who are dying for this type of camera or is it just rangefinder users who want a simple DSLR?

The reason I say that is because there seems to be a whole group of people out there who want the latest and greatest with 1 million options.

 

[gavinlg]

For many of us at RFF... but are there people who are primarily SLR users who are dying for this type of camera or is it just rangefinder users who want a simple DSLR?

The reason I say that is because there seems to be a whole group of people out there who want the latest and greatest with 1 million options.

I don't know... See the x100 for example. It's pretty much the same thing, but more rf/p&s version, and it's proven to be really popular. I'd expect the x100 is actually more complex in design than an slr as well - so it should prove that it CAN be done.

 

[David Murphy]

If I had an easily available 3 grand I'd consider buying it, but I don't and probably never will!

 

[redisburning]

yeah Ive not got the money for it but I would buy one for sure if I could reasonably swing it.

 

[semilog]

And the money is in lens sales, not camera sales.

That's not at all clear. The vast majority of SLRs sold only ever are used with their original lens.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

By the time Olympus gets around to such a camera, full-frame prices should be down to $1500. $3000... no way.

 

[gavinlg]

Im still waiting for this camera! Nikon! Give us a millenium edition f3hp digital!