swoop
Well-known
I think a modern digital Canonet would sell very well.
With a traditional optical viewfinder. Manually selectable aperture and shutter speed via dials. An APS-C sensor. A fixed lens the equivalent of a 35-45mm lens. An aperture of f2 or f2.5.
I think people would buy that. It would likely be a secondary camera for the same group that buys DSLR's and digital rangefinders. Or bought up by a lot of artsy and creative folks. But it would sell pretty well.
With a traditional optical viewfinder. Manually selectable aperture and shutter speed via dials. An APS-C sensor. A fixed lens the equivalent of a 35-45mm lens. An aperture of f2 or f2.5.
I think people would buy that. It would likely be a secondary camera for the same group that buys DSLR's and digital rangefinders. Or bought up by a lot of artsy and creative folks. But it would sell pretty well.
Last edited:
Avotius
Some guy
Note:I hate to do this but I am anyway.
While you are thinking that, they are thinking this:
And its a damn shame.
While you are thinking that, they are thinking this:
And its a damn shame.
Last edited:
stupid leica
i don't shoot rf
The Canon S90 will be a pretty good substitute in the mean time.
peterc
Heretic
Sigma DP1 or DP2.
Not an FF sensor (APS) but single focal length (28mm or 40mm), few bells and whistles. Also, excellent IQ.
Not an FF sensor (APS) but single focal length (28mm or 40mm), few bells and whistles. Also, excellent IQ.
functus
Failed Poet
Honestly, I doubt that rangefinder afficianados are out there in sufficient numbers to warrant resources being expended on the risky bet that a less-expensive-than-Leica digital rangefinder would capture the imagination of millions ...
Realistically, what is more likely is that Canikon -- or Olympus or Panasonic, perhaps -- will eventually create a interchangeable-lens digital camera with a much simpler, much less complex interface and direct-input controls (an actual focus ring, an actual aperture and shutter-speed dial, etc.). Not just pseudo-retro-styled like the E-P1, but a camera designed for a shooter who prefers a simple and direct manual approach ...
Then again, you could argue that Panaleica came close with the LC1/Digilux 3, and that didn't exactly take the world by storm ...
Digital FE-2, anybody?
Realistically, what is more likely is that Canikon -- or Olympus or Panasonic, perhaps -- will eventually create a interchangeable-lens digital camera with a much simpler, much less complex interface and direct-input controls (an actual focus ring, an actual aperture and shutter-speed dial, etc.). Not just pseudo-retro-styled like the E-P1, but a camera designed for a shooter who prefers a simple and direct manual approach ...
Then again, you could argue that Panaleica came close with the LC1/Digilux 3, and that didn't exactly take the world by storm ...
Digital FE-2, anybody?
djonesii
Well-known
I would settle for a nikon FMx in digital, same mount, same sensor size, just leave off all the cruft ...... I know this is RFF, but I have a feeling there are a few Nikon FMx shooters around here ..... They should be able to cram all the electronics needed in the same sized body. No AF, no scene modes, the already have the mechanical AI-S built into the lenses.
Dave
Dave
Bruin
Noktonian
A mirror-less APS-C compact can solve a lot of the optical challenges from the larger sensor by using a fixed lens and compromising (gasp!) on the IQ from the optics and letting software correct it in-camera or in post.
I think if Canon/Nikon came out with a fixed-lens, APS-C sensor, premium compact, it could prove to be a serious challenge to the micro-4/3 segment. Give it a f2.8 zoom with a decent range, let software correct some distortion and falloff (and write the metadata in the RAW files so converters know how to do it), IS of course, the controls you'd expect on a low-end DSLR, and the usual niceties (3" 920k screen, movie modes, etc.).
It won't intrude into the regular P&S range, and people who need the focal lengths outside of 24-90mm can buy a DSLR. A camera like this would sell well as a second camera for pros and DSLR owners and for a lot of amateurs, be the only camera they need.
I think if Canon/Nikon came out with a fixed-lens, APS-C sensor, premium compact, it could prove to be a serious challenge to the micro-4/3 segment. Give it a f2.8 zoom with a decent range, let software correct some distortion and falloff (and write the metadata in the RAW files so converters know how to do it), IS of course, the controls you'd expect on a low-end DSLR, and the usual niceties (3" 920k screen, movie modes, etc.).
It won't intrude into the regular P&S range, and people who need the focal lengths outside of 24-90mm can buy a DSLR. A camera like this would sell well as a second camera for pros and DSLR owners and for a lot of amateurs, be the only camera they need.
Phantomas
Well-known
Don't want to go aginst the grain here as I dream of (another) digital RF myself, but what makes you think that Nikon/Canon are going to take the valuable resources away from high demand, high turnover DSLR R&D and production and invest them into uber-nieche product like that? Supply and demand my friend. Bring yourself and a couple of hundred thousand friends and we're on. If you think that members of RFF and like forums constitute substantial market for Nikon and Canon you're dilusional. Trust me, I'm in the industry and know the numbers, demand for such cameras is nothing compared to DSLR demand.
And yes, they could produce a very nice (APC or fullframe) compact, but do you realise what the cost would be? The price would cut into lower DSLR or even higher and they would canibalise each other. Not good in business terms.
The only reason Oly and Pana are doing it is because their DSLR market share is not even visible in the big picture, they're just a thin line running invisibly next to zero while Nikon/Canon float up there close to 40% each. Oly and Pana have nothing to loose, it's actually good they diversify because they have no place in DSLR market, business-wise.
Nikon/Canon do not posses unlimited resources, they already struggle to meet DSLR demand in the low/mid range sector. Jumping into another sector would only hurt them in resource department.
Nikon already gave you a couple of nice anniversary "S" models. That was a nice gesture that covered an actual demand and served a symbolic purpose. Unfortunatelly that's as far as it will go for time being.
I'm not saying such cameras are impossible, just not now and not from these two guys. If you realistically want a digital RF-like camera pressue the underdogs - Leica, Oly, Pana, etc.
As far as the niche goes, a high cost digital MF would be a lot more realistic.
Again, I would personally LOVE to see such a camera, but the reality dictates otherwise.
And yes, they could produce a very nice (APC or fullframe) compact, but do you realise what the cost would be? The price would cut into lower DSLR or even higher and they would canibalise each other. Not good in business terms.
The only reason Oly and Pana are doing it is because their DSLR market share is not even visible in the big picture, they're just a thin line running invisibly next to zero while Nikon/Canon float up there close to 40% each. Oly and Pana have nothing to loose, it's actually good they diversify because they have no place in DSLR market, business-wise.
Nikon/Canon do not posses unlimited resources, they already struggle to meet DSLR demand in the low/mid range sector. Jumping into another sector would only hurt them in resource department.
Nikon already gave you a couple of nice anniversary "S" models. That was a nice gesture that covered an actual demand and served a symbolic purpose. Unfortunatelly that's as far as it will go for time being.
I'm not saying such cameras are impossible, just not now and not from these two guys. If you realistically want a digital RF-like camera pressue the underdogs - Leica, Oly, Pana, etc.
As far as the niche goes, a high cost digital MF would be a lot more realistic.
Again, I would personally LOVE to see such a camera, but the reality dictates otherwise.
burninfilm
Well-known
Try a D40. I don't know what all the fuss is about pertaining to all the excess features on a DSLR. Most of them can be turned off. Set the D40 to "Manual," put an old AI or pre-AI lens on the front of it, use a handheld meter, and shoot. Or, if you need in-camera metering, try a used D200 for about $600.
DougFord
on the good foot
[FONT="]As already mentioned above, an aps-c, fixed zoom lens camera from either Nikon/canon might cannibalize their lower end dSLR offerings. So it seems less likely that they’ll be in a hurry to do so. At least in the short term. The market could end up making their self imposed reluctance a moot point.[/FONT]
[FONT="]As luck would have it, I think Leica has a clear path to fully exploit this design architecture, NOW, quickly and with much haste. Just as important to the survival of the company as it was for Leica to solve the FF issue, I think it’s paramount that they introduce a FF AF hybrid (even if it’s just a mock-up) by this time next year.[/FONT]
[FONT="]As luck would have it, I think Leica has a clear path to fully exploit this design architecture, NOW, quickly and with much haste. Just as important to the survival of the company as it was for Leica to solve the FF issue, I think it’s paramount that they introduce a FF AF hybrid (even if it’s just a mock-up) by this time next year.[/FONT]
ZeissFan
Veteran
While I agree with you, glitz sells. And even though I know of NO ONE who EVER uses the scene modes, the companies continue to put them in there.
Any of the camera makers could certainly produce a stripped-down dSLR, but they don't want to, because they think that consumers want all of these features, even if they never use them. There's probably some truth to that.
I wonder how many people use the slide show feature on cameras? Or the night scene mode? Or even know what that symbol means?
It reminds me a bit of stereo equipment and the difference between European, American and Japanese components. Consumer-grade Japanese gear often had a lot of multi-segment LEDs and sliders, while European components (Bang & Olufsen and Thorens always comes to mind -- Dual turntables too) went the other direction.
The non-audiophiles who I knew went for the Christmas trees, while others selected subtlety.
functus
Failed Poet
Except what I'm looking for (hoping for) isn't a DLSR that can be turned into a manual mode camera -- by diving through menus and sub-menus and turning multi-function wheels that might change aperture or might change shutter speed or might do something else entirely depending on what mode I'm in -- what I would love is a digital camera that is designed to be manual by default. In other words, a camera that has immediate, tactile, evident, traditional (yes, I'm a curmudgeon) dedicated knobs and controls.
I don't know ... say a digital F4? That would pretty well be my ideal ...
M
merciful
Guest
Except for the massive crashing and banging of the shutter, and the hugeness of the whole rig, I'd be OK with that.
peterc
Heretic
That's what I want as well. The ergonomics of the F4 are the best I've found.
peterm1
Veteran
A few years ago when the Panasonic L1 / Leica Digilux 3 was on its way out, (and therefore half of its original price) I bought an L1 in the hope that it would soothe my need for a digital rangefinder without having to sell my house. Even though it is an SLR it handles somewhat like one. But it did not really work for me in this way. The thing is nice but still does not feel quite like a rangefinder in the hands - its a tad too big and the shutter response time seems a tad slow (although this may be an impression based on how the mirror returns). Plus the finder is a bit too small and dark making it difficult to use with manual lenses in some lighting conditions. But it can work well with other manufacturer's lenses using adapters and goes part of the way towards meeting that need. Like others I am still looking and it may be that in the fullness of time my only option will be a digital M.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
So????????