Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
It's strange... Today I felt I could enjoy a digital camera and forget all the things I don't like about them... If I could buy a camera for shooting and recording light the way I do with film cameras, I would accept battery life, computer post-processing and digital prints (all horrible things to me...) but only if my shooting was respected...
I don't know if the camera I'd buy will ever be made... Maybe it won't, 'cause maybe it wouldn't sell enough as for making someone want to produce it, but I wanted to share with other forum members what I'd enjoy in a digital camera:
I'd like it to be M mount so I could use my beloved small or fast lenses.
I want it to record in B&W only, because color photography isn't really photography as visually it's too close to reality.
I'd prefer it without screen, because what I like the most about photography is the time gap between shooting and seeing images: if I don't use it, I don't want a screen there.
One easy 2-position button for Metered Manual or Autoexposure.
One easy 4-position button for low(100)/medium(400)/high(1600)/very high(6400) ISO.
Of course shutter speeds for metered manual, and shutter release.
Manual RF focus only.
High resolution JPG only.
I don't care about sensor size.
And the most important to me would be the main “contrast” button on top, with three fast and easy to access positions: a)Direct sun/contrast pull... b)Overcast/shadows... c)Dull scenes/contrast push: recording contrast the way I want, with an easy button for quick options similar to the ways I expose/develop when I shoot film, is what I miss a lot on digital cameras insisting on menus and submenus... This is the only button I'd care about while shooting both sides of the street...
Sometimes I feel recording the right contrast and quickly deciding about that, is the weakest part of digital cameras for fast street shooting... And post-processing RAWs or badly exposed images is a limited procedure, and also one that goes against one of the funniest parts of photography: the goal of recording light the way we want precisely when we hit the shutter...
Am I totally alone here?
Cheers,
Juan
I don't know if the camera I'd buy will ever be made... Maybe it won't, 'cause maybe it wouldn't sell enough as for making someone want to produce it, but I wanted to share with other forum members what I'd enjoy in a digital camera:
I'd like it to be M mount so I could use my beloved small or fast lenses.
I want it to record in B&W only, because color photography isn't really photography as visually it's too close to reality.
I'd prefer it without screen, because what I like the most about photography is the time gap between shooting and seeing images: if I don't use it, I don't want a screen there.
One easy 2-position button for Metered Manual or Autoexposure.
One easy 4-position button for low(100)/medium(400)/high(1600)/very high(6400) ISO.
Of course shutter speeds for metered manual, and shutter release.
Manual RF focus only.
High resolution JPG only.
I don't care about sensor size.
And the most important to me would be the main “contrast” button on top, with three fast and easy to access positions: a)Direct sun/contrast pull... b)Overcast/shadows... c)Dull scenes/contrast push: recording contrast the way I want, with an easy button for quick options similar to the ways I expose/develop when I shoot film, is what I miss a lot on digital cameras insisting on menus and submenus... This is the only button I'd care about while shooting both sides of the street...
Sometimes I feel recording the right contrast and quickly deciding about that, is the weakest part of digital cameras for fast street shooting... And post-processing RAWs or badly exposed images is a limited procedure, and also one that goes against one of the funniest parts of photography: the goal of recording light the way we want precisely when we hit the shutter...
Am I totally alone here?
Cheers,
Juan
LKeithR
Improving daily--I think.
I think a camera with "all" of your ideas would be a hard sell but I'd certainly go for something simpler than most of today's digital cameras. An updated (better sensor, better screen, faster AF, more compact) version of the Digilux 2 would suit me just fine. Alternatively, a simple EVIL--or whatever we're calling them these days--with a PK mount would be pretty nice too...
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I think the reality is that it will never happen - at least not exactly as you describe.
To my mind, the X100 comes closest but it's not quite there yet. Maybe by waiting for the X101 or whatever the upgrade turns out to be (I feel sure there will be one) and then selectively turning off all the options that are unwanted, taping over the screen and using the optionally programmable buttons that will be supplied you might get very close.
If that happens I'm going to sell my GF-1.
But maybe it won't be from Fuji either - maybe another manufacturer is busy working on an interchangeable version of a camera with similar viewfinder technology. Doesn't hurt to flag our wishlists.
To my mind, the X100 comes closest but it's not quite there yet. Maybe by waiting for the X101 or whatever the upgrade turns out to be (I feel sure there will be one) and then selectively turning off all the options that are unwanted, taping over the screen and using the optionally programmable buttons that will be supplied you might get very close.
If that happens I'm going to sell my GF-1.
But maybe it won't be from Fuji either - maybe another manufacturer is busy working on an interchangeable version of a camera with similar viewfinder technology. Doesn't hurt to flag our wishlists.
cambolt
Green Spotted Nose Turtle
wouldn't it be better to have B+W native, but you can convert to colour if you want?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
If you do it right, it'll have a BW sensor, no bayer pattern, so converting to color is not possible. If it uses a color sensor, better to leave the image from the camera color and let us convert. I don't like Juan's jpeg only file format wither, I want a 16 bit raw format. JPEGs suck, the image quality is ok only if you never post process. The second you apply a curve, it falls apart.
Chris101
summicronia
All this fine tuning in different directions is why cameras are built to kitchen sink specs.
Me? I just make do with whatever I can get my hands on. They all seem to work.
Me? I just make do with whatever I can get my hands on. They all seem to work.
gavinlg
Veteran
What exactly is the point of the de-evolving the digital camera? As they sit now, even a basic and inexpensive olympus PEN (e-p1/e-pl1) will be sufficient for 95% of photographers, and they handle really well. The AF works well, (especially for street), they shoot well at iso800-1600, they have massive resolution capabilities.
The camera described here would only work for .2% of photographers, but any one of the DSLRs or even the PENs/m43/samsung NX could be shot in the way that you describe...
The camera described here would only work for .2% of photographers, but any one of the DSLRs or even the PENs/m43/samsung NX could be shot in the way that you describe...
thegman
Veteran
Kind of sounds like an Epson R-D1. OK, it has a screen, but you can fold it away. It can do colour, but you can always set the BW mode or something.
I too would maybe consider a digital camera if I could get something more like a "real" camera, but I think it's asking too much to ask for manufacturers to leave out features entirely when they're easy to turn off and on, like BW modes.
I do agree with you on many of your points, but there is no perfect camera, but there are cameras which will give you close to what you want. Of course, what you want fully catered for by film.
I too would maybe consider a digital camera if I could get something more like a "real" camera, but I think it's asking too much to ask for manufacturers to leave out features entirely when they're easy to turn off and on, like BW modes.
I do agree with you on many of your points, but there is no perfect camera, but there are cameras which will give you close to what you want. Of course, what you want fully catered for by film.
delft
Established
Juan,
I don't think RAWs should be treated with so much disdain. While there's only so much you can do to a badly exposed image in post-processing, RAW offers a perfect answer to your desire to have a 'contrast button' on the camera. In that way, shooting RAW is like shooting negatives, you can choose to develop for strong, normal or weak contrast.
If you insist on shooting JPEG, you could shoot RAW, hand your data-card to someone for processing using only a set of pre-defined contrast-settings and receive the (B&W) JPEGs as a result. That might come close to 'recording the light the way we want precisely when we hit the shutter...'
It's a lot like sending out your film to be developed. You could even set up your 'home-lab' with a script to let your computer eat RAWs and spit out JPEGs in high, medium or low contrast.
Dirk
Last edited:
greyelm
Malcolm
I'm not sure that a stripped down digital would be viable. I have a GF1 and X100, both give excellent results and if B&W is the prime mode then shooting Raw + BW jpg is a failsafe way to go. The GF1 does accommodate M and LTM lenses and in combination with the native m43 lenses gives a very flexible system (the EVF is lower res but useable, reminiscent of a Barnack). I love the X100 as it does all I need and like the GF1 the LCD can be turned off.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Juan,
I'm sure Leica could 'slug' (cripple) an M9 for you, at only twice the price of a vastly more versatile full-featured M9. But I think that the market for the camera you describe might consist only of Juan Valdenebro. JPEG only, when DNG allows the contrast control you want afterwards (exactly like processing film)? Smaller than even 18x27mm, so there are no fast wide angles and no extreme wide angles? What's 'limited' about DNG post-process? And why do you have to look at the screen? Sometimes I do; sometimes I don't. Willlpower suffices.
Cheers,
R.
I'm sure Leica could 'slug' (cripple) an M9 for you, at only twice the price of a vastly more versatile full-featured M9. But I think that the market for the camera you describe might consist only of Juan Valdenebro. JPEG only, when DNG allows the contrast control you want afterwards (exactly like processing film)? Smaller than even 18x27mm, so there are no fast wide angles and no extreme wide angles? What's 'limited' about DNG post-process? And why do you have to look at the screen? Sometimes I do; sometimes I don't. Willlpower suffices.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
gavinlg
Veteran
Introducing...... a simple digital camera:
Some things to note:
- The 'set and forget' things would take a total of 10 seconds to set.
- Despite the camera having an LCD screen, you don't have to worry about it, because you can turn it off. And it's a strong LCD (unlike the leica m8 and old nikons) that is very difficult to scratch or mark.
- AF set to single point is significantly faster to focus than anyone could manual focus a rangefinder, and accurate too, and it means the camera will focus exactly where you want it to 100% of the time - just focus and recompose like you would a rangefinder.
So basically the only external controls you would be likely to change when shooting would be - shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and JPEG picture control (changing contrast in monochrome mode).
You can't really get much more basic than that.
Some things to note:
- The 'set and forget' things would take a total of 10 seconds to set.
- Despite the camera having an LCD screen, you don't have to worry about it, because you can turn it off. And it's a strong LCD (unlike the leica m8 and old nikons) that is very difficult to scratch or mark.
- AF set to single point is significantly faster to focus than anyone could manual focus a rangefinder, and accurate too, and it means the camera will focus exactly where you want it to 100% of the time - just focus and recompose like you would a rangefinder.
So basically the only external controls you would be likely to change when shooting would be - shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and JPEG picture control (changing contrast in monochrome mode).
You can't really get much more basic than that.
Fraser
Well-known
Going back to the raw thing since having a M8 with weird white balance and using lightroom at home (still use photoshop for work) shooting raw makes no difference at all to my workflow. I just wouldn't bother shooting jpegs.
I don't think you can get much simpler than an M8 or M9, and even though I like my MP and M2 I think the M9 produce such nice files there is no contest.
I don't think you can get much simpler than an M8 or M9, and even though I like my MP and M2 I think the M9 produce such nice files there is no contest.
Jamie123
Veteran
So you want a camera that is so crippled that it will actively impede you from getting shots of reasonable technical quality just for the sake of a ''better'' shooting experience. Ok, fine. But why then even bother with a digital camera? Why not just keep shooting with film cameras? You don't even have to put film in them.
Fraser
Well-known
I think a digital camera without a screen is pointless and as jamie123 says you are better just shooting film.
As I said in a similar thread only a leica shooter
As I said in a similar thread only a leica shooter
Jeez Juan, you really think this?
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I tend to agree with Gavin in that most DSLRs can be set up that way you want to shoot Juan. By crippling the camera nothing will be significantly cheaper so just find a model that you like, set it you the way you like to shoot and leave it.
Bob
Bob
gavinlg
Veteran
But it is still a DSLR...
True, but on the flip side, it's a real camera and you can use it to good effect...
photobizzz
Speak of the Devil
I have wanted a digital RF for years but financially could never get one, so just settled for an EP-1, it's actually in the mail now and plan on getting some decent m glass fo it soon so I think the word of the day is compromise. We all make them and with cameras it is a requirement, there is no perfect camera and never will be so we just do the best we can with what we can get our hands on