Why hasn't someone made a DSLR with classic shape and controls?

[jsrockit]

Fuji has made the X series with classic controls (shutter speed dial and aperture ring) and with a classic RF style shape and has had some success. However, nobody has bothered making a Pentax K1000 style digital camera. Olympus' OMD certainly had the spirit of this type of camera, but still went the modern route ultimately.

1) Why hasn't this type of DSLR been made?

2) Who would be the first to make it if this ever does happen?

3) Do you think it would sell?

My guess is that it would have to be someone smaller in the DSLR world... someone looking to fill a niche like Fuji did with the X series.

 

[Dave Jenkins]

No answer to your questions, but put me first in line if someone ever makes one.

 

[Luddite Frank]

"Blobs" are the in thing.... just look at modern automobiles...

 

[FA Limited]

i would say because it doesn't sell.
-all DSLRs that are affordable have a bunch of auto modes that pander to entry level users (nothing wrong with that). but how can you combine auto modes with classic controls aperture and shutter speed?
-most new lenses are now made without aperture rings so a whole new set of lenses would have to be made
-finally mirrorless is probably going to be more dominant so significant investments in the DSLR field may not pay off.
-phase detection autofocus ruined the past bright massive viewfinders

i loved my pentax MZ-S, it's really too bad they didn't pursue a digital version.

 

[Sparrow]

... because the marketing dept now rules the design dept ... and anyone working in sales is useless to man and beast

 

[jsrockit]

i would say because it doesn't sell.

How could we possibly know this? It hasn't been attempted.

-all DSLRs that are affordable have a bunch of auto modes that pander to entry level users (nothing wrong with that). but how can you combine auto modes with classic controls aperture and shutter speed?

The Fujis offer auto everything modes too while having a shutter speed dial and aperture ring.

-most new lenses are now made without aperture rings so a whole new set of lenses would have to be made

True. And all of these older SLRs were manual focus too. A newer iteration would most likely have to be AF.

-finally mirrorless is probably going to be more dominant so significant investments in the DSLR field may not pay off.

It could pay off for a smaller company not called Nikon or Canon.

 

[thegman]

I expect it would sell, and after the success of the X100, I expect somebody will make one.

 

[jsrockit]

Perhaps Fuji will step up and reintroduce this in digital... 😉

 

[Murchu]

1) Appetite, I think. Canon/ Nikon seem happy with their formulaeic business model, and the smaller players seem content to ignore this niche in the market.

2) Guessing game really, but Sony perhaps. Otherwise any number of smaller players, and probably one with a legacy in slrs, as can't see a company without such a background being interested in creating such a camera.

3) To the photographic enthusiast market and up, yes. To the mass market, only if backed by a company with deep pockets to match Canon/ Nikon with advertising spend and economies of scale, as well as the staying power to take the early hits and stay the course.

I'd love to see such a camera, and with size becoming the new battleground (thankfully), you would wonder if even Canon/ Nikon are not feeling any pressure provide a digital slr that is not a brick. With their lenses now so tubby though, one would wonder even if Nikon came out with say a digital fm3a for example, whether it would make much of a difference to photographers. After all, the Sony Nex's are pretty small packages - until you put a lens on them.

 

[Godfrey]

Fuji has made the X series with classic controls (shutter speed dial and aperture ring) and with a classic RF style shape and has had some success. However, nobody has bothered making a Pentax K1000 style digital camera. Olympus' OMD certainly had the spirit of this type of camera, but still went the modern route ultimately.

1) Why hasn't this type of DSLR been made?

2) Who would be the first to make it if this ever does happen?

3) Do you think it would sell?

My guess is that it would have to be someone smaller in the DSLR world... someone looking to fill a niche like Fuji did with the X series.

I don't care so much about "classic SLR shape and controls". Having had more than a few SLRs (from Nikon, Olympus, Minolta, Contax, Pentax, Canon, Panasonic, and Exacta) over the past 45+ years, the very best SLR body I've used, film or digital, is the Olympus E-1. Superb ergonomics, wonderful feature set and controls.

Many of us who have owned (and still own, and use) the E-1 wish that Olympus would update it with the latest sensor and improved (faster) hardware, otherwise leave it alone. I'd buy one of those today, no hesitation.

G

 

[Contarama]

I hate to compare cars to cameras but look at the sales figures for Dodge Challengers and Chevy Camaros both very retro type designs. I imagine if one of the big manufacturers such as Nikon or Canon would do this it would be a big hit especially if priced for the consumer market.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

They'd be accused of "pandering" to the "hipsters".

 

[Spicy]

That's just how science works, friend. If you're going to learn it, you put in the effort to remember. If you weren't going to learn it in the first place, what difference does it make?


Also, I suspect if the "retro dSLR" is going to happen, it'll be soon. Pentax just made a mirrorless one with a black paint over metal body, and Fuji/Olympus have been trending towards "could be mistaken for a film camera" for a while. I'm sure a D3300/5300 in a small metal body would sell, if for novelty alone. But it seems like Canikon have been running low on Sense for a while now, content to ignore innovation and watch the more eager companies eviscerate their low-end DSLR sales because they're too shy/complacent to do it themselves...

 

[FA Limited]

The Fujis offer auto everything modes too while having a shutter speed dial and aperture ring.

i'm talking scene modes ... to n00bs i would imagine the shutter speed and aperture rings are like huh? like ooh i'm taking a picture of something fast, i should use the running man mode. or i'm taking night pictures so i'm using moon mode. as much as we hate it, it seems like a must for any "consumer" camera these days to have scene modes. how do you fit scene modes into this type of camera.

It could pay off for a smaller company not called Nikon or Canon.

who else is out there that would invest in a new SLR system at this point? most of the large electronic companies with any imaging background are already engaged in the camera space. at this point any DSLR system would have to have at least decent live view focusing which means it would have the functionality of a mirrorless. then all the additional complexities of a DSLR with its moving parts. i don't see it but not to say it couldn't happen.

 

[Godfrey]

Well not exactly 1000 is actually 1/1000th -- there is the rub...

1/1000 is a smaller number than 1 -- but the dial is marked 1000, so a "larger" marking is less light, even though it is actually a smaller number. Explain that in class. 😀

The f-stops are marked with whole numbers and indeed while they are also fractions of the focal length of a lens. no one has as much trouble with them. It is always enjoyable to explain that "1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6" is half as much light per stop. Good luck with that.

They're both marked with the denominator of fractions, so the ordering is the same—larger number shown is a reduction. Exposure time selector ("shutter speed is so imprecise ...) goes up by factor of two to cut light one half. Aperture f/number is a little trickier, but the relationship of the numbers is that each larger one is squareroot of two times the last ... difference is that it's an area measure, not a linear measure.

Just explain that to the noob who has questions. ;-)

G

 

[teleparallel]

I'd like to see some Dslr with speed dial. The camera could have a top lcd to tell the current aperture, in a brand that doesn't feature aperture rings. Like the Leica S system. But also, it could have an external ISO selection.

Nice things about these dials is that preselected settings become easy.

At the same time it's not as fast to set on the fly on M mode while fast shotting comparing to jog dials currently used.

I can't tell if the thing would sell, but it's unlikely to be a product that would reach too many different market niches, since these are things for enthusiasts in love with old style controls. So, the price point would be high.

Finally it's hard to be second to another company, since fuji did it. If the next models end up having a good digital split image, and others effective manual focus aids, it's unlikely that a more "limited" mirror box design succeed.

 

[gnarayan]

Not the "classic" shape with prism hump but the Panasonic L1 did have a shutter speed dial, and the Panasonic 4/3rds lenses did have aperture rings (albeit not mechanically coupled) and is an actual SLR unlike the X-Pro 1.

It's partly just handling - most lens ranges are dominated by zooms (even if the RFF crowd predominantly cares about fast primes). These are larger, so you get extended hand grips. You also need the space for a much larger battery, AF electronics, rear LCD... all things you don't have on something like a K1000.

 

[dave lackey]

Fuji has made the X series with classic controls (shutter speed dial and aperture ring) and with a classic RF style shape and has had some success. However, nobody has bothered making a Pentax K1000 style digital camera. Olympus' OMD certainly had the spirit of this type of camera, but still went the modern route ultimately.

1) Why hasn't this type of DSLR been made?

2) Who would be the first to make it if this ever does happen?

3) Do you think it would sell?

My guess is that it would have to be someone smaller in the DSLR world... someone looking to fill a niche like Fuji did with the X series.

Hear, hear! My thread a year or so ago was basically a rant from a designer, me, about the melted blobs of current DSLRs...I have film blobs from Nikon that I had 30 years ago and look no different than the bloated blobs from Nikon today.

Would they sell? Hard to say with the designer/market influences of today when folks (mostly younger) think tablets and iphones are classic shapes.😡

But, one day, DSLRs, if they are still made will have to evolve into something, hopefully not a fully melted blob.😛

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I wouldn't mind if my D7000 looked and handled like this....

 

[dave lackey]

"Blobs" are the in thing.... just look at modern automobiles...

+1..no, plus 100! Not only do they all look alike but a quick story...my wife owns a 1995 E420 and we had to get a little service work done because I didn't have the time/tools to fix a minor maintenance problem. Took it to the MB dealer and they gave us a brand new 2013 C-class as a loaner. My wife hated that car...the ride, the goofy turbo power, the seats, the interior. She much preferred her 18-year old sedan over the new MB. I did too.🙄

Then, to boot, the MB dealer was wrong on the diagnosis and I fixed it myself.😛

New ain't necessarily better than old.😎