why no DSLR that is simple? (No, not a Nikon DF)

[kdriceman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What you've missed is that it is perfectly possible to set up an M series digital camera so that anyone who has used an M series film camera (an early 1954 M3 for example;)) can use it without having to learn anything whatsoever (except perhaps, not to try to wind-on:eek:) - this is far from true for the vast majority of other cameras whose interface has substantially changed:confused:.

 

 

I'll give you that, except perhaps for setting ISO, shooting mode and asking about the 9 buttons on the camera. The M's user interface is classic and I do like that. Really, a lot. But to the extent that we are bemoaning camera complexity and feature bloat (I'm not), I think we have to include the M.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pgk]

I'll give you that, except perhaps for setting ISO, shooting mode and asking about the 9 buttons on the camera. The M's user interface is classic and I do like that. Really, a lot. But to the extent that we are bemoaning camera complexity and feature bloat (I'm not), I think we have to include the M.

Agreed. I reckon my M9 has too much on it too.....

[MarkP]

What originally attracted me to the M9 as my first digital camera (coming from the Nikon FT/3) was that it was full frame, had outstanding lenses, and that the user interface was familiar - that of focus, aperture, and shutter speed controls in the same place that I had been placing my hands and fingers on film cameras for decades.

 

Why no one has done this for a dSLR, as Leica has maintained for digital Ms, is beyond me - especially that now there seems to be a resurgence of interest in retro style and function. I would have thought that a simple and reasonably small dSLR with glass prism optical viewfinder would have or would build a niche market that perhaps Nikon or Olympus or whoever could develop. The major companies all have such a large and redundant range of current camera models that such a marketing experiment would be worthwhile

[kdriceman]

What originally attracted me to the M9 as my first digital camera (coming from the Nikon FT/3) was that it was full frame, had outstanding lenses, and that the user interface was familiar - that of focus, aperture, and shutter speed controls in the same place that I had been placing my hands and fingers on film cameras for decades.

 

 

 

Why no one has done this for a dSLR, as Leica has maintained for digital Ms, is beyond me - especially that now there seems to be a resurgence of interest in retro style and function. I would have thought that a simple and reasonably small dSLR with glass prism optical viewfinder would have or would build a niche market that perhaps Nikon or Olympus or whoever could develop. The major companies all have such a large and redundant range of current camera models that such a marketing experiment would be worthwhile

 

 

I fear that those of us that learned with and are still comfortable with a shutter speed dial, aperture ring and manual focus are few and far between... A small market segment. Fuji has tried to do this with the X series mirrorless and it actually works pretty well, especially with the XPro1 and it's hybrid EVF/OVF and now with the XT1 with the ISO dial on the top plate. But there aren't enough of us to support such a camera based solely on the classic interface, thus the cameras are loaded with features and options which leads to complexity and menus. Again, it doesn't bother me though because by spending just a few minutes with the camera and manual one can configure it to one's liking. Leica can do it because they have no competition in the digital rangefinder market and can thus charge $7,000 for an M body... But again the digital M does indeed have it's share of options, features and menu morass.

[MarkP]

I fear that those of us that learned with and are still comfortable with a shutter speed dial, aperture ring and manual focus are few and far between... A small market segment.

 

I'd argue that there may well be enough over the age of perhaps 40 who used these cameras, and there is an increasing interest from young photographers in film cameras, and the use of manual controls.....?

[kdriceman]

I'd argue that there may well be enough over the age of perhaps 40 who used these cameras, and there is an increasing interest from young photographers in film cameras, and the use of manual controls.....?

 

You may well be right, but I think that based on the fact that Sony, Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Fuji and others, spend millions of dollars on market research and we aren't seeing a purist DSLR it is probably not the case. I think Nikon thought that is what they were delivering with the DF, and I haven't used one, but at least some on this forum think it has fallen short. And, it is very expensive.

[gyoung]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My Nex-6 has the same sensor as my Nikon D7000, but the electronics to fiulfil virtually the same 'facilities' take up FAR more space. And the Nex has a tlting screen too.

Just compare the D800 to the A7r, its not just the mirror box that makes them bigger its inefficient design (IMHO), the amateur level cameras are a lot smaller without losing much that takes up space.

 

Gerry

[steveclem]

I'd be curious enough to wager that a grass roots camera as in the OP would sell more than the DF..................Nikon just couldn't stop themselves from bunging a load of extraneous buttons and menus in for the hell of it. and then proclaiming a back to the basics camera, in so many words.

[kdriceman]

I'd be curious enough to wager that a grass roots camera as in the OP would sell more than the DF..................Nikon just couldn't stop themselves from bunging a load of extraneous buttons and menus in for the hell of it. and then proclaiming a back to the basics camera, in so many words.

 

Especially if the price could be kept at around $1,000 or less. What they should do is this - develop such a camera - very basic, very high IQ, full frame, manual camera interface with an ISO dial (that's my preference anyway). Price it at $999 so it's below the A7. This would be available for those who don't want and don't want to pay for the added features, video, etc. It would be very easy to then release a feature laden version of the same camera with firmware enhancements for an extra $500-$600. I might go for that, especially if I could buy the firmware upgrade later should I change my mind.

[CalArts 99]

fwiw, the dialogue surrounding “complexity” in camera bodies didn’t start in the digital era. e.g., the Nikon F4 was the beginning of the current DSLR paradigm and was perfected with the F6 (Nikon’s last professional film camera and which is basically a D3 without a sensor.) And with additional functions that were only necessary with digital media, the camera bodies developed “complex” menus and abundant buttons. Although those additions are quite functional and arguably beneficial in a camera system used for specific purposes (and that one would expect to find in a full single lens reflex system; most photographers had both a rangefinder and a SLR to fulfill those specific purposes.) And it wasn’t only Nikon/Canon that shifted the design paradigm to more “complexity.” Leica also produced a much evolving SLR system themselves (e.g.,compare the Leicaflex SL to the Leica R9.)

 

Despite that I grew up on less “complex” film rangefinder and SLR cameras, I actually find that the modern digital Nikon SLR paradigm is a lot more ergonomic, functional, and much, much faster to use than the so-called “less complex” way of doing things. And especially with this type of camera system (single lens reflex) where utility and speed are often why one uses it in the first place. Yes, I can be pretty fast with a Leica M6 or Nikon F3 (both of which I still use), but the increased functionality of the modern DSLR is very much appreciated. And yes, I still appreciate using the M6 and F3 because of their “simplicity.” Although I think that perhaps has more to do with the characteristics of using film and mechanical cameras (although the F3 has an electronically timed shutter but which in turn allows for the convenience of an aperture priority mode.) But the reality is that they aren’t really as functional (e.g., the F3 versus the F6; both are film cameras but are very different in both ergonomics and utility.)

 

Rangefinders like the Leica M were/are desirable for a variety of reasons with one being their physical size. The Nikon grew in size (compare the F to the F6) and eventually got fat in the digital era. But this wasn’t so much because of the “complexity’” but also because a sensor was now being used instead of film and the fact that Nikon has remained with the original F lens mount. The digital Nikon Df is fat with its sensor and F mount. And the digital Leica M is also fat compared to M film versions (the sensor and legacy M mount contributes to its girth.)

 

Anyway, I personally think that this “complexity” argument is a bit overcooked. We seem to have adapted pretty well to ‘complex’ smartphones, ‘complex’ electronic laden modern automobiles, and other types of very advanced tools and appliances. A current DSLR doesn’t take a lot of brainpower to muster and they are, in fact, designed to be used very quickly and simply. That’s actually the whole point to them. Once they are set up, one can use them very easily and with little effort (and which is important in many situations that one normally would want to use a single lens reflex system.) Yet they also offer a huge amount of functionality (which can just sit in the background when not needed.) imho, the Nikon Df is kind of a bipolar camera. It doesn't seem to know if it wants to be fully 'retro' or be 'modern.' But I think that this also points to the fact that modern digital SLR cameras do indeed require certain functions (and in respect to Nikon, they also need to be able to use the current G lenses without their aperture rings, even if they are trying to be all 'retro.')

[doolittle]

Anybody adjusted the custom functions on a F100 recently? So much easier on a modern dSLR.

 

It's easy to change shutter speed, aperture and iso on most dSLRs - how much simpler can you get? You really don't need to change the other settings, or if you do only rarely. I think dSLRs are unfairly maligned!

 

Sure, if you want to set some more obscure settings, it might take a while to navigate, at least you don't need a cheat sheet to look up a code. Granted, there is room for improvement on most dSLR user interfaces. The likes of MyMenu makes it easy to set up the most often used settings.

[woorob]

We had a wild storm here tonight, and then one of the most beautiful gradient sunsets I've ever seen outside of Tuscany appeared.

 

I grabbed my 6D with 24-105, set it to C1 (which I had programmed to time-delayed, three exposure RAW mode), screwed in my Pod bean bag tripod, and obtained one of the best pictures I've ever taken off my back deck.

 

Seriously, what could be easier?

[zlatkob]

I grabbed my 6D with 24-105, set it to C1 (which I had programmed to time-delayed, three exposure RAW mode), screwed in my Pod bean bag tripod, and obtained one of the best pictures I've ever taken off my back deck.

 

Seriously, what could be easier?

 

I agree, what could be easier? I use the custom modes on my DSLRs as they are wonderful time savers.

 

Years ago, camera makers developed P (Program) mode but did not make it user-programmable. Today's cameras have custom modes and function buttons that can be very nicely programmed by the photographer. They can be complex to set up, but simple to use.

 

Complexity becomes beautiful when the user can customize a camera to their own way of working. The end result is a highly modified user-specific camera, almost a bespoke camera, that works as simply as the user wants it to.

[steveclem]

The F4 was completely straightforward IMO. You had a dial for all you needed. Exposure comp. shutter and film speeds, metering and motordrive,all easy to see and use. This was to me, the epitome of design and function-add a lens with an aperture ring and you would never want or need anything else. It's was my favourite camera when I had one, along with an FM for even more bread and butter operation.

And to be fair we only need shutter speed and aperture to take a picture. A digital version of this would have been what the Df should have been. All the fripperies and bollocks just isn't necessary in camera, that's what editing programs are for.

[steveclem]

We had a wild storm here tonight, and then one of the most beautiful gradient sunsets I've ever seen outside of Tuscany appeared.

 

I grabbed my 6D with 24-105, set it to C1 (which I had programmed to time-delayed, three exposure RAW mode), screwed in my Pod bean bag tripod, and obtained one of the best pictures I've ever taken off my back deck.

 

Seriously, what could be easier?

 

Would that shot been impossible without the control panel from the starship enterprise then? Or a point and shoot for that matter?

[pgk]

Seriously, what could be easier?

Well, as someone who shoots my M9 in manual the vast, vast (99.99%) majority of the time, I'd argue that simply selecting appropriate focus point (infinity I assume for a sunset), appropriate aperture and shutter speed and leaving the ISO where it always is (base) is about as easy as it gets - plus it is my decision as to these selections, not the camera's (pre-programmed or otherwise). I can operate similarly but not quite as straightforwardly with my 5D2, except that is, when I've used a specific setting for a particular task and have forgotten to reset afterwards - this has lost me shots due to the complexity of wading through menus trying to remember what I've done which is preventing the shot (and is incredibly irritating).

 

The Leica M series interface is still as simple and intuitive as ever and whilst there is some bloat, its quite manageable so far.

[gyoung]

Indeed, I am used to that on the M6 and M3 too.

And that is the way I shoot on the Nikon D7000 and the nex-6 too, no problems

 

Gerry

[MarkP]

The F4 was completely straightforward IMO. You had a dial for all you needed. Exposure comp. shutter and film speeds, metering and motordrive,all easy to see and use. This was to me, the epitome of design and function-add a lens with an aperture ring and you would never want or need anything else. It's was my favourite camera when I had one, along with an FM for even more bread and butter operation.

And to be fair we only need shutter speed and aperture to take a picture. A digital version of this would have been what the Df should have been. All the fripperies and bollocks just isn't necessary in camera, that's what editing programs are for.

 

 

+!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[CaptZoom]

There are many ways to define simplicity. Here's one (by way of example):

 

Camera setup for taking a slow contemplative shot- base ISO, small aperture, long shutter time, single shot mode. While taking this shot or immediately afterwards (it doesn't really matter) another photo opportunity arises but it needs the camera in action mode- high ISO, maybe a larger aperture, shorter shutter time, burst shot/high speed shutter release mode, and maybe AF tracking.

On a Leica rangefinder, each of the above mentioned settings would have to be set individually (with AF tracking not available)- that's at least four buttons/dials that need to be operated and the lens needs to be focused manually before firing the shutter. On the other hand with most modern dSLRs, the change would require one movement of a dial to go to a custom preset before firing the shutter. Most significantly, with the dSLR requires the least amount of time for the eye to be away from the viewfinder (if indeed any time away at all). How's that for simplicity? And this is before throwing zooms (and the time it takes to change lenses on a rangefinder) into the mix.

 

-Slow contemplative photo op- sunset

-Action photo op- flock of brides decides to do a fly-by close to you

 

-Slow shot- framing awesome cloud formation over the ocean

-Action shot- five year old disturbing a flock of birds resting on the sand a few feet from you

 

I don't use dSLRs much anymore, and I understand the advantages they offer. I too would like a dSLR with simplified controls but I do not think its possible to make one without giving up some of the awesome speed dSLRs bring. The closest thing to simplified dSLR is the control layout of the Fuji XT, and it doesn't have the custom modes and I don't see how it could. The Nikon DF is a debacle in interface design. The dials behave differently from one another, some that should be lockable aren't and some that shouldn't be lockable are! I guess with time one would get used to them, but simple they are not. Maybe Nikon will get it right the next time around (if there is a next one).

[steveclem]

And maybe use the pizza and beer buttons? This is exactly what I'm talking about, I see a picture, I compose and press the shutter. I don't wander about with the intention of doing macro but pack a telephoto just in case I see a woodpecker. Your way suits you and vice versa but there are a thousand cameras with all the gizmos when some of us just want an uncluttered unit with just the controls that really are necessary.

I don't need a camera on the off chance that those two scenarios you mention may possibly present themselves, I just snap away, I'm in no rush.