Cheapest Full Frame Digital Camera?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mutefan@yahoo.com, Nov 4, 2006.

  1. "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
    >> On Nov 4, 8:38 am, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number
    >> here)@cox..net> wrote:
    >>> Canon 5D

    >>
    >> Hey, dude, it's not nice to mock less informed posters, even at 5:30
    >> AM.

    >
    > I'm not mocking at all.
    >
    > The fact is...full frame cameras like the 5D are much less forgiving...on
    > several levels.
    >
    > One, it will expose the flaws in less-than-top-quality lenses because the
    > detail is that good.


    I disagree here. The 5D has much fatter pixels than the 400D, and requires
    that much less resolution (IMHO the significant paramater is no resolution
    but contrast at 75% of the sensor's Nyquist frequenct, but we can call that
    "resolution" for convenience). Even the lowly US$100 (used) Canon 55-200
    plastic PoC coughs up lovely sharp images on the 5D if you stop down a bit.

    > Two...it requires more care in terms of aperture value and due to the
    > return of normal vignetting issues we'd all but forgotten about after
    > becoming accustomed to cropped sensor sizes.


    This is becoming less and less true. APS-C users are using fewer and fewer
    FF lenses as consumer zooms with more convenient focal lengths for APS-C
    appear. Vignetting in made-for-APS-C lenses is just as bad on APS-C as it is
    in made-for-35mm lenses on FF. And stopping down a bit isn't a big deal.

    > Three: It has no built-in flash...meaning you must buy a show-mounted
    > flash, or rely solely on ambient light.


    I suppose. I've not found the need to use flash on my 5D yet. YMMV.

    Argumentatively yours,
    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Nov 4, 2006
    #21
    1. Advertising

  2. Mark² wrote:

    > Four: If you would prefer help as a new DSLR shooter from the modes which
    > lesser Canon cameras have (Sports mode, Landscape mode, Macro, etc.)...it is
    > assumed that you know how to do that, and you are therefore NOT given these
    > modes--You've got to create the settings yourself.

    What I want to know is - why do I have to spend $5k(AUS) to get rid of
    this feature.
    Why can't someone come out with a camera that has an aperture ring and a
    shutter dial and that's it. Add a "match-the-needle" viewfinder for good
    measure and we're done. The shutter dial could have an A position for
    the lazy, and the aperture ring could have an A position. Full auto -
    both on A. Shutter on A, selected aperture = aperture priority. Aperture
    on A, shutter selected = Shutter priority. Select both aperture and
    shutter, and you have full manual. No messing around with mode dials and
    wheels. No "push this button while turning the wheel to select
    aperture". Just simple straightforward and logical controls.
    The 5D almost gets there, the new Pana sort of does it, but again both
    are expensive cameras. Why does a camera have to be expensive to be simple?
    >
    > These are just a few examples.
    >
     
    Graham Fountain, Nov 5, 2006
    #22
    1. Advertising

  3. Mark² Guest

    Graham Fountain wrote:
    > Mark² wrote:
    >
    >> Four: If you would prefer help as a new DSLR shooter from the modes
    >> which lesser Canon cameras have (Sports mode, Landscape mode, Macro,
    >> etc.)...it is assumed that you know how to do that, and you are
    >> therefore NOT given these modes--You've got to create the settings
    >> yourself.

    > What I want to know is - why do I have to spend $5k(AUS) to get rid of
    > this feature.


    You don't have to.
    Lesser models have fully manual controls too... They just use meter
    markings instead of a needle.

    > Why can't someone come out with a camera that has an aperture ring
    > and a shutter dial and that's it. Add a "match-the-needle" viewfinder
    > for good measure and we're done. The shutter dial could have an A
    > position for the lazy, and the aperture ring could have an A position.
    > Full auto -
    > both on A. Shutter on A, selected aperture = aperture priority.
    > Aperture on A, shutter selected = Shutter priority. Select both
    > aperture and shutter, and you have full manual. No messing around
    > with mode dials and wheels. No "push this button while turning the
    > wheel to select aperture". Just simple straightforward and logical
    > controls.
    > The 5D almost gets there, the new Pana sort of does it, but again both
    > are expensive cameras. Why does a camera have to be expensive to be
    > simple?


    Because what's simple to you and me is confusing to the masses.

    But really, the 30D, 10D, 20D and even the old D30 and D60s were very
    straignt forward to use in fully manual mode.

    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
     
    Mark², Nov 5, 2006
    #23
  4. Mark² wrote:
    > Graham Fountain wrote:
    >> Mark² wrote:
    >>
    >>> Four: If you would prefer help as a new DSLR shooter from the modes
    >>> which lesser Canon cameras have (Sports mode, Landscape mode, Macro,
    >>> etc.)...it is assumed that you know how to do that, and you are
    >>> therefore NOT given these modes--You've got to create the settings
    >>> yourself.

    >> What I want to know is - why do I have to spend $5k(AUS) to get rid of
    >> this feature.

    >
    > You don't have to.
    > Lesser models have fully manual controls too...

    But the fully manual controls suck!
    On the Rebel series, if you are in Tv you use the dial to change
    shutter. In Av the same dial changes aperture. In M, the dial changes
    shutter, and you have to press and hold the +/- button to change
    Aperture - hardly a user friendly system. Yes it does it, but it's not
    intuitive, comfortable or quick.
    The 30D, which is meant to be an upgrade (and it does feel nicer to
    hold), is even worse on the user interface. In Tv the dial near the
    shutter changes shutter speed. In Av it changes aperture. In M, the dial
    near the shutter does shutter speed, and it is now the back dial for
    aperture. Depending on what mode we are in, the dial to change aperture
    changes - pretty dumb situation. Not only that, but the dial is in the
    most awkward possible position to try and access if you are holding the
    camera to your face - it's awkward positioning makes it even harder to
    use than pushing the +/- button as on the Rebel.
    The other advantage of aperture ring and shutter speed dials is their
    absolute positioning. When working quickly you can set them (aperture
    especially) purely by feel. The dial system modern cameras use doesn't
    allow this. Plus you face the problem where if you turn the dial fast,
    you outrun the electronics, and it doesn't change by the amount you
    selected - making it impossible to quickly go from one end of the
    spectrum to the other.

    > They just use meter
    > markings instead of a needle.

    Have you ever used a match-needle system? A bunch of leds showing +/-2
    stops just doesn't even come close to a match-needle. For starters the
    match-needle system shows far more than 2 stops range, so you can
    instantly see exactly how far out you are. Shooting a scene with
    difficult lighting? Just wave the camera around and watch what the
    needle does - you can instantly see the brightness difference between
    the dark and bright areas to make a judgement call on where to set
    exposure - modern systems pretty much force you to use bracketing and/or
    after-the-fact histogram assessment. Bracketing and Histograms are handy
    tools, but are no match for getting the exposure right in the first place.
     
    Graham Fountain, Nov 5, 2006
    #24
  5. Mark² Guest

    Graham Fountain wrote:
    > Mark² wrote:
    >> Graham Fountain wrote:
    >>> Mark² wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Four: If you would prefer help as a new DSLR shooter from the modes
    >>>> which lesser Canon cameras have (Sports mode, Landscape mode,
    >>>> Macro, etc.)...it is assumed that you know how to do that, and you
    >>>> are therefore NOT given these modes--You've got to create the
    >>>> settings yourself.
    >>> What I want to know is - why do I have to spend $5k(AUS) to get rid
    >>> of this feature.

    >>
    >> You don't have to.
    >> Lesser models have fully manual controls too...

    > But the fully manual controls suck!
    > On the Rebel series, if you are in Tv you use the dial to change
    > shutter. In Av the same dial changes aperture. In M, the dial changes
    > shutter, and you have to press and hold the +/- button to change
    > Aperture - hardly a user friendly system. Yes it does it, but it's not
    > intuitive, comfortable or quick.
    > The 30D, which is meant to be an upgrade (and it does feel nicer to
    > hold), is even worse on the user interface. In Tv the dial near the
    > shutter changes shutter speed. In Av it changes aperture. In M, the
    > dial near the shutter does shutter speed, and it is now the back dial
    > for aperture. Depending on what mode we are in, the dial to change
    > aperture changes - pretty dumb situation. Not only that, but the dial
    > is in the most awkward possible position to try and access if you are
    > holding the camera to your face - it's awkward positioning makes it
    > even harder to use than pushing the +/- button as on the Rebel.
    > The other advantage of aperture ring and shutter speed dials is their
    > absolute positioning. When working quickly you can set them (aperture
    > especially) purely by feel. The dial system modern cameras use doesn't
    > allow this. Plus you face the problem where if you turn the dial fast,
    > you outrun the electronics, and it doesn't change by the amount you
    > selected - making it impossible to quickly go from one end of the
    > spectrum to the other.
    >
    >> They just use meter
    >> markings instead of a needle.

    > Have you ever used a match-needle system? A bunch of leds showing +/-2
    > stops just doesn't even come close to a match-needle. For starters the
    > match-needle system shows far more than 2 stops range, so you can
    > instantly see exactly how far out you are. Shooting a scene with
    > difficult lighting? Just wave the camera around and watch what the
    > needle does - you can instantly see the brightness difference between
    > the dark and bright areas to make a judgement call on where to set
    > exposure - modern systems pretty much force you to use bracketing
    > and/or after-the-fact histogram assessment. Bracketing and Histograms
    > are handy tools, but are no match for getting the exposure right in
    > the first place.


    Ya, I guess I'd have to agree. My first camera had a needle, and just like
    with those pesky digital speedometers they thought looked cool in 80's
    automobiles...there's nothing quite so useful as the physical needle...

    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
     
    Mark², Nov 5, 2006
    #25
  6. wrote:
    > I still have time to cancel out the Rebel XTi 400D order. What is the
    > cheapest full frame sensor camera, and does it obviate the need to
    > purchase additional lenses in order to be worth the money?
    >

    The Canon 5D at 3.6X ($3700 CDN) the price of the Rebel XTi kit, you'll
    still need a lens.
     
    Not Disclosed, Nov 6, 2006
    #26
  7. "Not Disclosed" <> wrote:
    > wrote:
    >> I still have time to cancel out the Rebel XTi 400D order. What is the
    >> cheapest full frame sensor camera, and does it obviate the need to
    >> purchase additional lenses in order to be worth the money?
    >>

    > The Canon 5D at 3.6X ($3700 CDN) the price of the Rebel XTi kit, you'll
    > still need a lens.


    Exactly. A 5D + glass is seriously painful money.

    That's why the smart thing to do is to buy a Rebel and FF glass and learn
    how dSLRs work with the Rebel. Then if you decide that you need FF, you
    won't have to buy glass, and it becomes much more affordable. Besides, two
    or three years from now, FF bodies will probably be quite a bit cheaper.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Nov 6, 2006
    #27
  8. Mark² Guest

    David J. Littleboy wrote:
    > "Not Disclosed" <> wrote:
    >> wrote:
    >>> I still have time to cancel out the Rebel XTi 400D order. What is
    >>> the cheapest full frame sensor camera, and does it obviate the need
    >>> to purchase additional lenses in order to be worth the money?
    >>>

    >> The Canon 5D at 3.6X ($3700 CDN) the price of the Rebel XTi kit,
    >> you'll still need a lens.

    >
    > Exactly. A 5D + glass is seriously painful money.
    >
    > That's why the smart thing to do is to buy a Rebel and FF glass and
    > learn how dSLRs work with the Rebel. Then if you decide that you need
    > FF, you won't have to buy glass, and it becomes much more affordable.
    > Besides, two or three years from now, FF bodies will probably be
    > quite a bit cheaper.


    I agree with that. Bodies will come and go, but quality lenses can stay
    with you for a long time. For me, since I knew I'd eventually want FF, I
    avoided EF-S, and stuck with L lenses. The plan paid off, since I didn't
    need to "ugrade" my lenses once I bought the 5D. It pays to plan ahead.
    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
     
    Mark², Nov 6, 2006
    #28
  9. Mike Ross Guest

    On 4 Nov 2006 05:13:32 -0800, wrote:

    >I still have time to cancel out the Rebel XTi 400D order. What is the
    >cheapest full frame sensor camera, and does it obviate the need to
    >purchase additional lenses in order to be worth the money?


    Only Canon are still in the game producing new cameras, but you could
    IMHO do a lot worse that pick up a used Kodak DCS PRO SLR/n (or /c)
    for ~$1500-2000. Not quite in the Canon league but still full frame
    and a bloody good camera - how good it is *for you* depends on what
    you shoot of course.

    Mike
    --
    http://www.corestore.org
    'As I walk along these shores
    I am the history within'
     
    Mike Ross, Nov 7, 2006
    #29
  10. Mark² Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > Mark² wrote:
    >
    >> I agree with that. Bodies will come and go, but quality lenses can
    >> stay with you for a long time. For me, since I knew I'd eventually
    >> want FF, I avoided EF-S, and stuck with L lenses. The plan paid
    >> off, since I didn't need to "ugrade" my lenses once I bought the 5D.
    >> It pays to plan ahead.

    >
    > True, but OTOH, the good EF-s lenses have very high resale value (if
    > you got a good price on the EF-s, the resale value can be over 90%).
    > Normally I don't think about resale value on stuff like this, but I
    > knew that the 10-22 EF-s lens could easily be sold on craigslist when
    > I go full frame. I routinely see used Canon lenses selling for about
    > what new lenses cost from reliable etailers.
    >
    > While the prosumer and pro markets are all moving to full-frame, I
    > think that Canon and Nikon will keep the smaller sensor cameras for
    > the amateur market.


    Canon has indicated it's desire to stick with the two-tier sensor
    system...so the 1.6 probably won't go away any time soon--which is good for
    EF-S owners. On the other hand...if FF prices dip low enough, we may see
    fewer and fewer serious amateurs going with the 1.6 crop, and considering
    FF. When/if that happens, the re-sale value may drop.

    Who knows... As for me, the hassle of re-sale...and...the pleasure of using
    high quality optics from the beginning make the investment worth it to me.

    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
     
    Mark², Nov 7, 2006
    #30
  11. Bryan Olson Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > Mark² wrote:
    >
    >> I agree with that. Bodies will come and go, but quality lenses can
    >> stay with you for a long time. For me, since I knew I'd eventually
    >> want FF, I avoided EF-S, and stuck with L lenses. The plan paid off,
    >> since I didn't need to "ugrade" my lenses once I bought the 5D. It
    >> pays to plan ahead.

    >
    > True, but OTOH, the good EF-s lenses have very high resale value (if you
    > got a good price on the EF-s, the resale value can be over 90%).
    > Normally I don't think about resale value on stuff like this, but I knew
    > that the 10-22 EF-s lens could easily be sold on craigslist when I go
    > full frame.


    I agree with, well, all of you. My plan was to follow David's "smart
    thing to do" and get FF lenses for my digital Rebel, until riches
    befall me or FF bodies come down or I just give in to temptation.

    I'm sure David and Mark² would agree that the plan works better for
    lenses in the mid-to-long range that at wide angles. The 10-22 EF-S
    lens you mention makes sense because, well, what else is there?

    Haven't bought it yet, but I've decided my acquisition program can
    allow for one wide-angle EF-S lens without losing smart-thing-to-do
    status.

    And let's face it: David and Mark² may be smart guys, fine
    photographers, and sincere dispensers of good advice, but they
    didn't wait all that long before getting their 5D's.


    --
    --Bryan
     
    Bryan Olson, Nov 7, 2006
    #31
  12. Mark² Guest

    Bryan Olson wrote:
    > SMS wrote:
    >> Mark² wrote:
    >>
    >>> I agree with that. Bodies will come and go, but quality lenses can
    >>> stay with you for a long time. For me, since I knew I'd eventually
    >>> want FF, I avoided EF-S, and stuck with L lenses. The plan paid
    >>> off, since I didn't need to "ugrade" my lenses once I bought the
    >>> 5D. It pays to plan ahead.

    >>
    >> True, but OTOH, the good EF-s lenses have very high resale value (if
    >> you got a good price on the EF-s, the resale value can be over 90%).
    >> Normally I don't think about resale value on stuff like this, but I
    >> knew that the 10-22 EF-s lens could easily be sold on craigslist
    >> when I go full frame.

    >
    > I agree with, well, all of you. My plan was to follow David's "smart
    > thing to do" and get FF lenses for my digital Rebel, until riches
    > befall me or FF bodies come down or I just give in to temptation.
    >
    > I'm sure David and Mark² would agree that the plan works better for
    > lenses in the mid-to-long range that at wide angles. The 10-22 EF-S
    > lens you mention makes sense because, well, what else is there?
    >
    > Haven't bought it yet, but I've decided my acquisition program can
    > allow for one wide-angle EF-S lens without losing smart-thing-to-do
    > status.
    >
    > And let's face it: David and Mark² may be smart guys, fine
    > photographers, and sincere dispensers of good advice, but they
    > didn't wait all that long before getting their 5D's.


    Oh I don't know...
    I wanted full frame ever since BEFORE the 1Ds came out in 2002...but I
    waited.
    Then I waited through the 1Ds Mark II in '04...and then until 9 months after
    the 5D was announced.
    During that time...instead of shelling out HUGE $$ for either D model, I
    took that money and bought the lenses that would perform best when the time
    came that FF was more reasonable. In the meantime, I enjoyed making photos
    like these two with my "lowly 10D":
    http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/58828940/original
    http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36134121/original
    When the 5D came down from its initial $3400, I picked it up for $2699 after
    rebate. It's even more reasonable now...and may well be replaced with a
    16MP version soon...or perhaps the mythical 3D I originally hoped Canon
    would produce (built-in vertical grip).



    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
     
    Mark², Nov 7, 2006
    #32
  13. Bryan Olson Guest

    Mark² wrote:
    > Bryan Olson wrote:

    [...]
    >> And let's face it: David and Mark² may be smart guys, fine
    >> photographers, and sincere dispensers of good advice, but they
    >> didn't wait all that long before getting their 5D's.

    >
    > Oh I don't know...
    > I wanted full frame ever since BEFORE the 1Ds came out in 2002...but I
    > waited.
    > Then I waited through the 1Ds Mark II in '04...and then until 9 months after
    > the 5D was announced.


    Yeah, well I followed the Contax and Pentax FF announcements too. But
    I still don't have a FF, and you do, and that proves... uh, give me a
    minute...


    > During that time...instead of shelling out HUGE $$ for either D model, I
    > took that money and bought the lenses that would perform best when the time
    > came that FF was more reasonable. In the meantime, I enjoyed making photos
    > like these two with my "lowly 10D":
    > http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/58828940/original
    > http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36134121/original


    "Alaska River under McKinley" is my favorite. I'm drawn to "Cold Spring
    Arbor" too, but now people can PhotoShop-in a cloud veil that would fool
    me. I'd like to see "Haleakala" displayed in higher resolution.

    Thanks, good stuff.


    --
    --Bryan
     
    Bryan Olson, Nov 7, 2006
    #33
  14. SMS Guest

    Mark² wrote:

    > I agree with that. Bodies will come and go, but quality lenses can stay
    > with you for a long time. For me, since I knew I'd eventually want FF, I
    > avoided EF-S, and stuck with L lenses. The plan paid off, since I didn't
    > need to "ugrade" my lenses once I bought the 5D. It pays to plan ahead.


    True, but OTOH, the good EF-s lenses have very high resale value (if you
    got a good price on the EF-s, the resale value can be over 90%).
    Normally I don't think about resale value on stuff like this, but I knew
    that the 10-22 EF-s lens could easily be sold on craigslist when I go
    full frame. I routinely see used Canon lenses selling for about what new
    lenses cost from reliable etailers.

    While the prosumer and pro markets are all moving to full-frame, I think
    that Canon and Nikon will keep the smaller sensor cameras for the
    amateur market.
     
    SMS, Nov 8, 2006
    #34
  15. >Why can't someone come out with a camera that has an aperture ring and a
    >shutter dial and that's it. Add a "match-the-needle" viewfinder for good
    >measure and we're done. The shutter dial could have an A position for
    >the lazy, and the aperture ring could have an A position. Full auto -
    >both on A. Shutter on A, selected aperture = aperture priority. Aperture
    >on A, shutter selected = Shutter priority. Select both aperture and
    >shutter, and you have full manual. No messing around with mode dials and
    > wheels. No "push this button while turning the wheel to select
    >aperture". Just simple straightforward and logical controls.


    The 30D comes close if you put the camera on "M," because it has a
    back wheel. This is the biggest reason I'm not going to get the XTi.

    -Joel

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Free Bible and Mishna printouts in Hebrew: http://liturgy.exc.com/
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, Nov 8, 2006
    #35
  16. >The 30D, which is meant to be an upgrade (and it does feel nicer to
    >hold), is even worse on the user interface. In Tv the dial near the
    >shutter changes shutter speed. In Av it changes aperture. In M, the dial
    >near the shutter does shutter speed, and it is now the back dial for
    >aperture. Depending on what mode we are in, the dial to change aperture
    >changes - pretty dumb situation. Not only that, but the dial is in the
    >most awkward possible position to try and access if you are holding the
    >camera to your face - it's awkward positioning makes it even harder to
    >use than pushing the +/- button as on the Rebel.


    You get used to the back dial. (I did with the Elan IIe.) But of
    course you're right. If you're holding the camera properly, there are
    two places your hands can conveniently adjust things; near the
    shutter button, and on the lens.

    The dials are simply digital controls, and they can go anywhere. Why
    not put them where the photographer's fingers are?

    (Am I right that Nikkon does a better job with this?)

    -Joel
     
    Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, Nov 8, 2006
    #36
  17. Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote:
    >> The 30D, which is meant to be an upgrade (and it does feel nicer to
    >> hold), is even worse on the user interface. In Tv the dial near the
    >> shutter changes shutter speed. In Av it changes aperture. In M, the dial
    >> near the shutter does shutter speed, and it is now the back dial for
    >> aperture. Depending on what mode we are in, the dial to change aperture
    >> changes - pretty dumb situation. Not only that, but the dial is in the
    >> most awkward possible position to try and access if you are holding the
    >> camera to your face - it's awkward positioning makes it even harder to
    >> use than pushing the +/- button as on the Rebel.

    >
    > You get used to the back dial. (I did with the Elan IIe.) But of
    > course you're right. If you're holding the camera properly, there are
    > two places your hands can conveniently adjust things; near the
    > shutter button, and on the lens.
    >
    > The dials are simply digital controls, and they can go anywhere. Why
    > not put them where the photographer's fingers are?


    It's placed almost exactly where my right thumb wants to rest. Works
    just fine with that digit. My hands are average.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Nov 8, 2006
    #37
  18. Bill Funk Guest

    On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:14:48 +1000, Graham Fountain <>
    wrote:

    >Mark² wrote:
    >
    >> Four: If you would prefer help as a new DSLR shooter from the modes which
    >> lesser Canon cameras have (Sports mode, Landscape mode, Macro, etc.)...it is
    >> assumed that you know how to do that, and you are therefore NOT given these
    >> modes--You've got to create the settings yourself.

    >What I want to know is - why do I have to spend $5k(AUS) to get rid of
    >this feature.
    >Why can't someone come out with a camera that has an aperture ring and a
    >shutter dial and that's it. Add a "match-the-needle" viewfinder for good
    >measure and we're done. The shutter dial could have an A position for
    >the lazy, and the aperture ring could have an A position. Full auto -
    >both on A. Shutter on A, selected aperture = aperture priority. Aperture
    >on A, shutter selected = Shutter priority. Select both aperture and
    >shutter, and you have full manual. No messing around with mode dials and
    > wheels. No "push this button while turning the wheel to select
    >aperture". Just simple straightforward and logical controls.
    >The 5D almost gets there, the new Pana sort of does it, but again both
    >are expensive cameras. Why does a camera have to be expensive to be simple?


    Aperture rings on lenses would be problematic; where would an aperture
    ring go on a short zoom lens? There's already a zoom and focus ring.
    And it would need another switch - manual/auto.
    And there's the question of marketability; how many people want the
    added cost and complexity? How many would buy such a lens? Probably
    not many.
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Nov 8, 2006
    #38
  19. >> The dials are simply digital controls, and they can go anywhere. Why
    >> not put them where the photographer's fingers are?

    >
    >It's placed almost exactly where my right thumb wants to rest. Works
    >just fine with that digit. My hands are average.


    I find that I have to move the camera from my eye to make room for my
    thumb to get to the dial. But other than that, it's a fine second
    choice, and certainly better than the Rebel's solution.

    -Joel
     
    Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, Nov 8, 2006
    #39
  20. >Aperture rings on lenses would be problematic; where would an aperture
    >ring go on a short zoom lens? There's already a zoom and focus ring.
    >And it would need another switch - manual/auto.
    >And there's the question of marketability; how many people want the
    >added cost and complexity? How many would buy such a lens? Probably
    >not many.


    I wouldn't put the aperture ring on the lens. I'd put an electronic
    dial on the lens-mount.

    -Joel

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Free 35mm lens & digital camera reviews: http://www.exc.com/photography
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, Nov 8, 2006
    #40
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. J. Sm
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,169
    Mark Roberts
    Oct 8, 2003
  2. Steven M. Scharf
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    4,431
    Crownfield
    Apr 3, 2005
  3. DeanB

    Are we heading back to full frame digital?

    DeanB, Feb 23, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    90
    Views:
    1,504
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
    Feb 28, 2007
  4. Henry
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,032
    Henry
    Dec 15, 2009
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    300
Loading...

Share This Page