Is there a "Manual" Digital Camera, the equivalent of a Nikon FM2?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Stoatgobbler, Feb 5, 2006.

  1. Stoatgobbler

    Stoatgobbler Guest

    Hi there,

    My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    predominantly use for landscape photography.

    Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.

    I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital
    camera.

    Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and
    so I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting
    with clean sheet.

    As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control
    of aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.

    I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.

    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    --
    Stoatgobbler
     
    Stoatgobbler, Feb 5, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:59:52 +0000, Stoatgobbler
    <> wrote:

    >Hi there,
    >
    >My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    >ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    >24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    >predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >
    >Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    >of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    >ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    >cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    >internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    >and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >
    >I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital
    >camera.
    >
    >Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and
    >so I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting
    >with clean sheet.
    >
    >As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    >simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control
    >of aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.
    >
    >I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    >accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    >I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    >everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    >simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.
    >


    Well there's the Epson R-D1. Sounds just like what you need.

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04031101epsonrd1.asp



    *********************************************************

    "It looked like the sort of book described in library
    catalogues as "slightly foxed", although it would be
    more honest to admit that it looked as though it had
    been badgered, wolved and possibly beared as well."

    _Light Fantastic_
    Terry Pratchett
     
    John A. Stovall, Feb 5, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 18:22:30 GMT, John A. Stovall
    <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:59:52 +0000, Stoatgobbler
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>Hi there,
    >>
    >>My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    >>ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    >>24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    >>predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >>
    >>Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    >>of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    >>ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    >>cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    >>internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    >>and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >>
    >>I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital
    >>camera.
    >>
    >>Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and
    >>so I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting
    >>with clean sheet.
    >>
    >>As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    >>simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control
    >>of aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.
    >>
    >>I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    >>accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >>point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    >>I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    >>everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    >>simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.
    >>

    >
    >Well there's the Epson R-D1. Sounds just like what you need.
    >
    >http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml
    >
    >http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04031101epsonrd1.asp


    http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0503/harvey.html


    **********************************************************

    "A combat photographer should be able to make you see the
    color of blood in black and white"


    David Douglas Duncan
    Speaking on why in Vietnam
    he worked only in black and white
    http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/online/ddd/
     
    John A. Stovall, Feb 5, 2006
    #3
  4. Stoatgobbler

    Matt Ion Guest

    Re: Is there a "Manual" Digital Camera, the equivalent of a NikonFM2?

    Stoatgobbler wrote:
    > Hi there,
    >
    > My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    > ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    > 24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    > predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >
    > Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    > of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    > ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    > cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    > internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    > and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >
    > I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital camera.


    Almost all modern SLRs, film or digital, can be operated in full-manual
    mode. I often go with all-manual settings on my Canon Digital Rebel
    when I'm shooting in nightclubs, where lighting can be tricky to meter
    and autofocus has a hard time locking on to anything.

    > Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and
    > so I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting
    > with clean sheet.


    Hmmm, well being a Canon user, I can't say for sure, but I believe one
    of Nikon's big strengths over the years has always been the
    backward-compatablility of their lenses and bodies. If your FM2 lenses
    won't simply snap right onto, say, a D50 body, there should be an
    adapter that will do the trick.

    > As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    > simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control
    > of aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.


    Operationally, these functions should be relatively simple in most
    digitals. The cameras will necessarily have a lot more options and
    features, but you don't have to use those. To give you an example based
    on my DRebel, to shoot all-manual, you merely set the Mode dial to "M"
    and flick the AF/MF switch on the lens to "MF" for manual focus.

    The adjustment wheel above the shutter then controls the shutter speed
    (from Bulb to 30s to 1/4000s), and while holding down the EF-lock button
    with your thumb, it adjusts the aperture, both in 1/3-stop increments,
    allowing a full range of exposure adjustments without having to change
    your gripon the camera.

    The settings display on both the rear-panel LCD, and through the
    viewfinder, and a +/- 2-stop exposure meter shows the results. An added
    benefit with the Canon is that even under manual focus, the AF points
    will show you when you have a focus lock (this can be turned off as well).

    > I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    > accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    > point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    > I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    > everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    > simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.


    Well again, you may want to look into the compatability of or adapters
    for your existing Nikon lenses and accessories with a new Nikon digital
    body, but if you're going for an all-new system, I'd personally
    recommend a Canon DSLR setup (Rebel XT for the most basic, 20D if you
    wanna get a bit more serious, and it just goes up from there), because
    that what I have and I really like it :).

    I believe you'll find the manual controls are going to be generally
    simpler and more accessible with an SLR than with a point-and-shoot, you
    avoid a lot of the other typical P&S bugaboos like motor-driven zoom,
    shutter lag, and so on, and you have a much more expandable camera that
    you won't be cursing for its limitating in two months :) (And just a
    note, because I *know* someone will take me to task for it - not all P&S
    cameras suffer from those "bugaboos"; the higher-end ones do approach
    DSLRs in many performance aspects, but at that point you're paying so
    much for a P&S that you may as well take the next step anyway).


    ---
    avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
    Virus Database (VPS): 0606-0, 02/04/2006
    Tested on: 2/5/2006 11:13:05 AM
    avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
    http://www.avast.com
     
    Matt Ion, Feb 5, 2006
    #4
  5. On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 18:22:30 GMT, in rec.photo.digital John A. Stovall
    <> wrote:

    >Well there's the Epson R-D1. Sounds just like what you need.


    his makes absolutely zero sense as far as I'm concerned. It's a dead end.
    Better to get a D50 body alone or with the 18-70 kit lens. He has Nikon
    lens, why not start out with the cheapest way to use them?
    --
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Feb 5, 2006
    #5
  6. On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 15:36:18 -0500, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN
    SIG!)" <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 18:22:30 GMT, in rec.photo.digital John A. Stovall
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>Well there's the Epson R-D1. Sounds just like what you need.

    >
    >his makes absolutely zero sense as far as I'm concerned. It's a dead end.
    >Better to get a D50 body alone or with the 18-70 kit lens. He has Nikon
    >lens, why not start out with the cheapest way to use them?


    So, since when are you the standard for sense? He was interested in
    before jumping into a dSLR, "... until I've
    accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice."

    Well it the only rangefinder out there. It is a very good quality
    rangefinder until the DM Leica comes out.

    Face it Ed, you lack imagination.


    **********************************************************

    "A combat photographer should be able to make you see the
    color of blood in black and white"


    David Douglas Duncan
    Speaking on why in Vietnam
    he worked only in black and white
    http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/online/ddd/
     
    John A. Stovall, Feb 5, 2006
    #6
  7. On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 21:53:55 GMT, in rec.photo.digital John A. Stovall
    <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 15:36:18 -0500, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN
    >SIG!)" <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 18:22:30 GMT, in rec.photo.digital John A. Stovall
    >><> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Well there's the Epson R-D1. Sounds just like what you need.

    >>
    >>his makes absolutely zero sense as far as I'm concerned. It's a dead end.
    >>Better to get a D50 body alone or with the 18-70 kit lens. He has Nikon
    >>lens, why not start out with the cheapest way to use them?

    >
    >So, since when are you the standard for sense? He was interested in
    >before jumping into a dSLR, "... until I've
    >accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice."


    And what part of "the beginning of that sentence did you NOT read?

    On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:59:52 +0000, in rec.photo.digital Stoatgobbler
    <> wrote:
    >I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    >accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice.


    >Face it Ed, you lack imagination.


    If that's the case then you can't keep things in the context posed by the
    OP worth a what?
    --
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Feb 5, 2006
    #7
  8. Stoatgobbler

    Rich Guest

    You certainly get what you pay for with that camara.
    -Rich

    # Magnesium alloy exterior, die-cast aluminum chassis
    # 5.6x3.5x1.6 inches; 1.3 pounds with Li-ion rechargeable battery
    # About $3,000
     
    Rich, Feb 5, 2006
    #8
  9. On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:59:52 +0000, in rec.photo.digital Stoatgobbler
    <> wrote:

    >My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    >ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    >24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    >predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >
    >Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    >of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    >ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    >cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    >internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    >and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >
    >I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital
    >camera.
    >
    >Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and
    >so I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting
    >with clean sheet.


    Why do you think that? Most lenses will work on full manual with all the
    dslr bodies. Since Nikon doesn't have a full frame camera you will
    experience a 1.5 x multiplier for the FOV of your current lenses.

    >I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    >accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice.


    Why waste this $$ on a camera with no possible future use compared to a
    Nikon dslr body which can use them?
    --
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Feb 5, 2006
    #9
  10. Stoatgobbler

    Tesco News Guest

    "Stoatgobbler" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi there,
    >
    > My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    > ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    > 24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    > predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >
    > Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    > of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    > ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    > cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an internal
    > (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon and a
    > handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >
    > I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital camera.
    >
    > Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and so
    > I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting with
    > clean sheet.
    >
    > As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    > simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control of
    > aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.
    >
    > I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    > accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    > point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    > I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    > everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    > simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.
    >
    > Any help would be greatly appreciated.
    >
    > --
    > Stoatgobbler


    I would agree that a Nikon DSLR is the sensible answer.

    They can all work in Manual Exposure, if you are using older lenses ( AI )
    you will have to use Manual and a hand held meter. They do not need any
    adaptor, they just go straight on, but there is no metering with them on the
    D50, D70 or D70s, I believe the D200 will meter using them.

    The Auto Focus indicator will show when the lens is focussed, but the VF
    Screens do not have any focussing aids, and are smaller than the FM / FEs.
    That Auto focus indicator is very precise, and you will find it is much
    finer tuned than the Split Image device you are used to.

    Roy G
     
    Tesco News, Feb 5, 2006
    #10
  11. Stoatgobbler

    JAL Guest


    >
    > Hmmm, well being a Canon user, I can't say for sure, but I believe one of
    > Nikon's big strengths over the years has always been the
    > backward-compatablility of their lenses and bodies. If your FM2 lenses
    > won't simply snap right onto, say, a D50 body, there should be an adapter
    > that will do the trick.
    >

    Sort of... The Nikon lenses will mostly ~work on the camera, but the D50/70
    don't like the manual lenses and when used, the meter doesn't work. To
    remedy this you have to step up to the new D200, $1700 when you can find
    one. I believe there's a service somewhere that will add a computer chip to
    old manual lenses to make the D50/D70 recognize them.

    john
     
    JAL, Feb 5, 2006
    #11
  12. Re: Is there a "Manual" Digital Camera, the equivalent of a NikonFM2?

    John A. Stovall wrote:

    > Face it Ed, you lack imagination.


    YOU should talk, you ignorant ****?

    If you don't have a USEFUL answer why don't you simply shut the
    **** up?

    >
    > **********************************************************
    >
    > "A combat photographer should be able to make you see the
    > color of blood in black and white"
    >
    >
    > David Douglas Duncan
    > Speaking on why in Vietnam
    > he worked only in black and white
    > http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/online/ddd/


    You worthless newbies really SHOULD learn the "4 line signature
    rule".

    Assholes. Oh, and your pictures suck, too.
     
    Stovall Sucks, Feb 6, 2006
    #12
  13. I looked into the R-D1 and the price is outrageous. There.................
    now someone has said it out in public.

    Willie


    "John A. Stovall" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:59:52 +0000, Stoatgobbler
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Hi there,
    >>
    >>My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    >>ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    >>24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    >>predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >>
    >>Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    >>of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    >>ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    >>cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    >>internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    >>and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >>
    >>I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital
    >>camera.
    >>
    >>Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and
    >>so I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting
    >>with clean sheet.
    >>
    >>As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    >>simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control
    >>of aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.
    >>
    >>I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    >>accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >>point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    >>I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    >>everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    >>simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.
    >>

    >
    > Well there's the Epson R-D1. Sounds just like what you need.
    >
    > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04031101epsonrd1.asp
    >
    >
    >
    > *********************************************************
    >
    > "It looked like the sort of book described in library
    > catalogues as "slightly foxed", although it would be
    > more honest to admit that it looked as though it had
    > been badgered, wolved and possibly beared as well."
    >
    > _Light Fantastic_
    > Terry Pratchett
     
    William Saens, Feb 6, 2006
    #13
  14. I looked at the pix on the page using the link below. These pix taken with
    the R-D1, in my opinion are certainly nothing to write home about:

    Link: http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0503/harvey.html

    My DSLR would have blown these subjects away. They would be jumping off the
    screen. Maybe the guy knows where the controls are because he is a Leica
    guy, but have you see the results?

    Willie


    "John A. Stovall" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 18:22:30 GMT, John A. Stovall
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:59:52 +0000, Stoatgobbler
    >><> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Hi there,
    >>>
    >>>My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    >>>ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    >>>24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    >>>predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >>>
    >>>Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    >>>of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    >>>ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    >>>cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    >>>internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    >>>and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >>>
    >>>I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital
    >>>camera.
    >>>
    >>>Seemingly my Nikon lenses are not suitable for their digital range and
    >>>so I'm not beholden to any camera manufacturers system, I am starting
    >>>with clean sheet.
    >>>
    >>>As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    >>>simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control
    >>>of aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.
    >>>
    >>>I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    >>>accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >>>point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    >>>I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    >>>everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    >>>simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.
    >>>

    >>
    >>Well there's the Epson R-D1. Sounds just like what you need.
    >>
    >>http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml
    >>
    >>http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04031101epsonrd1.asp

    >
    > http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0503/harvey.html
    >
    >
    > **********************************************************
    >
    > "A combat photographer should be able to make you see the
    > color of blood in black and white"
    >
    >
    > David Douglas Duncan
    > Speaking on why in Vietnam
    > he worked only in black and white
    > http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/online/ddd/
     
    William Saens, Feb 6, 2006
    #14
  15. In article <>,
    Stoatgobbler <> wrote:
    >As a digital virgin I would like the digital equivalent of the elegant
    >simplicity of a FM2......is there such a thing, simple camera, control
    >of aperture and "shutter", ideally, with manual focus.
    >
    >I'm not sure I want to buy into a SLR manufacturer range until I've
    >accumulated some digital experience so a (very) good quality simple
    >point'n'shoot or a rangefinder/TLR would suffice. The local (uk) cameras
    >I've seen from regional branches of Comet/Dixons/Jessop's are all auto
    >everything cameras with more thought going into unwanted "modes" than
    >simplicity, reliability, rugged and quality.


    If you just want to experiment, get a 2nd hand Nikon D1. They tend to go
    for $500 or less.

    A D1 will have everything a typical DSLR has except for image quality. The
    D1 accepts the same lenses as the FM2, so you can verify the effect of
    'digital' directly.

    You can continue to use the aperture ring and the focusing ring on the
    lens. The shutter speed dial is unfortunately a general purpose dial, but
    it is not that hard to get used to.

    The D1 has a reasonable 'B' screen. And there is the focus assist
    information from the AF system.

    With digital, there is a lot of extra complexity like selecting the ISO,
    choice of output format (raw, tiff, jpeg), choice of white point etc. But
    that is just the nature of digital photography.


    --
    That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
    could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
    by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
    -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
     
    Philip Homburg, Feb 6, 2006
    #15
  16. "William Saens" <> wrote in message
    news:AtxFf.9218$...
    >I looked at the pix on the page using the link below. These pix taken with
    >the R-D1, in my opinion are certainly nothing to write home about:
    >
    > Link: http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0503/harvey.html
    >
    > My DSLR would have blown these subjects away. They would be jumping off
    > the screen. Maybe the guy knows where the controls are because he is a
    > Leica guy, but have you see the results?
    >
    > Willie
    >

    You can tell all this from a 300x232 pixel web page image? The images are
    down sampled -1000 % I would like to compare the RD-1 side-by side with a
    Nikon D70s as they both have the same sensor.

    ..
     
    Darrell Larose, Feb 6, 2006
    #16
  17. Stoatgobbler bedacht in news::

    > Hi there,
    >
    > My (very) amateur photographic hobby has taken me through a few camera's
    > ending up, for the last 15 years, with a Nikon FM2 (mainly used with the
    > 24mm lens) and a Bronica ETRS (mainly with the 40mm lens) which I use
    > predominantly use for landscape photography.
    >
    > Since my photography seems to get simpler as time goes on (and knowledge
    > of what matters to me in both the enjoyment of taking the photograph and
    > ending up with the envisaged picture increasing) I have ending up with
    > cameras with manual shutter speed, aperture and focus and with an
    > internal (but not interconnected to anything) light meter in the Nikon
    > and a handheld Sekonic for the Bronica.
    >
    > I do not want an auto everything camera but I would like a digital
    > camera.



    Will you be buying a new camera or would you be willing to try your hand at
    digital photography with a good second hand camera?

    JL
     
    Justus Lipsius, Feb 6, 2006
    #17
  18. Stoatgobbler

    Stoatgobbler Guest

    Hi again,

    Thanks for the info, I was informed by a local camera shop that my Nikon
    lenses wouldn't work on their digital bodies, maybe I shouldn't believe
    all I am told (Kendal branch of Wilkinson Camera's) and try for myself.

    Thanks for the info on the Epson, very expensive, not sure I'll get that
    one past the missus.

    Whilst following your Epson lead I came across a Ricoh GR-D, apparently
    set to manual gives total manual control, looks robust and simple, fixed
    28mm lens. Anyone any experience?, for £400 looks cheap. If I remember
    rightly weren't the 35mm versions of Ricoh's G range Lieca lens fit?,
    wonder if they intend to bring a GR-D with that lense mount, that would
    be the one for me.

    I apologise for any flaming I've caused, it was not intentional.

    --
    Stoatgobbler
     
    Stoatgobbler, Feb 6, 2006
    #18
  19. Stoatgobbler

    Stoatgobbler Guest

    >
    >Will you be buying a new camera or would you be willing to try your hand at
    >digital photography with a good second hand camera?
    >


    I'm not sure, the reason why I've never tried digital photography is
    that it has seemed so transient. I've always thought that a good quality
    camera holds its value over many years if looked after and maintained,
    nowadays with digital it's moved camera's into disposable territory, a
    Nikon FM2 bought 20 years ago would be worth 50-75% of that cost 10
    years later. An equivalent priced Nikon digital SLR body bought now
    would probably be little more than landfill in 10 years time if it even
    lasts that long.

    Maybe that Epson would hold value and therefore not seem so expensive?

    I've nothing against second hand, when I was a student Jessops second
    hand counter and Grays of Westminster were common haunts.

    --
    Stoatgobbler
     
    Stoatgobbler, Feb 6, 2006
    #19
  20. Stoatgobbler

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 19:24:18 +0000, Stoatgobbler
    <> wrote:

    >>
    >>Will you be buying a new camera or would you be willing to try your hand at
    >>digital photography with a good second hand camera?
    >>

    >
    >I'm not sure, the reason why I've never tried digital photography is
    >that it has seemed so transient. I've always thought that a good quality
    >camera holds its value over many years if looked after and maintained,
    >nowadays with digital it's moved camera's into disposable territory, a
    >Nikon FM2 bought 20 years ago would be worth 50-75% of that cost 10
    >years later. An equivalent priced Nikon digital SLR body bought now
    >would probably be little more than landfill in 10 years time if it even
    >lasts that long.
    >
    >Maybe that Epson would hold value and therefore not seem so expensive?


    Back then, film SLRs were a mature technology. But it took them a
    while to get to that state.
    Now, digital cameras are still a young technology; witness how fast
    things are moving (your complaint).
    If you want to, you can wait a few decades for digital camera
    technology to mature, but many of us will be enjoying it in the
    meantime.
    Personally, I understand your dilemma: spend now, with the expectation
    that something better will be along 'real soon now', or wait 'till
    that something better comes along. For myself, my solution was to buy
    a DSLR now (a DRebel/300D), buy a nice selection of lenses, and expect
    to stick with Canon bodies in the future. If, OTOH, you intend to
    stick with P&S, the problem is worse, as any upgrade means a whole new
    camera, not just a body.
    But, reality is what it is. Technology marches on. The decision is
    yours to make, and complaining won't help.
    >
    >I've nothing against second hand, when I was a student Jessops second
    >hand counter and Grays of Westminster were common haunts.


    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Feb 6, 2006
    #20
    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. CJ
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    5,554
    Terry Baranski
    May 20, 2004
  2. Doghouse Riley
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    3,905
    David J Taylor
    Aug 10, 2004
  3. R.
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    320
    Lin Chung
    Mar 31, 2005
  4. Becky

    Gigabyte F2A85X-UP4 AMD FM2 Motherboard

    Becky, Dec 6, 2012, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    592
    Becky
    Dec 6, 2012
  5. Becky
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    492
    Becky
    Jun 13, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page