Is there a dslr on the market that does not require looking at it to make adjustments?

Here is what I really want:

ISO - a clicking slider
Aperture - a fluted wheel that clicks and opens to the right and closes
to the left
Focus point - a self centering joystick that you move then push to lock
White balance - a button that locks to most recent picture
Shutter - a coaxial knurled wheel thirds on the inside, single on the
outside
LCD - a button that toggles it between histogram, most recent pic and E
meter
Exposure bracket - a slider that pushes to lock time

Then I would like everything else stripped away - all creative modes,
all in camera post processing, all features - everything.

Then I would like Zeiss to make the optics, olympus to build the body
and Canon to build the sensor. Then Nikon could put their name on it
just to make me feel like one of the gang.

I should have said that to begin with.
Btw, I am sorry for ignoring your suggestions about auto modes but my
brain just doesn't seem to go there.

Best regards,
Ron

 

It's too bad that constructing a digital camera is so complex,
software having to be written for the sensor and support electronics.
I have a feeling if it wasn't, we'd see digital backs for old favorite
SLRs coming available.
-Rich

 

Olympus E330, the first DSLR with live preview.

 

Ron,

First, my sympathies that you had to make 500 clarifications -- what
you were after was patently obvious after your 2nd or 3rd post. And I
guess DSLR's have spoiled people with their little LCD screens so much
that the very idea of tactile manual controls is alien.

I have a Pentax DSLR with a control dial that regularly "misses" a
click (and I hear this happens in other brands/models too), so using to
accurately set some value without looking is well-nigh impossible.

Let's see:

Focus: An autofocus lens? Because the manual focussing ring usually
turns during autofocus, they can't let it turn too far -- usually a
half-turn of the ring takes it from a couple of feet to infinity. So
setting it to MF and using the infinity stop as a reference, you can
make, say, a quarter turn by feel and set it to 5 feet.

Or even better, avoid the infinity reference by gluing a small nub of
plastic to the focussing ring of your lens and using its position to
judge current focus distance.

Or use a lens with a readymade focussing tab, like the older Leicas.
These will fit on a Epson R-D1, which is a digital rangefinder and not
a DSLR, but has other virtues as mentioned below.

Focus point: If you're manual focussing I guess you won't need it, but
for autofocussing, uh, one of those things with a jog dial at the back
(so you can move, say, 3 steps to the right and one down)? It seems to
me that training yourself to do it blindfold will be quite a task,
though.

Shutter speed: The best system I can think of -- the shutter speed
dials of the old manual SLR's with an outer ring and a little window
showing film speed. Essentially you could find that little window by
feel and use that as a reference (assuming constant film speed, of
course) for knowing what the current shutter speed was. However, I
can't think of a single DSLR with this system. The Epson R-D1 has one
though. If you can manage with just a manual shutter speed dial
(without a by-feel reference point, so you'll have to remember the
current position) the soon-to-come Panasonic DMC-L1 will have one. The
Leica Digilux 2/Panasonic DMC-LC1, though not SLRs, already have one
(they also have other nice manual controls).

Shooting mode, metering mode etc: Again, the DMC-L1 will have little
levers whose positions you can "feel". Check this out:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/panasonic/dmcl1-02.jpg

ISO: Can't think of anything even remotely close. Again, the R-D1 is
probably the closest with its traditional "lift-and-turn" mechanism.

All things considered there doesn't appear to be a single camera that
does EVERYTHING you want it to do .

HTH
Sid

 

Oh and aperture... uh... any lens with an aperture ring. Those usually
have nice clicks and stop at their widest and narrowest apertures for
reference. There are of course those ones that have an A position at
one end of the turn and you have to press a little button while turning
it the other way to "unstick" it. Good if you like setting aperture
from the body or shooting shutter priority, bad if you don't.

Cheers
Sid

 

Hi Sid,
I am not surprised that every maker does not offer a model with tactile
control but I am very surprised that the whole idea, like you said,
seems so alien. I assumed there would be a type of photographer that
pretty much demanded that kind of relationship to the camera. I think
there may be a small but reliable market. In the mean time I have
decided to remain extremely happy with my cheapo Canon. Thaks for the
help and other interesting insights.

Best regards,
Ron

 

I am not surprised that every maker does not offer a model with tactile

Oh yeah? Wake up and smell the coffee. This is the future:

http://us.gizmodo.com/gadgets/digital-cameras/canons-latest-dslr-powerhouse-camera-150127.php


If those astronauts can learn the space shuttle controls blindfold,
there's no way you can't use this without looking (and we all know
which button we'll be pressing).

Yeah, but I wish I had the bucks for the L1 or the R-D1 . Oh well.
I'll live with my cheapo Pentax too.

Cheers
Sid

 

Why the surprise? AF 35mm film SLRs have been "non-tactile" for 15 or more
years now, especially the pro cameras. There are almost no mechanical
interface film cameras in production at this point in time. Leica and the
Leica clones (of which there are at least 3) and the Mamiya 645ProTL and
7II; that's all folks. Hassleblad is rumored to be winding down production
of the 500 series and Canon hasn't made a tactile camera in years. I think
Nikon has discontinued the FM3.

Also, I think you overestimate "tactile". I suppose you could feel your way
to an f stop, but focus and shutter speed would be impossible.

FWIW, there is a camera you might like: the Epson R-D1 rangefinder digital.
It's based on a fake Leica body. The problem with the R-D1, though, is that
it's US$3,000, and if you had that much money, you'd be insane to spend it
on the 6MP cropped-sensor R-D1 when you could buy the 12.7MP full-frame 5D
for the same price.

http://www.epson.co.uk/products/digital_cameras/RD1.htm

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

 

No bourbon button so i will have to pass, although I would reconsider
if they replace the Adams button with a Kafka button.

 

Why the surprise? AF 35mm film SLRs have been "non-tactile" for 15 or more

While the surprise is indeed somewhat unjustified given current camera
trends, there are, to the best of my knowledge, a number of mechanical
interface film cameras othe than the ones you mentioned still in
production. This includes the FM10 and the FM3A -- they are both listed
on the Nikon site at least. And the Pentax ZX-M. And the Vivitars. And
possibly also the Oly OM2000, which was introduced in the late 1990s.
They are all perfectly good and usable, and can take exactly as good
pictures as an F6.

Agreed, these are not all "pro" cameras, especially if a pro camera has
to look like a cruise missile, but life does not begin and end with
Leicas and Hasselblads.

Streetshooters have been setting focus by feel for aeons. I quote from
an article by Mike Johnston about Leica lenses:

"[The 35mm Summicron] is the best and easiest lens to learn to
pre-focus. This skill is one of the keys to using a Leica well. To
recap for those who may not already know this (most Leica photographers
know this, I'm sure), it is simply to look at the distance to the
object you wish to focus on and set the focus on the camera by feel,
without having the camera to your eye and without using the
rangefinder. Push the tab all the way to the right [directions relative
to behind the camera of course] and you're on infinity; place the tab
pointing directly down, and you're focused at about five feet. In
between those positions, you can learn to eye the distance and set the
tab for the focus that is proper for that distance. I did it by first
shoving the focus to infinity, then getting the "feel" for how far I
should pull it back based on what my eyes were looking at. If you
practice this every night for five minutes in your living room, you get
very good at it very quickly. Then, as you walk around looking at the
world with your M, you can automatically change the focus continuously
for whatever happens to catch your eye. Without ever holding the camera
to your eye, you are always ready for a quick grab shot. And again, the
slight WA focal length aids you here, by covering up errors with its
more generous d.o.f. It is perfectly practical to use an MP / 35 'Cron
combo all day without once ever referring to the light meter diodes or
the rangefinder patch. In fact, I would go so far as to say that any
photographer who carefully meters and focuses every single shot is
simply not using the Leica correctly."

And I am willing to lay a small bet that shutter speed can be set
similarly (read my long post above, which mentions the R-D1, btw) using
a traditional shutter speed dial.

David, there's a class of photographer who doesn't give a damn about
12.7 MP but wants the useability of a small, unobtrusive, tactile
camera for street-shooting. The 5D doesn't fall into that category --
_that_ is why Ron won't buy it (please correct me, Ron, if I'm wrong),
and I wouldn't either. (And nor do the tiny P&S's, for reasons too
obvious to mention.)

Ron mentioned that people stiffen up when a camera is pointed at them
-- can you imagine what would happen if that camera was as big and
scary as a 5D? And it doesn't have the controls he asks for either. I
agree the RD-1 price is horrendous, but that doesn't necessarily mean a
5D is a better alternative.

Also, if the RD-1 is a fake Leica body, what about all other
rangefinders out there? Are they all fake Leicas too?

Please understand that there are some of us who don't shoot high-res
landscapes or wildlife.

Cheers
Sid

 

Upon pressing which, you would find yourself transformed into a
gigantic insect?

 

Or even better, my family would be free of a giant insect. We should
all focus on the happy ending.

 

Thanks,

You could get a camera that has an "automatic" mode. Just stick it on
"automatic" and then you don't have to look at it.

If you want to get fancy, you could, in theory, memorize the positions
of all the function buttons. If a setting, such as iso, doesn't show
up through the viewfinder when you're aiming for your shot, you could
keep track of how many "clicks of the wheel" it would take to go from,
for example, your current iso your desired iso.

Kevin

 

Live and learn. I prefer my images actually to be in focus, so wouldn't even
think of fooling around like that.

Could be. I definately consider crappy images uninteresting, and given
modern AF, zone focusing games seem like bad ideas that have long outlived
their usefulness. FWIW, I do own and use a rangefinder camera, though.

See below for 5D vs. street shooting. Also, here's an essay by someone who
does street shooting with a 5D. (I don't know if this particular article
speaks to this question, but if you read through his essays, you'll find
quite a bit of street shooting related stuff.)

http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/Pontification/a0100_Full_Frame_or_Not/a_Full_Frame_Or_Not.html

The 5D's not all that much larger than the R-D1: 142 x 88.5 x 39.5 vs. 152 x
113 x 75. Most of that difference is in the thickness. It is almost 1/3
taller, though.

If one really wanted the shot, one would just use AF/AE.

If size is of concern, the 350D's 127 x 94 x 64 mm is basically smaller and
lighter than the R-D1. And the US$2000 left over will buy you a Cosina Bessa
film rangefinder.

The R-D1 is built on the "Voightlander (sp?)" (actually Cosina) Bessa. The
Bessa is a whole series of cameras, including both screw mount and M mount
models. The term "fake Leica" seems quite appropriate.

Zeiss and Rollei both have (relatively) new rangefinder cameras out; both of
which bear more than coincidental similarity to the Bessa that the R-D1 is
built from<g>. The Cosina-made (!!!!) "Zeiss" lenses are flipping amazing,
by the way.

Unfortunately, the "Texas Leica" has been discontinued. I finally found one
used, but didn't fall in love, so I just bought a Mamiya 7.

The 5D comment was simply an example of a quality camera for the same price,
I wasn't making a serious suggestion for street photography, but thinking
about it, it turns out that it wouldn't be all that bad. I suppose the 350D
plus a small prime (24/2.8 or 35/2.0) might be a reasonable approach for
someone who thinks they don't need the image quality. But the better AF,
better low-light performance, and higher resolution would make the 5D +
35/2.0 or 50/1.4 the better tool for street photography. The 5D's AF point
pattern is more compact than the 350D/30D pattern, making it quite
reasonable for street photography in which one is aiming only roughly. (I'd
worry about false hits by the extreme left and right focus points with the
350D.) And the extra resolution would allow you to crop, so you wouldn't
have to worry about exact framing.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

 

Live and learn. I prefer my images actually to be in focus, so wouldn't even

Hmmm... to each his own I guess. But you do know, don't you, that a lot
of people from Cartier-B downwards are reputed to have worked like
that? And their images are pretty much in-focus.

For the crappy images part, let me refer you to Kertesz, HCB,
Winogrand... .

I think the distinction is between the lag, however slight, due to AF
(and possibly wrong AF -- e.g if you're shooting through a mesh or
leaves or something) and between virtually instantaneous but slightly
off-focus shooting (trusting DOF to take care of the misfocus). I'd say
that at least for some people, the second style still holds value and
works best for them.

(Disclaimer: This comparison is mostly uncharted territory for me. As a
new owner of an autofocus body, I intend to put this to the test
sometime, i.e. shoot in both pre-focus and AF modes and see which works
better for me.)

Again, to each his own. If you can make your equipment work, then it's
fine, of course.

Read that, saw the photos. I'm sure street shooters in medium or large
format exist too. Such as this guy, who admits to using a 4 x 5:

http://www.pinkheadedbug.com

My problem with the 5D is not quite the size -- it's more that it
shouts "pro camera!" from the rooftop, and you can't really carry it
under your arm without people noticing (I've seen the stares people
carrying F5's get). I personally would like to avoid that, but of
course if you don't mind it (and evidently Petteri doesn't) then good
for you. But just to stress the point, I'd guess there are plenty of
people like me who wouldn't want to shoot with a 5D.

Accepted. I was talking more about the controls, but you're right --
the R-D1's not small. But the size difference is actually quite
pronounced, so that makes the 5D very big! And rangefinder lenses tend
to be quite small (and because of the small thickness of the body,
stick out less in front). The whole impression is more of a slightly
bloated p&s (which is an advantage) than of a professional tool.

Agree that you can just preset the aperture (which is NOT something you
would leave to the auto mode, puhleez... no camera knows what DOF I
want for a shot), and either preset the shutter speed or leave it to
AE. But have mentioned issues re AF above.

Hey, I'm using a Pentax *ist DL at the moment ... that's about as
cheapo as you can get, _and_ it's smaller than the 350D. And yes, size
as much as cost influenced that decision. 6MP works for what I want --
if you think 12.7 is essential, who am I to argue?

I can't afford shooting film, btw -- that's one of the main reasons why
I've gone digital. So there goes the Bessa! I still have a beat-up old
film SLR, to be resurrected on occasion.

Since Leica invented 35mm, I guess all 35mm cameras are in some sense
fake Leicas ... but further quibbling on the point seems unnecessary

Congratulations

The cropping of street photographs is a very dicey ethical issue! While
I'll keep my mouth shut on this one, there are plenty of photogs who'll
want to break all that Zeiss/Cosina glass on your head for saying that
.

There's absolutely no doubt the 5D is one of the best imaging tools.
But I don't think I'd be comfortable doing street-shooting with it,
even if I had the money to buy one.

Cheers
Sid

 

Interesting - how do you see that without looking?