Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Looking for camera without video
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
Jul 11, 2013 10:34:25   #
joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois
 
Mogul wrote:
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 camera that does NOT have video capabilities? The last one I had was a Canon 50D. Now that I am physically capable of holding a larger camera steady for a short time without shaking, I am looking for a new (or refurbished) contemporary camera, but I do not like video; it adds components, buttons, procedures and weight I do not want or need. I can also get by without high ISO capacity, super shutter speeds or a moveable LCD (to tell the truth, I don't even need live view, but I guess I have no choice). I would like to have ISO as low as 100 and, if possible, a real optical viewfinder. Please tell me such a camera exists. Thank you for your help.
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 c... (show quote)


Nikon D700 if you can find one.

Reply
Jul 11, 2013 11:46:56   #
texaseve Loc: TX, NC and NH
 
Nikon D80 does not have video and takes great shots.

Reply
Jul 11, 2013 13:03:27   #
flyguy Loc: Las Cruces, New Mexico
 
Mogul wrote:
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 camera that does NOT have video capabilities? The last one I had was a Canon 50D. Now that I am physically capable of holding a larger camera steady for a short time without shaking, I am looking for a new (or refurbished) contemporary camera, but I do not like video; it adds components, buttons, procedures and weight I do not want or need. I can also get by without high ISO capacity, super shutter speeds or a moveable LCD (to tell the truth, I don't even need live view, but I guess I have no choice). I would like to have ISO as low as 100 and, if possible, a real optical viewfinder. Please tell me such a camera exists. Thank you for your help.
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 c... (show quote)


I have a Canon 5D Mk II that has video capability and I have never used it in the two years I've owned the camera, just because I wasn't interested in taking video in the first place. I would have been happier not having it and been charged a few hundred dollars less in price.

As for all the other features and buttons, just ignore the ones that you don't use, i. e. "live view", which I rarely use, and you won't know the difference. The larger sensor size, "full frame" 35 mm equivalent format is what I desired the most and, because of that, any difference in price was not a big deal.

Reply
 
 
Jul 11, 2013 13:49:14   #
Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire
 
I am having a hard time getting this "no video" discussion. I think the discussion is about all the buttons getting in the way. I have a Canon 7D, and to turn on the video you must TURN a switch, which when in the non-video mode is the "live view" button. This switch is well out of the way of the right thumb. I was not a real fan of video on a still camera, but since I found you can snatch a frame from video and post process it in any processing program. As for the overall layout of the buttons, they are almost the same as the old 50D. It would be nice if you could find a camera that would operate on voice commands.

Reply
Jul 11, 2013 14:07:44   #
JPL
 
RLKurth wrote:
The Nikon D80 is probably the last affordable Nikon DSLR made without video capabilities. You can get a Nikon refurbished one at Adorama for $350.
http://www.adorama.com/INKD80R.html


A Nikon D300 is a even better camera with no video.

Reply
Jul 11, 2013 14:54:28   #
saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon
 
I have that "button in the wrong place" problem with the Olympus PEN Mirrorless camera's.

However, that button (right under your right thumb) can be programmed to perform other functions, or be non functional. Easy to do in the menus.

I can only hope that other camera manufacturers understand that some, perhaps many, people may not want, or ever use the video functions.

Personally, I think that providing video in high level DSLR camera's was a total waste of valuable R&D money that could have gone into better still image function design.

I know some use the DSLR video, but I can't help but think they actually lust after a real video system in a dedicated video camera.

I too, however, am a confirmed tripod user, but note your mention of a string pod, and I can always find one in my bag or in my pocket when out shooting. Been making and using "string pods" or "Pod in a Pocket" for years.

Reply
Jul 11, 2013 17:37:44   #
nekon Loc: Carterton, New Zealand
 
RLKurth wrote:
WOW! And at only $7,000 you would think it would have video wouldn't you? :mrgreen:


No!-It's a photographer's camera, not a videographer's

Reply
 
 
Jul 11, 2013 20:18:03   #
Ralloh Loc: Ohio
 
Mogul wrote:
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 camera that does NOT have video capabilities? The last one I had was a Canon 50D. Now that I am physically capable of holding a larger camera steady for a short time without shaking, I am looking for a new (or refurbished) contemporary camera, but I do not like video; it adds components, buttons, procedures and weight I do not want or need. I can also get by without high ISO capacity, super shutter speeds or a moveable LCD (to tell the truth, I don't even need live view, but I guess I have no choice). I would like to have ISO as low as 100 and, if possible, a real optical viewfinder. Please tell me such a camera exists. Thank you for your help.
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 c... (show quote)


The Nikon D3000 has no video and is very reasonably priced.

Reply
Jul 11, 2013 21:11:43   #
Gio Loc: Bentonville, AR.
 
I agree with CaptainC!

Reply
Jul 11, 2013 22:51:16   #
BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
 
THANK YOU to all who answered. Whether you agree with my criteria or not, your comments were helpful and very much appreciated. In three pages, I have assembled a list of 12 cameras (more by inference - and I am, sadly, not including the Leica). My next step will to compare other criteria (possibly a spreadsheet), including objective criteria and at least one subjective criterium, the layout of the camera back. I will be happy to add any future suggestions. I am intrigued by the inclusion of the Panasonic Lumix G1, as I currently use a G3. On the other end of the spectrum, I am surprised that I may be able to attain my goals with a full frame camera. Needless to say, I have a lot of research ahead of me. That is acceptable, because my very limited income will necessitate some care budgeting. I also need to factor in the possibility of another medical incident such as that which required my withdrawal from DSLR photography in the first place. Again, thank you, and please be assured that I will post any glittering gems of wisdom my research uncovers.

Reply
Jul 12, 2013 01:50:55   #
JPL
 
One more advice for you, check user ratings and reviews for the 12 cameras you want to choose from. You could f.x. check the user reviews at Amazon.com That should help you make your choice.

Mogul wrote:
THANK YOU to all who answered. Whether you agree with my criteria or not, your comments were helpful and very much appreciated. In three pages, I have assembled a list of 12 cameras (more by inference - and I am, sadly, not including the Leica). My next step will to compare other criteria (possibly a spreadsheet), including objective criteria and at least one subjective criterium, the layout of the camera back. I will be happy to add any future suggestions. I am intrigued by the inclusion of the Panasonic Lumix G1, as I currently use a G3. On the other end of the spectrum, I am surprised that I may be able to attain my goals with a full frame camera. Needless to say, I have a lot of research ahead of me. That is acceptable, because my very limited income will necessitate some care budgeting. I also need to factor in the possibility of another medical incident such as that which required my withdrawal from DSLR photography in the first place. Again, thank you, and please be assured that I will post any glittering gems of wisdom my research uncovers.
THANK YOU to all who answered. Whether you agree ... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Jul 12, 2013 02:10:46   #
JPL
 
Another camera I came to think of from Nikon is the D700. That is probably the best full frame Nikon without video. It is an excellent camera, highly praised by those who bought it. I have used one occasionally and know it is very good camera.

Mogul wrote:
THANK YOU to all who answered. Whether you agree with my criteria or not, your comments were helpful and very much appreciated. In three pages, I have assembled a list of 12 cameras (more by inference - and I am, sadly, not including the Leica). My next step will to compare other criteria (possibly a spreadsheet), including objective criteria and at least one subjective criterium, the layout of the camera back. I will be happy to add any future suggestions. I am intrigued by the inclusion of the Panasonic Lumix G1, as I currently use a G3. On the other end of the spectrum, I am surprised that I may be able to attain my goals with a full frame camera. Needless to say, I have a lot of research ahead of me. That is acceptable, because my very limited income will necessitate some care budgeting. I also need to factor in the possibility of another medical incident such as that which required my withdrawal from DSLR photography in the first place. Again, thank you, and please be assured that I will post any glittering gems of wisdom my research uncovers.
THANK YOU to all who answered. Whether you agree ... (show quote)

Reply
Jul 12, 2013 06:56:54   #
Mickey432 Loc: San Antonio , Texas
 
RLKurth ,

Noticed that you have a Nikon D90 and just had to ask you :
How does your D90 perform taking indoor sport shots in indoor gymnasiums----- no flash --- basketball games in
particular ?? I'm following my grandsons in their high school BB games with a Nikon D60 with mediocre results at best and have been interested in the Nikon D90 for a while now .

Pro's and cons would be truly appreciated . Thank you .

Mickey432

Reply
Jul 12, 2013 22:27:22   #
Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada
 
Mogul wrote:
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 camera that does NOT have video capabilities? The last one I had was a Canon 50D. Now that I am physically capable of holding a larger camera steady for a short time without shaking, I am looking for a new (or refurbished) contemporary camera, but I do not like video; it adds components, buttons, procedures and weight I do not want or need. I can also get by without high ISO capacity, super shutter speeds or a moveable LCD (to tell the truth, I don't even need live view, but I guess I have no choice). I would like to have ISO as low as 100 and, if possible, a real optical viewfinder. Please tell me such a camera exists. Thank you for your help.
Does anyone make a current DSLR or &#956;4/3 c... (show quote)


Sure " no problem there old and callsd brownnies

Reply
Jul 12, 2013 22:30:49   #
BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
 
Bram boy wrote:
Sure " no problem there old and callsd brownnies


Sorry, response unintelligible.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.