awana wrote:
I would like a camera with only the basic features that are necessary with digital imaging. Manual control, no video,no image manipulation features etc. any ideas?
Buy a used Sony Mavica. Floppy disk and all.
burkphoto wrote:
Yeah, there isn't a "Pentax K1000" of the digital age.
All but a few digital cameras have video. Most have lengthy manuals. Most CAN be used totally manually, but nearly all come with lots of automation features.
Ah. The wonderful Pentax K1000. My wife has an earlier one when they were still manufactured in Japan. It was, and is, a terrific basic film camera.
Peterff
Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
rehess wrote:
So when the CNET on-line review
https://www.cnet.com/products/canon-powershot-elph-s400/review/ said "
With the camera in Manual mode, you can adjust exposure compensation, white balance, ISO speed settings (50 to 400), and effects (vivid or neutral color, low sharpening, sepia, and black and white)", they managed to leave the most important features "manual control of shutter speed and aperture" out of the list?
Rehess, remember that you are responding to my comment
"most modern digital cameras can do basic stuff, you just have to ignore the rest of the options.". The salient words are 1) 'Most' and 2) 'Modern'. If you remember Scott McNealy - founder and longtime CEO of Sun Microsystems - one of his pithy insights was that "Technology has the shelf life of a banana."
You are right about the S400 (2003, so not modern), was designed as a very compact point and shoot, but did not have explicit shutter speed or aperture control. On the other hand the A710 (2006, so not modern either) does have full manual control of shutter speed and aperture, and with CHDK can deliver DNG format raw files. As does the A540 (also 2006, so also not modern). For 2003 the Digital Elph was a pretty good camera, by 2006 digital stuff had become much more sophisticated if you bought the right models.
Not that any of this really matters, but the Stones nailed it a long time ago in 1969:
"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes well you might find
you get what you need."We have more options now than we have ever had historically, and relatively speaking for much less money in comparison to average income. This is an interesting discussion, but I fail to see why people are not satisfied with the choices in front of them.
awana wrote:
I would like a camera with only the basic features that are necessary with digital imaging. Manual control, no video,no image manipulation features etc. any ideas?
Get any DSLR that allows for manual mode. Than, superglue the mode selector in the manual mode. There you have it. Otherwise you could have one built for several thousand dollars.
tdekany wrote:
I see that you have a D7000 - what is wrong with that camera?
SS is correct - practice, practice, practice before you spend $$$ on a "better" camera. You need to get better first.
5-pages of people telling you to waste money on changing systems or buying a different body. But a few have identified you just need to learn and use your current camera. It currently can be operated in full manual including the selection of the ISO and the WB and manual focus of the lens with just the flip of a switch. There's really no other option ....
I'll sell you my Nikon D40!!!!!!
mwsilvers wrote:
Ah. The wonderful Pentax K1000. My wife has an earlier one when they were still manufactured in Japan. It was, and is, a terrific basic film camera.
I never had one, but when I worked for a yearbook and school portrait company, we recommended them to students because they were solid, cheap, high quality, and very functional. Many bought Canon AE-1 Program cameras, however, and got pretty awfully exposed images due to not knowing how to use the automation.
Impressionist wrote:
Sony a6000 is your best bet. It will be all you want it to be for as long as you want and not break the bank. You could look into older cameras that have only still capability but they really aren't going to be as cheap or as useful in the long run.
I keep seeing sales prices of $699 for the Sony a6000 and two lenses: 16-55 mm & 50-210 mm.
Here's one I found at Walgreens for $10.00. It's as bare bones as you can get.
--Bob
awana wrote:
I would like a camera with only the basic features that are necessary with digital imaging. Manual control, no video,no image manipulation features etc. any ideas?
When it is realized how much intelligence can be placed on even the smallest solid state chip, it is no wonder that most cameras have so much 'stuff.' Blame it all on those solid state engineers and physicists laboring in micro-miniaturization.
And not to forget those camera engineers laboring to fill-up those chips. Somewhere a few years ago I read that miniaturization was only about 1/10th the way to the quantum limit, so I would guess over the next 5-10 years cameras will have grow in size just so there will be enough room for all new buttons to make all that functionality usable. Think 500 page menu.
CHG_CANON wrote:
5-pages of people telling you to waste money on changing systems or buying a different body. But a few have identified you just need to learn and use your current camera. It currently can be operated in full manual including the selection of the ISO and the WB and manual focus of the lens with just the flip of a switch. There's really no other option ....
Seems like no one is really listening, I guess people just have a need to "talk" photography. Which I like, but in this case the topic is way off, since the OP has a very capable camera already, which can be used as a bare bone body just like those cameras that are being recommended left and right.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.