Why can't they keep it simple?

[JimC]

Monza76 wrote:

Hopefully the shake up at Minolta (sorry, Konica-Minolta) will not cause to many problems, in recent years Minolta has produced the best featured entry level 35mm cameras out there, if that philosophy carries over into DSLRs there could be something in my range.

Well, I did read a forum post yesterday on another forum, from someone giving details from conversations with KM,indicating that the design team for KM's D7 now consists of an equal number of members from both Konica and Minolta's engineering groups. He also discussed the differences in philosphy between the two groups, as to how an image should look.

IMO, Konicas image processing in their little pocket cameras (like my KD-510z) is vastly superior to the image processing used by Minolta in the digital camera models they designed. I rarely need to do any post processing at all to my images (only redeye correction). In contrast, many owners of newer DiMAGE owners post process virtually all of their images to get them looking "just right".

So, I think the collaboration between the two engineering groups will be a good thing for consumers.

As for digital, my Pentax Optio 33L takes very good pictures, all it lacks is greater manual control and an optical viewfinder. I guess it just comes down to the fact that I need to adapt to the technology, since it is not likely to adapt to me (at least not at a price point that I can currently afford) I include an image captured by the Pentax just last week.

Beautiful Photo! :-)

[Monza76]

Thanks JimC,

I am enjoying my little camera, fake metal and all, there are many image quality settings and some unusual options which make for great pictures. I hope to explore more of them over the summer before school starts again (I teach).

I bought my wife a Fuji Finepix 2800 for her birthday, unbelieveable pictures for a 2Mp, 5"X7" look fantastic and 8"X10" are quite acceptable. Interesting that it punches up the colour just like most Fuji films do.

I will still be toting around the Minolta gear for those situations where the limitations of the Optio are exceeded. BTW I kept a Pentax KX and a set of prime lenses for things like night photography (star trails etc.) since it doesn't require batteries and the camera doesn't mind the cold nights.

Hopefully for the future Konica-Minolta will let the Konica group design the electronics and lenses while the Minolta crew lays out the controls, the Maxxum 7 35mm almost tempts me even today (my cameras are old 7000s, crude by modern standards but reliable and capable of great results).



Ira

[Mikefellh]

Chako wrote:

Why are so many photographers in love with black?

Well, cameras have been black (in order to block out light), most (good) converter lenses are black, most filters have black rings...it's only stupid engineers and marketing "experts" say digital cameras should be silver due to the high-tech aspect...but then again most digital camera designers never operated a proper camera in their life.

Have to add here that many earlier film cameras had more chrome, only because they couldn't produce black metal that would keep the paint intact, but in areas of the film they did have black coating or a black layer of plastic or rubber.

[Chako]

Hmmmm......

I have several old cameras in my collection which I occasionally take out and run a roll of film through. They are fairly old things all chromed up, etc...as the want of the style of their era. I even have anAsahi PentaxS that has chromed filter rings for it. They look snazzy on the chromed lens, and body.

Interestingly enough, they take very good photos. Even the chromed filter rings do not seem to affect the photograph at all, as I strongly suspect they are outside the light path, or so close to the peripheral, that it equates to the same.

Thus, black has little to do with keeping light out unless it is going to be in contact with the light path. Even my oldAsahi has black painted interior inside that all chromed lens. The inside of the camera was black as well, as is all 35mm camera equipment that I am familiar with.

Black camera bodies and lenses started when a few professionals started to tape their bodies and lenses with black tape to be less conspicuous. Being incognito has great advantages, and at the time, chromed gear was very noticeable.

Camera companies took notice, and started to make black camera bodies and lenses. Amateurs and snap shooters started to want black bodies because they saw the more pro gear all blacked up.

The colour of the camera does not equate to being a "proper camera". The colour of the camera exterior has no effect on the image. The optics do.

So why are people in love with black. If your going to take photos under a hot sun, who in their right mind would want a black camera? Most of us know that heat does nothing good for film, and yet, we buy black cameras that absorbs the full colour spectrum. In essence, you now have an oven that takes photos.

I strongly suspect there is more then "marketing experts" behind the colour of most digital cameras. Everyone knows that electronics do not like heat either. Why paint it black, so that it will heat up in the midday sun? Likewise, the same thing goes for most lower end cameras. Oddly enough, the higher end stuff is all black.A throwover from those days where tape was needed I guess.

[NHL]

Don't forget most Canon 'L' lenses are white (for the same heat reason)... and they make nifty marketing campaigns based on that color dominating the field :-):-):-)

BTW the D7/i/Hi/A1/A2 camera has manual zoom, manual 'feel' focusing ring and most of everything can be accessed with knobs... They did went overboard with their real-time EVF though.

[Monza76]

I have used old Pentax cameras with shiny metal finishes for years, but all of these cameras had nice black leather grip areas and very functional shapes. I like the Fujifilm 3800 and S3000 because thay have a nice finish with some black rubberized grip areas, however so many new digicams are just shiny plastic, often in rather odd shades.

This is probably the least important issue on my list, and after reading some of the responses here I now conclude that the ability to use an external flash unit is probably the biggest oversight in lower cost digicams.

Right now a Fuji S7000 looks like the best bargain however I have read a lot of comments about image quality so I will reserve judgement for the time being.



Ira

[Alan T]

I agree, and have posted rants like yours not far from here previously.

The thing I could really do without is autofocus, as it has often prevented me from getting a decent shot when it has refused to work correctly, on every digicam I've had. Most consumer digicams just need 4 zone focusing buttons (close-up, head & shoulders, group, mountain), because at their maximum aperture they still have lots of depth of field. Even top-end cameras would all be improved by a simple optical rangefinder, which is reliable and works in all lighting conditions.

Also, everyone knows the movie feature is completely useless on a still camera. My family keep taking movies by accident and filling their memory cards.If you want movies, buy a camcorder.

[Alan T]

Monza76 wrote:

I include an image captured by the Pentax just last week.

Lovely picture! Have you seen...

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=85

...?

[Chako]

I have to agree. Camera manufacturers seem to think that because it is a digital camera, they need to make it overly complex.

It would be nice if they could come out with a Pentax K1000 equivalent digital camera (Pentax, do you hear this, might make a killing as there are many people who are looking for a good solid simple and cheap workhorse of a digital camera).

[Monza76]

That is my real point, simplicity.

BTW in spite of its lack of its lack of a manual exposure mode the Pentax Optio 33L I use does have manual focus, however with the small LCD screen it is best to use it as a focus lock by simply using spot autofocus and then switching to manual focus. This is quite effective and cuts lag time for grab shots significantly.

What would make me happy? How about a Leica D2 which used AA sized NiMH batteries and cost $400. I would not expect Leica class optics, but Pentax, Canon and Fuji (just to name three) make excellent lenses for a fraction of the cost, I just want that "traditional" camera control layout in an affordable package.

Ira