Is using the camera in manual that difficult.

[jbuenavides]

I enjoy using manual set-up as it let me explore the features of the camera compared when it is set to automatic.

 

[BradS]

Is it difficult? No, of course not but why does it matter? If auto exposure does the job, and the photographer is happy with the results, why does it matter if the photo was taken with aperture priority auto exposure or full manual with the aid of a ttl meter or with a box camera that has only one shutter speed and one aperture?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Manual all the time for me and the type of photography that I do.

 

[GRHazelton]

Having "grown up" on film photography with manual cameras when I added digital with first a Pentax K-10 and now a Pentax K-5 I found the Tav exposure mode most to my liking. The camera presents in the viewfinder the ISO (or ASA as we old farts call it) the shutter speed and the f stop which should yield a proper exposure. Varying the shutter speed or f stop will change the ASA. The shooter has a lot of control over the "feel" of the shot, whether depth of field is emphasized at the expense of action stopping, etc. Of course the meter pattern can be selected; given my film heritage I usually use strongly center weighted, as does the Pentax LX. which I still use.
For what its worth my first "real" camera was a Kodak Retina I - bought second hand, I assure you! The Retina 1 is small folder, f3.5 Ektar lens, a 4 element Tessar type, 1 to 1/300 Compur shutter, scale focusing. Thus it is TOTALLY MANUAL! I had to learn to guesstimate distances; initially the exposure data in the inside of Kodak's film boxes got me in the ball park. I did buy an exposure meter when my funds permitted. I still have the camera, and it still works!

 

[YellowPangolin]

While manual might seem more like a pain in the rear from all the fiddling and setup, it has it perks and advantages. Primary advantage is that you dont have to charge your camera, and thus can never forget to charge it. It might need a small coin cell battery for the light meter, but those are very cheap batteries and very lightweight.

You also get extreme precision in what you wish to get from a photo. Not messing with screens afterwards means less time worrying if you got the shot or not. Its 36 or 24 which forces users to get gud or get out.

Film is also very reliable and resistant to electrostatic charges. Its write once read many.

 

[Pieter12]

While manual might seem more like a pain in the rear from all the fiddling and setup, it has it perks and advantages. Primary advantage is that you dont have to charge your camera, and thus can never forget to charge it. It might need a small coin cell battery for the light meter, but those are very cheap batteries and very lightweight.

You also get extreme precision in what you wish to get from a photo. Not messing with screens afterwards means less time worrying if you got the shot or not. Its 36 or 24 which forces users to get gud or get out.

Film is also very reliable and resistant to electrostatic charges. Its write once read many.

I believe you are confusing using a camera in manual mode with a mechanical, non-automatic camera. Many, many automatic cameras, both digital and analog, have the ability to be used in manual mode as well as a number of "automatic" modes--aperture- or shutter-priority, or programmed mode of some sort.

 

[YellowPangolin]

I believe you are confusing using a camera in manual mode with a mechanical, non-automatic camera. Many, many automatic cameras, both digital and analog, have the ability to be used in manual mode as well as a number of "automatic" modes--aperture- or shutter-priority, or programmed mode of some sort.

I believe I am indeed confusing it. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've never owned anything but a completely manual camera, and never will. What is a lot of work is reading through some Owner's Manual the thickness of a phone book trying to figure out how many redundant bells n whistles need to be turned off before you can actually take a picture the way YOU want it to look, and not some generic program's idea.

 

[MattKing]

I've never owned anything but a completely manual camera, and never will. What is a lot of work is reading through some Owner's Manual the thickness of a phone book trying to figure out how many redundant bells n whistles need to be turned off before you can actually take a picture the way YOU want it to look, and not some generic program's idea.

Well...
I was out yesterday using my OM-4T.
The information in the viewfinder when using it in manual exposure mode is wonderful and intuitive and, most likely, would not have been engineered in if the designers had not worked the way they did to incorporate the more complex spot metering and automatic exposure modes and the necessary viewfinder information supporting them.
I expect that information is available that way in the viewfinder of the rare and desirable manual exposure only OM-3T, but I've never even handled one of those, and I'm sure the OM-3T wouldn't even have come to market without the OM-4 coming into being.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I use a handheld Pentax spot meter. It's more accurate than anything TTL because there's no intervening technology to un-complicate. But with practice, one can get accustomed to just about any kind of reliable meter, including TTL's. But I think you have the evolutionary model backwards, Matt. 35mm cameras went from no meter, to exterior coupled meters, to internal TTL meters with manual control, and only after that, aperture-priority versus shutter-speed-priority auto options. Then it was an arms race among manufacturers, much like people expecting the latest and coolest cell phone or whatever nowadays. I happen to like my Nikon FM2n because it is totally manual, and works perfectly without even a battery.

 

[MattKing]

But I think you have the evolutionary model backwards, Matt.

Don't think so Drew.
I've been using cameras with in-viewfinder meter readouts for 45+ years. The quality of that readout in the OM-4T is wonderful - in combination with my choice of screen, I have an accurate indication of spot metering area, an indicator showing recommended exposure and set exposure, with 1/3 stop increments, and the manually set shutter speed, all (except the indicator) outside the nice, bright and contrasty image.
While the quality of the viewing system/screen itself isn't a meaningful improvement on the viewing system/screen in my 1974 vintage OM-1, the information included with it is both more useful and subtly and intuitively much better presented.
The multi-segment exposure indicator in particular is great.
I will agree that there are many other examples of more modern cameras where the implementation isn't nearly as good.

 

[jtk]

The most recent Samsung mirrorless feature huge screens that are far brighter than anything else. And the *upcoming* Samsung NX will slaughter full frame competition, any of which they can buy with pocket change.

I use Pentax primes with my NX5 as well as Samsung's zooms.

 

[VinceInMT]

I still use manual cameras. Of course, I develop by hand in a stainless tank, my cars have manual transmissions, I bake all my own bread, I still play 8-track tapes, I do lots of my own sewing, I draw with a pencil, and shovel rather than use a snowblower.

I guess it depends on one's personality.

 

[KenS]

Being an 'large format' camera "User" for some 60+ years, I have not yet been able to find a means whereby either of my LF cameras might 'expose' the film in the film-holder all by itself.. maybe I'll have to wait a few more years (if I live that long)

Ken

 

[DREW WILEY]

Only 45 years, Matt? I go back to the old Honeywell Pentax H-1 days. I'd rather have another one of those than anything fancy afterwards. My current Nikon does have a simple TTL meter; but the camera itself works without any battery at all, and I normally use a handheld meter anyway. Life gets complicated enough for me when the world looks rightside-up and I can't find a darkcloth anywhere in my Nikon big.