Posted on 07/06/2012 5:39:13 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER
This small mountain of gear leads to two very frightening thoughts. Firstly, there’s no ending in sight; one keeps accumulating more and more equipment in order to keep pushing the edge of what’s possible both from a compositional and artistic standpoint, as well as from an image quality standpoint. You’ve either got to have a great day job and very deep pockets, or some good recurring clients.
The second thought is around obsolescence. In the film days, the camera body and lenses lasted a long time; you invested in glass, got a decent body – one that fulfilled your personal needs as a photographer – and then picked the right film for the job. In that sense, image quality differences between brands were down to the lenses and the photographer. This is to say that if you put the same film in every camera, the difference in sharpness or acuity or color or whatever would be down to the lens only. If you wanted more image quality, you went for a bigger format – and thus a larger sensor. The digital equivalent to this would be having only one photo site design of a fixed pixel pitch; say around 4.9 microns, which would get you 16MP at APS-C, 36MP at FX, about 60MP on 645, and something silly on large format. For an equivalent size print, the larger format would definitely outdo the smaller format by an amount proportional to the difference in resolution.
I have that same camera I also bought in 2001. Still use it. Works great. (although now I use it as a second camera)
I photograph sports for a living.
You are absolutely correct. The camera doesn’t make the photographer.
It’s like someone proficient with rifles. Give him something he’s never seen before, and with a little practice he’s hitting the bullseye.
The reason the digital stuff is obsolete is not the shutters or lenses. It because digital cameras are just computers. The ability of my first one (Nikon d1 in ‘00) vs the Nikon D4 this year is simply staggering. I can make better photos with less effort. But I still made a good living with the old ones.
Yes...I still have my F3. And I still use it.
Margaret Mitchell was my 2nd cousin.
B—stards!
The article is correct, the digital stuff out there is highly suspect.
The nature of digital is that you shouldn’t think you own stuff, visualize it as more of a rental. If you don’t feel like you can get half of your money’s worth out of it in the first year, and three quarters of it in the first two years, you probably shouldn’t buy it. Because even if it doesn’t break down early, it is certain to be obsolete in six years. You had to know that going in. You should always buy second-hand if you need to save your money.
You’re both correct; bigger megapixels do lend themselves to cropping. Again, it all goes back to the specifics of how you want to use the photo.
Professional photographers should always have the option to crop, especially if they use high-end DSLR equipment that balances ISO and resolution due to using a larger sensor. My complaint isn’t about resolution per se, it’s a complaint about resolution vs. sensitivity. The average consumer believes that a 15 MP camera is automatically better than a 10 MP camera, even though the 10 MP camera may make consistently better quality images in most lighting situations. Not so much with DSLRs, that have larger sensors and can handle higher ISOs.
It makes it hard to find a decent all-around camera unless you want to carry around a clunky DSLR all the time.
And many people, especially those using point-and-shoot, they’re not as worried about composition...they just want a pouty picture of themselves to use as their Facebook signature.
Of course, I’m talking about point-and-shoot, consumer-grade cameras in general. There’s no real need for them to have 14+ megapixels when most people are simply viewing their pictures online or making 4x6 prints.
The lens flare is real. I shot that with my AE-1, and I couldn’t look through the viewfinder as I shot. So, I set the focus manually based on the scale on the lens, then I bracketed the focus and took two more shots.
I did clean it up in Gimp a little bit, because the print I scanned it from was about 20 years old, but other than that, the pic looks exactly like it came out of the camera.
First of all, I don’t need to save my money. I have sufficient discretionary income.
And no, I didn’t know of the fast, planned obsolescence of these products going in. I do now and will act accordingly.
You, sir, have an eye. As a career creative director and a fellow devotee of “get the best out of any gear” photography, I commend you. That’s high praise from me because I’m impossible to impress.
I’ve heard talk that digital shutters are good for something like 150,000 shots?
Sounds like a lot until you realize that it is possible to shoot two thousand pictures in a day (especially if you shoot multiple frames in a burst and select the best of the bunch).
Some people are disclosing the number of shots (say 35k out of 150k) when selling used digital cameras.
I have a digital SLR but still mostly shoot 35mm film.
The Nikkor lense that you own was designed by my friend. And yes they are super sharp and perfectly suitable for photos and most consumer photo applications. I too own a D40 and several nice Nikkor lenses.
Great stuff!
I like backlit photos if the light doesn't overwhelm the subject. You did a good job making it presentable and then some. Guys like car photos and that 57 Chevy is sharp.
I've watch SS improve with his birds. He gets some terrific ones. IIRC he was shooting with a p&s zoom lens which had pretty good reach but soon moved up to dslr which gave him sharper ones.
Thanks, if you aren’t getting better you’re not paying attention!
I take a little umbrage at the term “planned obsolescence” in this context. It’s not that the manufacturers are deliberately making changes for the mere sake of making changes, as in the ‘50s era automobiles from Detroit. It’s just that the past validity of Moore’s Law teaches us to expect that better digital technology will become available soon. The makers of digital chips can’t make half as good a chip now as they plan to be able to make in two years. And in two years, that same statement will still be true.So you just have to wait until you feel that you will get your money’s worth out of a new digital device quickly.
I don’t try as hard as I did. I was able to get down on my stomach for some shots and various contortions, but I shake now am getting old. My health and stamina have taken a turn for the worse and I can only take a few photos at a time in my yard of my flowers, butterflies, and such. I have a nice collection of owls though when they nested in my tree which I had to have taken down.
The stabilizer system in the Sony handles most of the shake, it’s pretty good.
They only go back to the D3100 model -- which I and many others Did-Not-Want because of all the bells, whistles and switches on it. We didn't want to take Videos or even have Live View, we wanted a 'C-A-M-E-R-A', period.
But one thing I'm not crazy about with any brand of Digital SLR is their 'recommended operating range temperature, 30oF to 90oF. I'd think it would work outside that range, just the battery life might be affected.
I sure didn't have to worry about that with my Nikon FE or even my Pentax Spotmatic II (both of which still work just fine). Only the possibility of the front lens element fogging up in cold weather like if you brought it outside from the house and tried taking pics right away, or have it under your cost, then try to shoot right away). I took pics wit my Nikon FE on Construction Sites in below zero weather without a problem - except I was the one freezing up :-)
All I want is a camera which does basic camera things well, don’t need the bells and whistles. I love my Sony A200 but the only way I’ll be able to replace it will be to find a good used one with a low shutter count. It’s going strong but it can’t last forever.
I've had it since my 40's and gotten to the point I only do checks, envelopes and sign stuff. It looks squiggly. I type everything I can.
The right brain controls that, and it must be the anxiety and/or meds. Sometimes it's so bad I have to use two hands to manage a spoon and slop my tea cup. It hasn't been that bad for awhle. It's nice and steady today but still couldn't write neatly like I used to.
The most I ever learned about photography is when the meter went dead on my Praktica MTL-5. I bought it on eBay because it is a near replica of the camera I learned on, my dad’s old Praktica LTL.
Once the meter died, I taught myself how to manually estimate exposure and continued to shoot with that camera. I learned about f-stops and shutter speeds and their relation to one another. I learned how to look at the available light and take my film ISO into consideration and set the aperture and shutter speed accordingly. After a while, I got really good at it. The picture of the black-eyed susans was done with that camera.
Lots of fun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.