Oh I must have the latest Kit or do I ?

moonraker

moonraker

Suspended / Banned
Messages
77
Name
Neil
Edit My Images
No
I know this does not just relate to just photographic kit, but I never cease to be amazed that when new equipment comes out the equipment we have been using quite happily suddenly becomes no good and unable take a decent photo.
I know there will never be such a thing as the perfect camera and there will always be new developments ,all electrical goods are out of date as they come off the production line, which will be passed on to the consumer.The good news is if you don't mind having last years or the years before model you can get your hands on some very good equipment for sensible money.
I bought my Nikon D80 18-70 lens ,one of the last two in the shop both ex display in perfect condition, at the change overtime when the D90 had just come out the choice £340 for the D80 or getting on for £800 for the D90 with all the latest whistles and bells on it.
I know its personal choice and some people like to have the latest equipment but I for one feel having the latest isn't always the way to go.
How do other people feel?
 
I agree with you horses for courses and all that and its interesting that Pro equipment seems to go longer between upgrades.
It is in the entry level and mid level and semi pro equipment that the manufactures seem to do the must have upgrades. It could be that this area is the one that is more open to the must have the latest kit syndrome.
 
Or it could be that the entry/mid level equipment appeals more to the newbie/casual buyer and the more new gadgets they can add, the more appealing it will seem to that market regardless of wether the gadget is useful. It is unusual to see a complete beginner jump straight in and buy pro equipment until they've tried the hobby to see if it suits.
 
Might be some way away but I'm hoping the Chinese delve into the photography arena (not sure if they already have) and put some of the expensive technology within reach of the average consumer.
 
D80 to D90 a good case in point one of the main selling points was the video mode do we really need this on a stills camera? There was other up grades as well over D80 but the question is would the average person notice a big difference in the end result. Are we close to diminishing returns ,more features and more money for a little improvement in picture quality.
 
Veracocha said:
Might be some way away but I'm hoping the Chinese delve into the photography arena (not sure if they already have) and put some of the expensive technology within reach of the average consumer.
Click to expand...

I'd say a lot of the more expensive technology is within reach of the average consumer. Ok, so the top professional gear is still beyond a lot of people but how many of those really require it?
 
TriggerHappy said:
I'd say a lot of the more expensive technology is within reach of the average consumer. Ok, so the top professional gear is still beyond a lot of people but how many of those really require it?
Click to expand...

Yes, but the Chinese will put the pro gear in our hands at mainstream pricing. Not a question of requiring it if it's at the right price.
 
no they won't verococha

growing the sensors is a dammed expensive business and why ff is expensive wherever you are, there are no cheaper mainstream pc processors are there ;)

oh and ditto for glass
 
Some people feel the need for the latest technology, whether there will be a significant improvement in using that technology or not. :shrug: Technolust. ;) :lol:

As long as they're not using my money to pay for it, and not getting themselves into significant debt, then good luck to them. :thumbs:

These are the people that fuel technological advancement are they not?

If there was no market for new technology, and everyone was happy with what they have, then the cameras, in this case, wouldn't be as advanced or advancing as they are.
 
As already said above, depends on what your doing with it. I also think it depends on what your upgrading from to and what changes / upgrade / new features are included. I seem to remember the Canon 450D was a significant jump from the previous model (even more so from the 350D !).

Having said that, there are people out there, that must just have it, because it's new, no matter how small the changes maybe :shrug:
 
i recently bought a new fuji s5, think it's 2005 technology but a great camera.

I'd love a D700 for low light and the colours (are to my eye) really nice thought totally different from the fuji, ill probably end up waiting until it becomes 'old' too but when i get by god it'll be worth it. depends what you want your camera to do
 
I think the driving factor could well be the demands the professional photographers make on their equipment a bit like car improvement filter down from Formula 1. There are things which are aimed more at the consumer market IE movie mode. I for one would like to have seen may be some weather proofing on consumer DLSR's because at the end of the day the cost of the cameras are not cheep and it would be nice not have to worry about a bit of rain.
 
I use a Kodak DX6490 and I love it. Yes it is slow to start and there are lots of things I would like to do, but the photos I take I like and for me that is all it needs to do.

Having said that The things I would like to do are beginning to make me think about getting an DSLR.

Hence part of the reason for joining the site.
 
david1701 said:
no they won't verococha

growing the sensors is a dammed expensive business and why ff is expensive wherever you are, there are no cheaper mainstream pc processors are there ;)

oh and ditto for glass
Click to expand...

What? It's all about filtration of technology, eventually it comes to the consumer level, it's the same with most technology including processors.
 
I'm quite happy being a year or two out of date with most things in my life like my tele, hi-fi, golf clubs, cameras etc.

And I'm happy because I laugh at people that have lost ££££'s when I turn up to buy their second hand goods for peanuts!!:woot:

However, I do realise, if it wasn't for those silly rich people wasting their money on the latest must have's, I would have to pay top dollar for them, so, for that, I'm grateful!!:thumbs:
 
david1701 said:
no they won't verococha

growing the sensors is a dammed expensive business and why ff is expensive wherever you are, there are no cheaper mainstream pc processors are there ;)

oh and ditto for glass
Click to expand...

Ok, lets talk optics; equally an expensive business. It is no secret that Leica & Swarovski produce some of the finest optics (Bino's for arguments sake). Arguably some way ahead of Canon or Nikon. Now the Chinese are producing ED glass that surpasses that which in theory, cost much more. I was shocked to see a £300 pair of bino's blow away my £1200 Swaro's. I flogged the Swaro's at a loss and brought two pairs of Chinese bins and had change to buy a Sigma 10-20. Europe & the west now have some serious competition on a technological level.
 
Slimbert said:
I'm quite happy being a year or two out of date with most things in my life like my tele, hi-fi, golf clubs, cameras etc.

And I'm happy because I laugh at people that have lost ££££'s when I turn up to buy their second hand goods for peanuts!!:woot:

However, I do realise, if it wasn't for those silly rich people wasting their money on the latest must have's, I would have to pay top dollar for them, so, for that, I'm grateful!!:thumbs:
Click to expand...

Rich people spending money keeps people in jobs. Is that funny too?
 
I don't think Nikon expect people to change their D80 for a D90, the new models are aimed at new buyers to the price bracket.
I know the D90 is essentially better than my D80 but it doesn't bother me one bit, when I upgrade it'll be to a higher bracket not a sideways move.
 
I bought a D200 about 21 months ago whilst umming and erring over whether to wait for the D300...... Yes once the D300 came out I momentarily thought b****r wish I'd waited but then realised that I had had about 4 months happy photography from my D200. I learnt more and more about photography and when I decided to get a 2nd body I didn't want to spend much because I am saving for my next main camera so I bought a D1x.

A D1x !! Now that is an old camera BUT all my lenses fit, my Nikon flashes fit, my remote fits etc etc..... Was it a good camera when it was launched ---- YES. Is it just as good now? ------ YES.

It might be 6Mp but who cares? That is enough pixels to blow up to A3 or to crop a chunk out and still blow it up to 10x8. It is bullet proof and easy to use! Would I buy one again? -- YES.

When I buy my next camera which will be the replacement for the D700 I will be converting the D1x to IR.

Basically I have a D200 which is superb and a D1x which is a decent work horse. I have 4 lenses ALL of which are now worth MORE than when I bought them!!!!! The camera is worth much less so what does that tell me? --- It tells me to invest in glass and to change bodies ONLY when my current body is no longer capable of doing what I want. The D300 has a few extra pixels, live view and nothing much more really!

When will that be? - Who knows? The D700 replacement is for its FF capabilities and because I cannot afford (or justify) a D3x although I would absolutely love one :)
 
KayJay said:
Rich people spending money keeps people in jobs. Is that funny too?
Click to expand...

Not at all! But poor money is as good as rich money. In some cases even better!

Do you think Canon, Nikon, Sony etc care which tier of buyer their huge turnover comes from?? I'm sure it effects what products they make, but I doubt it has much effect on the number of people they employ! Would Nikon sack many people if they dropped the D700 from their product line-up? I'm not sure they would........

I have no doubt at all, that the reason for entry level equipment being so good, is due to people buying expensive equipment, and that those features that are developed for high end cameras, are eventually filtered down to lower end cameras (etc). And believe me, I'm very grateful for how this works!

But seriously, I understand your point. If I was richer I would probably be one of those people that buys the latest of everything (I love my gadgets!), however being a lowly social worker, I'm more than happy for other (richer) people to soak up the bulk of the depreciation when the latest model comes out, and let me have the goods I wanted a year ago upon their release, for a much lower price!!

PS: although it may be very cheap (for some), I bought my a200 brand new from a high street shop!
 
"My $0.02" :D.

I believe that there's still a lot that could be done to drastically improve the quality of digital photography, which hasn't yet been done. Once the technology takes a significant step in the direction of "perfection", then the goalposts shift for everyone, not just the pros and their clients.

For instance, imagine if a camera manufacturer actually developed a sensor that was able to control exposure at pixel level, so that highlights would be attenuated in-camera by an adjustable margin :naughty:. Combine an innovation like that with, say, massivley improved noise reduction and you're looking at equipment that would remove the need for HDR, ultra-fast (pricey) lenses, VR/OS/IS etc. and a whole host of top-level features that we crave nowadays :|.

I wouldn't blame anyone for wanting to upgrade to kit like that and if those people didn't, then the technology would never find it's way down to the amateur peasants like me :lol:.

The only reason I can see for griping on about people who want to spend their own money on better kit, is jealousy - that's not a great motivation, IMO. And, considering what I've already pointed out about how the market works, it's actually pretty counter-productive too :shrug:.

There you go, you can all flame me now ;).
 
Naboo32 said:
For instance, imagine if a camera manufacturer actually developed a sensor that was able to control exposure at pixel level, so that highlights would be attenuated in-camera by an adjustable margin :naughty:. Combine an innovation like that with, say, massivley improved noise reduction and you're looking at equipment that would remove the need for HDR, ultra-fast (pricey) lenses, VR/OS/IS etc. and a whole host of top-level features that we crave nowadays :|.
Click to expand...

D3, D700, D3X and to a degree D300, D90, D60.
Controlling exposure at pixel level is basically what "Active D-Lighting" does and is adjustable to a degree depending on which model you have and the FX models are much less noisy at high ISO's.
 
i recently went from D80 to a D300...

wow what a move well worth it. need to get a few more pro lenses and ill be happy.. invest in the glass its well worth it. the glass never changes that much over the years and holds its money.... bodys come and go...

invest in glass thats what im trying to do....
 
Mediocre photographers will always be looking for a better piece of kit.:D

Seriously though, no amount of kit or technology know how will give you the ability to know what a good image is and capture it at the right angle.
But likewise, no amount of artistic ability will give you fantastic pictures if you have a crap camera or a good camera but with no ability to use it right!

Max
 
Veracocha said:
Ok, lets talk optics; equally an expensive business. It is no secret that Leica & Swarovski produce some of the finest optics (Bino's for arguments sake). Arguably some way ahead of Canon or Nikon. Now the Chinese are producing ED glass that surpasses that which in theory, cost much more. I was shocked to see a £300 pair of bino's blow away my £1200 Swaro's. I flogged the Swaro's at a loss and brought two pairs of Chinese bins and had change to buy a Sigma 10-20. Europe & the west now have some serious competition on a technological level.
Click to expand...

something I wasn't aware of, but our materials lecturer was going over the factors limiting the fall of electronics, and that the cost of growing the wafers was one. Same as for sensors, a ff sensor has to be dearer than a crop one to produce.

I must be mistaken in applying it to glass, I thought the flouride elements were grown in the same way.

I meant that chinese kit is usually cheaper due to lower labour costs, and that a major limiting factor here is component cost so there wouldn't be a huge difference
 
i find my kit usually starts getting shabby and tired around about the time Canon bring out its successor
works well for me to upgrade every couple of years
 
KayJay said:
Rich people spending money keeps people in jobs. Is that funny too?
Click to expand...


No.

It is absolutley not funny.

Consumerism is the poison of our society and is the single major factor in stopping any sort of equality of class in this country, or any other, for that matter.

What did you think was responsible for the current crisis state of the worlds finances that is making so many people unemployed? Knitting?
 
Gandhi said:
No.

It is absolutley not funny.

Consumerism is the poison of our society and is the single major factor in stopping any sort of equality of class in this country, or any other, for that matter.

What did you think was responsible for the current crisis state of the worlds finances that is making so many people unemployed? Knitting?
Click to expand...

Give me a break. So what do you suggest? We all stop spending and things magically get better?
 
MaxineM said:
Mediocre photographers will always be looking for a better piece of kit.:D

Seriously though, no amount of kit or technology know how will give you the ability to know what a good image is and capture it at the right angle.
But likewise, no amount of artistic ability will give you fantastic pictures if you have a crap camera or a good camera but with no ability to use it right!

Max
Click to expand...

too true.
 
in the case of digital it has only recently bettered the good old tranny (equal to 14mill pixels) so its been a case of upgrading while it matched the image quality we had before

i admit that since the resolution of the 1Ds mk11 etc its been harder to justify it but things are getting better still so you have to keep up
 
photobiker said:
in the case of digital it has only recently bettered the good old tranny (equal to 14mill pixels) so its been a case of upgrading while it matched the image quality we had before
Click to expand...

have to say it's not just about pixel count IMO

i have 2 20D's which work for me, and i've tried a good number of newer models including the 5dMKii which is a stonking camera but none of them give me the depth in shadows and especially highlights that film does - digital seems to lose on the highlights really quickly.

so my money went on .... a 40 year old MPP 5x4 camera :)
 
cyclone said:
D3, D700, D3X and to a degree D300, D90, D60.
Controlling exposure at pixel level is basically what "Active D-Lighting" does and is adjustable to a degree depending on which model you have and the FX models are much less noisy at high ISO's.
Click to expand...

Well, they're getting there ;). What I meant though was, a sensor upon which you can put a "buffer", so that when a certain amount of light is received by particular photosites, it begins to limit their output, instead of continuning until they reach the max output and "burn out".

The D-Lighting in Nikons doesn't work this way - it boosts the output from photosites that recorded a low signal, making the dark lighter, as opposed to the light darker. What difference is there, you ask :shrug:!? Well, IQ suffers badly when the weak signals are amplified and you get all kinds of "noise" and nasty grain :(.

One day, someone (Sony, probably :lol:) will crack this particular nut and then half of us will be wanting to upgrade :naughty:. Not in my lifetime, I hope!
 
All of my stuff is between twenty and sixty years old so I don't play the 'must have new' game. It doesn't stop me wanting to get more equipment though.


Steve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top