technic Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.6 #13 · p.6 #13 · What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2016? | |
stevesanacore wrote:
I will buy the latest body or lens if its something that has features I miss now. it's also exciting to have the latest gear (if it's an upgrade). If it's technically superior then it's a no-brainer. If you are making a living with your cameras, then the cost is just not as relevant if the gear will help you work faster, or get better results. That's a very personal choice. I do enjoy having new toys, others may not. It also depends on what you shoot and the market you work in.
To me the most important features for buying a new body are faster more foolproof focus and more dynamic range to get better files under more extreme conditions. Any step in that direction is certainly worth it to me. I think AF has certainly reach a level of perfection, but dynamic range has a long way to go.
To "top pros" it's irrelevant as they just rent the latest gear or buy it if it's more convenient.. Big budget shoots have line items for gear rental. The cost is insignificant and can pay off gear in one or two shoots in addition to their fees. Nice huh? For the rest of us working slobs, we have to pay it off over a much longer period :-)...Show more →
I mostly agree with the above. Over the last ten years, I have seen very little reason to upgrade because for my main applications newer Canon bodies have offered very little upgrade incentive over my 450D. The main factor was that for my "action" shots of flying dragonflies AF even in the latest models is almost useless (I still use MF most of the time) while for my other subjects like landscape/cityscape the AF in older DSLRs is sufficient (using Liveview for best accuracy). I upgraded my 450D to 80D because it had a fatal shutter failure; the only real improvements were the flip screen (great for my joints and definitely allows many shots that were impossible before) and increased dynamic range at low ISO (in practice hardly useful for me). RAW image quality of the 80D, especially at high ISO, is hardly better than with the much older 450D IMHO.
For me an upgrade is worth it if I think it will provide much better image quality or higher keeper rate; but expectations can be totally wrong. Upgrading my 4/300IS for the 100-400II proved a big mistake, and I don't think upgrading the 80D will improve my dragonfly action shots until we get something very different. This might require mirrorless cameras with more computer power aboard than what we have now, until then I have to stick to MF. For high frame rates same story, the 5>7 fps increase from 450D to 80D proved insignificant for me and I guess only 20-30 fps would help me get more good shots. With 7 fps, at best just one shot is reasonably in focus and in the frame ...
With my background on the gear side, I'm sometimes tempted to try new equipment and hope for the best and I would be interested to try out e.g. a D500 or D850 with the 4/300PF, or Sony A7R3 with suitable lens, but there is no affordable way to arrange that over here
And I definitely agree with John Power above. In the late nineties and early 2000's I upgraded yearly despite having to learn a new camera. It was worth is most of the time due to the fast technological progress (of course most cameras were a bit less complicated than they are now). All cameras had strange issues, you just accepted that as part of the deal (and at the time, I was usually aware of the potential problems with specific models). Nowadays, I find that most new equipment has strange quirks that almost nobody knows about and that you sometimes cannot work around either, and that even if you stay with the same brand many controls can change between models. Working with existing equipment that you are familiar with has its advantages.
|