I was reading this thread 5dc and 1dIIn. It caused me to think about:
1) Who here still use older gear... See no reason to upgrade? cost/profit margin (see #3)?
2) for those who are still using older gear, do you feel that you are heading into a gunfight with a pocket knife?
3) with the typical wedding photography (full timer) price around a few thousand, one would be able to evergreen your equipment?
just some random thoughts rolling around my head.
For full disclosure, I don't do much weddings. Mostly lifestyle portraits so I do get by with a 5dc and 7d (ok it's not that old).
I think newer camera bodies are way overrated. As long as a camera has enough megapixels for the albums we make and goes to ISO 1600 I'm good. I still shoot a 5D classic regularly and if they had a higher megapixel count, I'd probably shoot them exclusively. I'm sure lots of photographers use all the features of the new cameras to their full extent, argue about ISO 25,000 and worry about how many focus points they have, but I'm not one of them. If it's full frame and the files look good, I don't care if it's 80 years old.
Yes, technology marches forward, but too many photographers chase the newest and shiniest thing instead of working on their craft.
1. First you have to define what you mean by "older". Last generation, 5 years, 10 years?
2. No.
3. I suppose, but why? Just because something is new doesn't mean you have to run out and but it.
I shoot professionally with my Leica M6 made 15+ years ago (alongside a 3 year old DSLR). I get along just fine. Image quality has more to do with the talent of the photographer, not the relative age of the camera gear.
I use a 5D classic and a 1DII and I've even shot portrait sessions recently with a 20D. IQ is great on all those cameras in the right scenarios (I prefer the 5D usually). I'll probably upgrade next year to a 5d MKII (just can't resist the LCD), but other than that I'm completely happy with my set-up.
Tony Hoffer wrote:
I think newer camera bodies are way overrated. As long as a camera has enough megapixels for the albums we make and goes to ISO 1600 I'm good. I still shoot a 5D classic regularly and if they had a higher megapixel count, I'd probably shoot them exclusively. I'm sure lots of photographers use all the features of the new cameras to their full extent, argue about ISO 25,000 and worry about how many focus points they have, but I'm not one of them. If it's full frame and the files look good, I don't care if it's 80 years old....Show more →
I'm exactly the same way...even if I had a latest generation DSLR, all the latest features would kind of be wasted on me. I pretty much always just get them set up the way I want and rarely get into the menus for anything other the MLU and that sort of thing. My 1Ds (original) can still deliver great images, and I still use it quite a bit. Yes, the LCD is the worst one ever put on a camera, but it's not that big a deal...the only time I ever feel like I really need it is setting up lighting ratios and the like. The file size is nice, and the thin AA filter makes for nice sharp images. More MP would be nice, if only to have more room to crop...
Would it be nice to have a 5DII? Sure. When my old stuff dies, I'll get something newer, but probably not brand new just because of the depreciation that happens as you're opening the box.
I shoot cameras that really are 80 years old, though not on a paid gig (yet). The files are only as good as the scanner, but they're capable of producing files bigger than any DSLR if you're willing to pay for it .
My main cameras are a 1DsII (2) and a 1DII. I shoot about 100 affairs per year that run between $1695 and $12k. Typically between $3500 and $6000.
The gear, of the black box in the hands of the photographer is really not that important. It's what the mechanic does with his tools that matter. I recently had two cameras in for service, failures a week apart. So I had a 1DsII and I pulled out my old Kodak DCS-560. Cool, it still works. First I'm thinking can I really shoot with a 10 yr old, 6PM 1fps DSLR that has a range of 80 to 200 ISO (+1 to ISO 400 looks nice in ACR).
Bottom line that I have shot many affairs with that 560 and felt if I needed I could shoot another and not have a problem delivering.
Other than making a few things easier during a wedding shoot I just don't see the difference. High ISO shooting is cool, but I manage to do what I do when high ISO wasn't much of an option. Fast FPS is cool too, but I'm not into making still picture books. Video would be mostly a toy-ish option for me....I can do the same with my Flip-Share or cell phone for what I would video.
I'm a gear and technology freak, but I'm a realist about what it is and where it will take me. Many people are more about hype, bragging, and feeling good about what they have than reality. This is true with photography, computers, cars, politics, relationships, dare I say religion, and more......
I still use a 5Dc and 20D and I'm the original buyer. I also use an old 20-35L 2.8 that provides great images. Would I like the latest and greatest 1D-something, sure but mostly for the sake of having it.
Mr645 wrote:
My main cameras are a 1DsII (2) and a 1DII. I shoot about 100 affairs per year that run between $1695 and $12k. Typically between $3500 and $6000.
The gear, of the black box in the hands of the photographer is really not that important. It's what the mechanic does with his tools that matter. I recently had two cameras in for service, failures a week apart. So I had a 1DsII and I pulled out my old Kodak DCS-560. Cool, it still works. First I'm thinking can I really shoot with a 10 yr old, 6PM 1fps DSLR that has a range of 80 to 200 ISO (+1 to ISO 400 looks nice in ACR).
Bottom line that I have shot many affairs with that 560 and felt if I needed I could shoot another and not have a problem delivering. ...Show more →
Hey, another DCS shooter... I used to have a 520 (got it when the L.A. Times sold it). You're right, they were great cameras. I'd shoot a 560 if I had to, but a 520? Files just a tad small for today . I think I still have one of the giant memory cards I kept as a souvenir...it has a Times property sticker on it, which I thought was kind of cool.
I shoot with a 5DmkII and a 5Dc... and for the most part, the 5Dc keeps pace just fine. I have no worried about pushing it to 3200 if I need to... and rarely find the need to go over 3200, even with the mkII.
I wouldn't too hung up about the age of your gear. I always get a laugh when I read about people that think their gear is obselete as soon as a newer model comes out.
Mark_L wrote:
To full time pros: do you look at the business case for upgrading or just buy and not think about it?
This is not a leading question I'm just interested.
For us there was a bit of a "just go for it" approach to buying gear while starting our business. I don't regret this, as it was necessary to ensure we had what we needed, as well as back up solutions for all of our important gear.
Now that this phase is over, and we basically have everything we need, we are definitely in a "business case or forget it" frame of mind. The questions now are: Will this gear save us time? Help us standout from competition (ie. increase bookings)? Will this gear help us make money somehow?
I think it would be all too easy to drop every cent we make back into the business. Then it would stop being a business though, and become more of a free hobby.
I made the jump from Canon where I was shooting a 5dc and a 1DIIn - Even with the 8MP 1DIIn the file sizes were plenty big enough 99.9% of the time, and the quality was top notch.
However, I shoot live action as well and wanted full frame w/high frame rate with a strong focus system. I sold them and picked up a D700/D3 combo. I plan on shooting these until the shutters blow up, and then I'll replace them and keep shooting with them. I see no need to update anytime soon. I honestly hope to not have to replace a camera in at least 5-7 years. I used to get 10 out of my film bodies....
.
. I think I still have one of the giant memory cards I kept as a souvenir...it has a Times property sticker on it, which I thought was kind of cool.