In our downtime at the nationwide photo retailer I worked at during the mid-'90s, we'd muck about with the F4s, the N90s, the 1N, the F3HP, then run all the photos through our mini-lab setup at cost. Then we'd futz around with the odd stuff like the Olympus Ecru and that oddball (gasp!) Casio QV-10 digital thingy...
Looking back at it, it was every bit as much fun then as it seems now.
Ektar25 wrote:
In 1992 I bought a new Nikon F4s for around $2200.00 retail, with inflation that is equal to about $3600.00 today...
With regards to megapixels, well I had a "hard reset" the other day when I actually printed some images from my mirrorless camera (with quality glass!) on a Canon Selphy I use for photobooth prints.
Even the "small" JPG setting of 2 MP makes 4x6s that are just as good as anything those analogue prints from the '90s (above) were.
22 megapixels is a LOT of resolution. 12 MP is still damned good!
We have the means to zoom in so much on our monitors, but if you just burp out some prints, I feel you notice that it's about color fidelity, spatiality, depth, and content, waaaaay before any modern camera's megapixels come into play.
Anything from 18 to 24 megapixels is OK for me, for right now.
M Lucca wrote:
A77 locks AF and Meter at first frame. It's a Fail for serious shooters.
Your information is a fail for serious posters
AF is not locked on the A77 when shooting 12FPS.
Aperture is locked to f/3.5 or whatever the fastest of the lens can get (which confuses me, even with f/2.8 lens it locks to f/3.5 ) but not AF or exposure (AF-C). You can adjust aperture, but focus is locked (duh), when shooting AF-S in this mode.
For serious action shooters the A77 fails because of the slide-show coming from continuous shooting. If you're doing small bursts of 3-4 shots with small breaks, though, it's not bad at all.
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
So then they need 2 backup bodies when buying the new camera?
Presumably the backup body that was being used prior to buying the new camera becomes obsolete as the previous main camera now becomes the backup camera. At least where I am concerned.
Is it really hard to believe that it is convenient to keep one's previous main camera as a backup when buying a new camera? Surely I can't be the only person who has done this.
M Lucca wrote:
It's weird. But this is the specs that the Nikon d700 fan boys were clamoring for after the D800 announcements. How ironic.
You're right. I'm a longtime Canon user who picked up a pair of D700's because the center-point only focusing system of the 5D2 drove me nuts. And I was hoping Nikon would update the D700 with more resolution (16-18mp), add some cross-type sensors on the outer AF points, and continue to offer great high-iso output. Instead, out came the D800 with 36 megapixels. Not at all what I want or need when I photograph a low-light music event. Nevertheless, the D800 looks to be an astonishingly piece of equipment.
The 5D3 specs are in line with what I expected from Canon three and half years ago. But at least now there's a semi-affordable full frame in the Canon lineup that includes a fleshed-out AF system. One of these won't seem so out of place alongside a 1D4, since the outer focus points will be useful.
But the price is not right. The D800 is $3000; the camera Nikon users expected (an updated D700 in the 18mp range) likely would have been less than $3000 too. $3500 for the 5D3 just feels wrong given the competition nowadays.
It is an odd sensation: new Canon bodies and lenses are more expensive than their Nikon counterparts. Not a pleasant sensation, either...
Jim Levitt wrote:
You're right. I'm a longtime Canon user who picked up a pair of D700's because the center-point only focusing system of the 5D2 drove me nuts. And I was hoping Nikon would update the D700 with more resolution (16-18mp), add some cross-type sensors on the outer AF points, and continue to offer great high-iso output. Instead, out came the D800 with 36 megapixels. Not at all what I want or need when I photograph a low-light music event. Nevertheless, the D800 looks to be an astonishingly piece of equipment.
The 5D3 specs are in line with what I expected from Canon three and half years ago. But at least now there's a semi-affordable full frame in the Canon lineup that includes a fleshed-out AF system. One of these won't seem so out of place alongside a 1D4, since the outer focus points will be useful.
But the price is not right. The D800 is $3000; the camera Nikon users expected (an updated D700 in the 18mp range) likely would have been less than $3000 too. $3500 for the 5D3 just feels wrong given the competition nowadays.
It is an odd sensation: new Canon bodies and lenses are more expensive than their Nikon counterparts. Not a pleasant sensation, either... ...Show more →
So when the 5D2 came three and half years ago. You expected that body to have better AF then the 1Ds3 ? More AF points then the 1Ds3 ? Better resolution then the 1Ds3 ? Faster writing to the memory cards and better buffer then the 1Ds3 ? And so on...............
For me its just easy now. I was planing to purchase a new body this year. The only one I WAS interested in was 1D X. Because of better and higher ISO and AF.
Now Canon seems to present me a 3000€ less body as a choice, giving me all what I asked for as far I can see.
Thanks Canon. Saving me € 3000 gives me the opportunity to, to invest it in lenses.
Great sensation for me.
Ralph Conway wrote:
For me its just easy now. I was planing to purchase a new body this year. The only one I WAS interested in was 1D X. Because of better and higher ISO and AF.
Now Canon seems to present me a 3000€ less body as a choice, giving me all what I asked for as far I can see.
Thanks Canon. Saving me € 3000 gives me the opportunity to, to invest it in lenses.
Great sensation for me.
R.
What's happening, Ralph ? I thought you couldn't survive as a photographer unless your camera gave you 12 FPS
How can you now settle for a dreck rate of 6 FPS only ?
skibum5 wrote:
if it had 30MP and 6fps I would not peep one bit
if it had 22MP and 8fps I would not peep one bit
if it had 22MP and 7fps i would peep once and then be quiet
22MP and 6fps makes me peep for 16,000 frames in a row though at $3500
22MP and 6fps at $2700 i would not peep one bit
22MP and 6fps at $3000 and I might peep a few times
Peep away, I doubt Canon will care. They will sell it for the current price to everyone who wants it and, when the current market is exhausted, they will drop the price. That pisses me of as much as it does you but don't blame Canon, blame the people who are willing to pay that price. When you are the seller, trying to part with a 2nd hand body or lens, I'm sure you'd try any strategy to get the best price you can - I know I would. So, Canon will try this new high price and will persist for as long as the strategy works. All we can do is either pay their price or wait, but it's hypocrisy to criticise them for wanting the best price they can get if you aren't willing to sell your 2nd hand kit at bargain basement prices.
c'mon all, be real. you dont REALLY need 22mp let alone THIRTY-FRIGGIN-SIX! you just want it because your life would be empty without complaints
Some people want it because they get satisfaction from having the best/biggest/latest. I can't criticise that because I am at least partially guilty of feeling the same way. Reality is, if you have the disposable income, buy it all, if not - prioritise and wait. In 10 years time we will all be looking back at how antiquated the D800/5DIII seem by contemporary standards. In the mean time we will all have taken some amazing images many of which would have been impossible 10 years ago.
c'mon all, be real. you dont REALLY need 22mp let alone THIRTY-FRIGGIN-SIX! you just want it because your life would be empty without complaints
Please replace you with I. Printing 36x24 and larger on a regular basis, I can use all the mp I can get. What I don't need is 6fps or any fancy AF, but at least I recognize others do so I don't criticize them for wanting this. Maybe you should also realize people use cameras for many different types of photography and yes, some do need more mp.
I think there are commenters here who think (accurately in some cases) that having the best gear makes a difference, either in the kinds of pictures they can make, or in the commercial opportunities that will become available. Taking that as a given, do they notice any contradiction when they complain about prices? If you are relying on your gear to give you a leg up over the competition, isn't it BETTER to pay a price your more casual competitors will be unwilling to match? Or is it simply that the price complaints are coming from the casual competitors?
PetKal wrote:
What's happening, Ralph ? I thought you couldn't survive as a photographer unless your camera gave you 12 FPS
How can you now settle for a dreck rate of 6 FPS only ?
If you're commenting about me saying that serious sports photographers want 8 or more, then I think you're taking it out of context. That's uncharactaristic of you, so I'm thinking that I'm just confused here.
PetKal wrote:
What's happening, Ralph ? I thought you couldn't survive as a photographer unless your camera gave you 12 FPS
How can you now settle for a dreck rate of 6 FPS only ?
You are wrong. That was never me. I still can live wonderful with 5D IIs 3.9 fps. I seldom use more than two frames (to have a second in spare). I was asking for IQ and two stops higher ISO. That was what 1D X offered (on paper). And now 5D III. I am fine with this opportunity. I would have been, too with less AF at less money, I guess. But I will learn to use it. Or even let it. Hope the center AF point will work like I know it. -2 EV is great, too.
RobertLynn wrote:
If you're commenting about me saying that serious sports photographers want 8 or more, then I think you're taking it out of context. That's uncharactaristic of you, so I'm thinking that I'm just confused here.
Right, nothing to do with you, Rob, I can't read all posts around here anyways.......so I do not have a record of every post you've made.
I was just yanking on Ralph's wee-wee for he's been a big 1DX fan, and now he seems to be dropping it for a much slower camera.
) but not AF or exposure (AF-C). You can adjust aperture, but focus is locked (duh), when shooting AF-S in this mode.