Archive 2020 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #1 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
T-O Shooter wrote:
Without reading the whole spiel of it, which I have no intention of doing, my point was that what we are choosing as options greatly depend on what Nikon is putting out there. I was neither suggesting that a D780 or a Z7 was the right choice for you. I was talking in general terms.
Someone shat in your corn flakes today??
No, I just don't like you putting words in my mouth and saying what I would and would not like when you are actually wrong about that. And of course we are limited in our choice by what Nikon produces (i.e., puts out there). Nothing particularly novel or insightful about that statement. You might want to think before you write next time and be careful when you use the word you, that is if you care at all about appearing to speak for other people.
p.9 #2 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Steve Spencer wrote:
No, I just don't like you putting words in my mouth and saying what I would and would not like when you are actually wrong about that. And of course we are limited in our choice by what Nikon produces (i.e., puts out there). Nothing particularly novel or insightful about that statement. You might want to think before you write next time and be careful when you use the word you, that is if you care at all about appearing to speak for other people.
Good luck with that train of thought. One of two things are smeared with Vaseline if you believe that I was telling you what you should use. You eyes or my words. When I look back at what I wrote it doesn't appear blurred to me.
Quit wasting my time with your foolishness. If you're going to comment on what I write, comment on what I write, not your twist of it.
Jan 13, 2020 at 01:29 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #3 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
T-O Shooter wrote:
Good luck with that train of thought. One of two things are smeared with Vaseline if you believe that I was telling you what you should use. You eyes or my words. When I look back at what I wrote it doesn't appear blurred to me.
Quit wasting my time with your foolishness. If you're going to comment on what I write, comment on what I write, not your twist of it.
Now, you just can't admit when you are obviously wrong. You wrote, "The Z7 kit looks good to you because Nikon made a small body, 46mp piece of gear." How is that not putting words in my mouth? Then you come back with the "shat in your cornflakes," comment. Learn to admit when you are wrong and to apologize when you make rude remarks and things will go much better around here.
p.9 #4 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Steve Spencer wrote:
Chez, if you actually do the math and stick to primes I think you will find the difference much smaller than you are suggesting. Nikon has long offered a fairly small and light DSLR kit for travel with their very light and quite small in size f/1.8G lenses. Those lenses make pretty much any D780 kit (compared to a Z6 kit) lighter even if you add a second camera (if you care about weight it probably makes sense to add the Df as your second DSLR, which I think is the lightest FF Nikon DSLR). But to demonstrate how these small lenses can even compare quite favorably to a two camera Sony mirrorless kit let's compare these two kits: Nikon D780 and Df, 20 f/1.8G, 28 f/1.8G, 50 f/1.8G, and 85 f/1.8G to the Sony A7 III X 2, Zeiss Loxia 21 f/2.8, Sony FE 28 f/2, Sony FE 55 f/1.8, and Sony FE 85 f/1.8. They are surprisingly close in weight. Yes, the Sony kit does weigh less at 2546g versus the Nikon kit at 2825g of 279g or about an 11% difference. Certainly no huge weight differences in these two kits, however (and if you swap out the 28mm lenses for the 35mm and even if you use the tiny Sony FE 35 f/2.8, the weight difference is even smaller--just 229g--and less than 10%).
So, I am not saying mirrorless doesn't offer you a small kit--it does--but you won't get lighter by going mirrorless in Nikon land and even if you go with Sony which offers the lightest mirrorless FF the weight savings over a light Nikon DSLR kit with their light f/1.8G primes will be minimal at best. ...Show more →
We need to look at equivalent capabilities if we are to compare systems. Here is my travel kit:
1. I travel with a high resolution sensor as my photography is split between landscape where I definitely utilize the extra resolution and street / event shooting where I appreciate the ability to crop with the extra resolution. So you need to make a kit that has this high resolution abilities ( D850 ).
2. Both my cameras are full frame and I use them interchangeably during the day, having say the Batis 18 on one and the Sony 85 on the other and using a PD Clip to hold the camera that is not being used at the time...quickly to change if need be. So it is important to have my backup camera full frame...so the DF is out.
3. Going wide to 18mm is very handy in places like churches or narrow alleys etc... Not sure how I'd feel using a 20mm for this.
I think if you create a DSLR kit that is equivalent in capabilities, I think you'll find the weight difference becomes more substantial. I came from a Canon based DSLR travel kit and going mirrorless, I saved roughly 40% weight...and just the same amount of bulk.
Other things to include is batteries and chargers...especially if they are different types for the 2 cameras...these add up. In your example the 780 and DF use different batteries...so you'd have to include extra batteries and the extra charger.
p.9 #5 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
chez wrote:
Easy to carry that weight on your back...but hanging a camera off you wrist, neck or shoulder for days on end quickly becomes tedious. I've covered events that lasted many days carrying my camera for at least 12 hours on my wrist taking photos. Every gram saved makes a huge difference at the end of the day. Carrying my other gear in my backpack was easy...it's what's hanging off your wrist that counts.
Well, when I'm walking with my backpack, I have a camera in hand, not on a strap so it's not like all my gear is in the bag. Again, I hardly think about weight. I've walked more hours than I can recall with a Canon SLR with an 85L on the end of it. Hardly a light piece of gear but it never bothered me. I never thought about saving 2.2 grams, that's for sure. I had a 24L, 35L, and 50L in my bag. I enjoyed and still enjoy the exercise.
p.9 #6 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
rattymouse wrote:
Well, when I'm walking with my backpack, I have a camera in hand, not on a strap so it's not like all my gear is in the bag. Again, I hardly think about weight. I've walked more hours than I can recall with a Canon SLR with an 85L on the end of it. Hardly a light piece of gear but it never bothered me. I never thought about saving 2.2 grams, that's for sure. I had a 24L, 35L, and 50L in my bag. I enjoyed and still enjoy the exercise.
Well you can get that same feeling by carrying a mirrorless camera in hand with an extra kilogram weight hanging off your hand.
1. I travel with a high resolution sensor as my photography is split between landscape where I definitely utilize the extra resolution and street / event shooting where I appreciate the ability to crop with the extra resolution. So you need to make a kit that has this high resolution abilities ( D850 ).
2. Both my cameras are full frame and I use them interchangeably during the day, having say the Batis 18 on one and the Sony 85 on the other and using a PD Clip to hold the camera that is not being used at the time...quickly to change if need be. So it is important to have my backup camera full frame...so the DF is out.
3. Going wide to 18mm is very handy in places like churches or narrow alleys etc... Not sure how I'd feel using a 20mm for this.
I think if you create a DSLR kit that is equivalent in capabilities, I think you'll find the weight difference becomes more substantial. I came from a Canon based DSLR travel kit and going mirrorless, I saved roughly 40% weight...and just the same amount of bulk.
Other things to include is batteries and chargers...especially if they are different types for the 2 cameras...these add up. In your example the 780 and DF use different batteries...so you'd have to include extra batteries and the extra charger. ...Show more →
As I noted above Nikon does not have any small high resolution DSLRs, so if you want a small high resolution kit Nikon does not have a DSLR solution--although the options are a lot more compelling for a DSLR 24MP kit. Nikon does have a really nice set of small f/1.8G lenses for DSLRs, however, and they come close to matching your lenses for that very small Sony kit. A Nikon f/1.8G 20, 24, 35, & 85 only weighs 84g more than the Sony kit you use, and that is despite the Nikon kit having faster lenses in all but 85mm where the kits have the same speed lenses. So, I stand by the point that Nikon has wonderfully small lenses for travel, but I agree that if one wants high resolution for travel (as both you and I do) you are stuck with huge DSLRs which don't allow a light travel setup.
p.9 #10 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Steve Spencer wrote:
As I noted above Nikon does not have any small high resolution DSLRs, so if you want a small high resolution kit Nikon does not have a DSLR solution--although the options are a lot more compelling for a DSLR 24MP kit. Nikon does have a really nice set of small f/1.8G lenses for DSLRs, however, and they come close to matching your lenses for that very small Sony kit. A Nikon f/1.8G 20, 24, 35, & 85 only weighs 84g more than the Sony kit you use, and that is despite the Nikon kit having faster lenses in all but 85mm where the kits have the same speed lenses. So, I stand by the point that Nikon has wonderfully small lenses for travel, but I agree that if one wants high resolution for travel (as both you and I do) you are stuck with huge DSLRs which don't allow a light travel setup....Show more →
Seems to me that these AF-S G primes could be mated with a Z7 + FTZ adapter to create a lightweight Nikon kit. On top of that this combo offers IBIS! Film SLRs like FM2 used to offer high quality and small size, before the AF SLR - DSLR bloat started.
p.9 #11 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Unless the difference is in kilograms or hiking up Mt Everest where every gram matters, this whole thing about "my mirrorless is xx grams" lighter than yy DSLR is much ado about nothing. What matters is whether the equipment will work for someone for a specific use case. And that cannot be generalized nor quantified with grams.
p.9 #12 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Jaree wrote:
Unless the difference is in kilograms or hiking up Mt Everest where every gram matters, this whole thing about "my mirrorless is xx grams" lighter than yy DSLR is much ado about nothing. What matters is whether the equipment will work for someone for a specific use case. And that cannot be generalized nor quantified with grams.
Maybe not for you...but for my use case, the mirrorless path gives me a much more portable system that I can carry all day without getting fatigued. I shot the Kumb Mela in India for 6 straight days, at least 12 hours of shooting each day along with long treks from my camp to the site. I'll tell you this much...if I had the D850 with me...it would have been painful.
Yes we all have different requirements...but please don't trivialize saving weight using a mirrorless system as we truly do have differing use cases...and the savings are not a couple of grams.
p.9 #13 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Jaree wrote:
Unless the difference is in kilograms or hiking up Mt Everest where every gram matters, this whole thing about "my mirrorless is xx grams" lighter than yy DSLR is much ado about nothing. What matters is whether the equipment will work for someone for a specific use case. And that cannot be generalized nor quantified with grams.
Different people have different priorities. I like to save weight, especially when I'm also carrying a tent, clothes, and sleeping gear. But that's just me. That doesn't make my preferences "much ado about nothing." They're just different than yours.
p.9 #15 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
I can tell you I that have been to Varanasi several times, walked several kilometers on the ghats and in the streets. Bag load of gear. My companion, a female had 2 Canon 5DIIIs on the last trip each with two buffalo sized zooms, same size that roam the "galis" of Varanasi. I carried Leica S2 with the beastly S lenses in Glacier National Park on hikes over 10 miles. Hiked from top of Kunjapuri temple in Rishikesh down to the starting point, over 10 kilometers with boat-load of gear. I don't weigh my equipment for grams.
chez wrote:
Maybe not for you...but for my use case, the mirrorless path gives me a much more portable system that I can carry all day without getting fatigued. I shot the Kumb Mela in India for 6 straight days, at least 12 hours of shooting each day along with long treks from my camp to the site. I'll tell you this much...if I had the D850 with me...it would have been painful.
Yes we all have different requirements...but please don't trivialize saving weight using a mirrorless system as we truly do have differing use cases...and the savings are not a couple of grams....Show more →
p.9 #16 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
chez wrote:
Maybe not for you...but for my use case, the mirrorless path gives me a much more portable system that I can carry all day without getting fatigued. I shot the Kumb Mela in India for 6 straight days, at least 12 hours of shooting each day along with long treks from my camp to the site. I'll tell you this much...if I had the D850 with me...it would have been painful.
Yes we all have different requirements...but please don't trivialize saving weight using a mirrorless system as we truly do have differing use cases...and the savings are not a couple of grams....Show more →
Pointing out that Nikon mirrorless, including the weight of one or more lenses, is in many cases as heavy as Nikon DSLR is not trivialising. The introduction of mirrorless didn't nullify physical realities. The weight advantage goes both ways and are mostly small. A few extra batteries easilly tips it in the other direction, and for people with large hands, the D850 will often feel lighter than a Z7.
There is no universal answer to this, and again, I shoot both and will probably continue to do so. What I do not like is the never-ending chant "DSLR is dead, DSLR is dead". For many photographers, DSLR is not dead, and hopefully, it won't die as long as I am around. SLR cameras have been my preferred body type since the early seventies, and I'm not changing that because somebody else tells me that I'm wrong. I'm changing when my own experience shows me that there are better alternatives around.
p.9 #18 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
Pointing out that Nikon mirrorless, including the weight of one or more lenses, is in many cases as heavy as Nikon DSLR is not trivialising. The introduction of mirrorless didn't nullify physical realities. The weight advantage goes both ways and are mostly small. A few extra batteries easilly tips it in the other direction, and for people with large hands, the D850 will often feel lighter than a Z7.
There is no universal answer to this, and again, I shoot both and will probably continue to do so. What I do not like is the never-ending chant "DSLR is dead, DSLR is dead". For many photographers, DSLR is not dead, and hopefully, it won't die as long as I am around. SLR cameras have been my preferred body type since the early seventies, and I'm not changing that because somebody else tells me that I'm wrong. I'm changing when my own experience shows me that there are better alternatives around....Show more →
Well you better start buying up those DSLR cameras to show Nikon truly the DSLR is not dead...but the trend in sales numbers is pointing in a different direction.
As far as weight goes, I'm getting tired of people trying to tell me an equivalent DSLR system weighs basically the same as a mirrorless system. I have enough experience shooting both and know the savings in weight / bulk are real. Why is it that you DSLR lovers need to continuously try to down play this obvious difference in the two systems.
I can understand you like the size and heft of a DSLR along with the big lens...but don't down play the savings in weight of a equivalent mirrorless kit...and this savings makes a huge difference to some.
p.9 #19 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Jaree wrote:
I can tell you I that have been to Varanasi several times, walked several kilometers on the ghats and in the streets. Bag load of gear. My companion, a female had 2 Canon 5DIIIs on the last trip each with two buffalo sized zooms, same size that roam the "galis" of Varanasi. I carried Leica S2 with the beastly S lenses in Glacier National Park on hikes over 10 miles. Hiked from top of Kunjapuri temple in Rishikesh down to the starting point, over 10 kilometers with boat-load of gear. I don't weigh my equipment for grams.
Bully for you. Does that make you a better photographer, maybe you feel you are better in shape? Oh...and I've scaled many peaks in the Rockies carrying my Pentax 6x7 outfit with a Manfrotto tripod weighing 5lbs...does that make it into your exclusive club?
Personally I'd much travel and photograph with a lighter kit than heavier...but that's just me...you might be different.
p.9 #20 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
chez wrote:
Well you better start buying up those DSLR cameras to show Nikon truly the DSLR is not dead...but the trend in sales numbers is pointing in a different direction.
As far as weight goes, I'm getting tired of people trying to tell me an equivalent DSLR system weighs basically the same as a mirrorless system. I have enough experience shooting both and know the savings in weight / bulk are real. Why is it that you DSLR lovers need to continuously try to down play this obvious difference in the two systems.
I can understand you like the size and heft of a DSLR along with the big lens...but don't down play the savings in weight of a equivalent mirrorless kit...and this savings makes a huge difference to some.
No, I'm not a DSLR lover, I'm a photographer, and I choose the tool that suits me best.
Mirrorless cameras are convenient, and I have had lots of them. I use two bodies on a daily basis because of convenience and because of size. I use Panasonic m43 for size and weight. I also have some wrecks in my drawer, bodies, batteries and chargers, gathered through 10 years of mirrorless usage.
For full frame, I see no reason why I should rather have a $600, 415g 50mm f/1.8 in Z-mount than a $450, 280g 50mm f/1.4 in F-mount. Is the Z-mount lens better? Probably. Will people see the difference in my photos? Probably not.
