Remember 4?
p.1 #2Remember 4?
Nope. My first DSLR in Q1 2003 was the 11MP 1Ds. I was more into quality than quantity.
EBH
EBH
Dec 01, 2025 at 07:41 AM
p.1 #3Remember 4?
I remember my Fuji point & shoot from around 2005 or so. I shot tons of salamanders, snakes and frogs for a guide to the Reptiles & Amphibians of the Cleveland Metroparks. Funny thing is that nowadays a modern smartphone would blow away that Fuji, and I'd have never believed that would ever be the case at that time!
Dec 01, 2025 at 07:59 AM
p.1 #5Remember 4?
My first digital camera was 3.3MP, but it wasn't a DSLR so nowhere near as sharp as the duck pic above.
Dec 01, 2025 at 09:33 AM
RoamingScott
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.1 #6Remember 4?
A blurry mess, just as I remember it.
Dec 01, 2025 at 10:05 AM
p.1 #7Remember 4?
Had one, made a good chunk of change for me back in the day. Great camera!
Dec 01, 2025 at 11:02 AM
p.1 #8Remember 4?
Tom RC wrote:
Had one, made a good chunk of change for me back in the day. Great camera!
Yes, and the ones that got blurry images with it still get blurry images with the latest cameras.
Had one, made a good chunk of change for me back in the day. Great camera!
Yes, and the ones that got blurry images with it still get blurry images with the latest cameras.
Dec 01, 2025 at 11:42 AM
p.1 #9Remember 4?
Imagemaster wrote:
Yes, and the ones that got blurry images with it still get blurry images with the latest cameras.
Yep, spot on with that comment! Sold a lot of fairly large framed spectacular looking prints from the “old” 1D. I remember getting the 1DS and thinking there was no limit to print size with 11mp.
Tom RC wrote
Had one, made a good chunk of change for me back in the day. Great camera!Yep, spot on with that comment! Sold a lot of fairly large framed spectacular looking prints from the “old” 1D. I remember getting the 1DS and thinking there was no limit to print size with 11mp.
Dec 01, 2025 at 12:13 PM
p.1 #10Remember 4?
I'll never forget when I upgraded from a D30 to a 1D shooting weddings professionally and then traveling for a living taking my gear with me shooting tons of great landscapes around the country. Back then I certainly didn't complain about much as it always rendered in focus shots with great color. About the ONLY thing I didn't love was above ISO400 the noise was pretty bad and there wasn't the programs we have these days to eliminate it. I ran a shot taken in the Yosemite Valley by the Merced River through Gigapixel and some color and lighting corrections with Topaz and holy moly it filled the screen and presented great detail and color. So indeed, the files from it still have potential even today.
Dec 01, 2025 at 12:18 PM
|
p.1 #11Remember 4?
Tom RC wrote:
Yep, spot on with that comment! Sold a lot of fairly large framed spectacular looking prints from the “old” 1D. I remember getting the 1DS and thinking there was no limit to print size with 11mp.
There are some that think their boring images are great because they are sharp, then there are the great images that are far more popular due to the subject, not the degree of sharpness.
Yep, spot on with that comment! Sold a lot of fairly large framed spectacular looking prints from the “old” 1D. I remember getting the 1DS and thinking there was no limit to print size with 11mp.
There are some that think their boring images are great because they are sharp, then there are the great images that are far more popular due to the subject, not the degree of sharpness.
Dec 01, 2025 at 02:05 PM
p.1 #12Remember 4?
The 1D was out for only one year before the 1Ds. At the time I felt that film was better than the 4MP, although the film was only scanned at 20MP and not as good per pixel. No doubt there was commerical value for 4MP. I recall a few years later, maybe 2006, stock required 12MP or greater so images from all those early cameras were excluded.
EBH
EBH
Dec 01, 2025 at 02:18 PM
p.1 #13Remember 4?
I miss those days and the 1D’s, 1DMKII’s & 1DS’s. Lots of memories shooting weddings with a 1DMKII and either a 24-70 or 70-200 over one shoulder and a 1DS and 85mm 1.2 over the other. Good photographers who actually had skill could make really good money back in those days particularly shooting high end portraiture and weddings. All started going downhill from a business standpoint about the time of the Canon Rebel when everybody and their mother bought one and called themselves "professional photographers”. Watered down the market something severe.
Edited on Dec 01, 2025 at 04:22 PM · View previous versions
Edited on Dec 01, 2025 at 04:22 PM · View previous versions
Dec 01, 2025 at 04:12 PM
p.1 #14Remember 4?
Tom RC wrote:
I miss those days and the 1D’s, 1DMKII’s & 1DS’s. Lots of memories shooting weddings with a 1DMKII and a 70-200 over one shoulder and a 1DS and 85mm 1.2 over the other. Good photographers who actually had skill could make really good money back in those days particularly shooting high end portraiture and weddings. All started going downhill from a business standpoint about the time of the Canon Rebel when everybody and their mother bought one and called themselves "professional photographers”. Watered down the market something severe.
Mass availability watered don't the internet also. In the early days there were numerous very technical discussions at FM and other sites.
EBH
I miss those days and the 1D’s, 1DMKII’s & 1DS’s. Lots of memories shooting weddings with a 1DMKII and a 70-200 over one shoulder and a 1DS and 85mm 1.2 over the other. Good photographers who actually had skill could make really good money back in those days particularly shooting high end portraiture and weddings. All started going downhill from a business standpoint about the time of the Canon Rebel when everybody and their mother bought one and called themselves "professional photographers”. Watered down the market something severe.
Mass availability watered don't the internet also. In the early days there were numerous very technical discussions at FM and other sites.
EBH
Dec 01, 2025 at 04:20 PM
p.1 #15Remember 4?
gdanmitchell wrote:
I remember 640 x 480 pixels and 0.3 Mpx.
8 inch floppies on work computers (they were old).
First digital camera was a Sony that used 1.44 floppies…
First real one was the Canon 20D. Treat it right, and those 8mp files could be printed fine on my Epson 2200 at 13x19,
When the 1DXII came out with FF and 20+MP, I was line DONE. Plus 14+ frames per second. I just keep collecting them…
I remember 640 x 480 pixels and 0.3 Mpx.
8 inch floppies on work computers (they were old).
First digital camera was a Sony that used 1.44 floppies…
First real one was the Canon 20D. Treat it right, and those 8mp files could be printed fine on my Epson 2200 at 13x19,
When the 1DXII came out with FF and 20+MP, I was line DONE. Plus 14+ frames per second. I just keep collecting them…
Dec 01, 2025 at 04:25 PM
p.1 #16Remember 4?
EB-1 wrote:
Mass availability watered don't the internet also. In the early days there were numerous very technical discussions at FM and other sites.
EBH
I must be old, as I fondly remember forums being social media with the media-driven portion, so it was just social gathering and people arguing about the smallest of points.
Tom RC wrote
I miss those days and the 1D’s, 1DMKII’s & 1DS’s. Lots of memories shooting weddings with a 1DMKII and a 70-200 over one shoulder and a 1DS and 85mm 1.2 over the other. Good photographers who actually had skill could make really good money back in those days particularly shooting high end portraiture and weddings. All started going downhill from a business standpoint about the time of the Canon Rebel when everybody and their mother bought one and called themselves "professional photographers”. Watered down the market something severe.EBH
I must be old, as I fondly remember forums being social media with the media-driven portion, so it was just social gathering and people arguing about the smallest of points.
Dec 01, 2025 at 10:00 PM
p.1 #17Remember 4?
Tom RC wrote:
I miss those days and the 1D’s, 1DMKII’s & 1DS’s. Lots of memories shooting weddings with a 1DMKII and either a 24-70 or 70-200 over one shoulder and a 1DS and 85mm 1.2 over the other. Good photographers who actually had skill could make really good money back in those days particularly shooting high end portraiture and weddings. All started going downhill from a business standpoint about the time of the Canon Rebel when everybody and their mother bought one and called themselves "professional photographers”. Watered down the market something severe.
Well yes the Rebel did that, but it also allowed serious amateurs to transition from film to a 6 MP DSLR that did not break the bank, coupled with decent EF-S lenses like the EF-S 17-85 IS (in 2004 for me). Yes I could have done a decent wedding with that equipment (OK, only 3 AF points...), but that was not my goal. It allowed a much larger demographic to get into the digital era, which led rapidly to upscaling to better gear as it became available. 3 years later I had a 5D and a 40D, the 17-40 L, 24-105L, 70-200 f:2.8 L IS and other more expensive glass and cameras. This broader market scope allowed Canon and other brands to develop and sell a wide variety of quality lenses at comparatively reasonable prices (excluding the super-telephoto gear) which would be a benefit to professionals as well.
I miss those days and the 1D’s, 1DMKII’s & 1DS’s. Lots of memories shooting weddings with a 1DMKII and either a 24-70 or 70-200 over one shoulder and a 1DS and 85mm 1.2 over the other. Good photographers who actually had skill could make really good money back in those days particularly shooting high end portraiture and weddings. All started going downhill from a business standpoint about the time of the Canon Rebel when everybody and their mother bought one and called themselves "professional photographers”. Watered down the market something severe.
Well yes the Rebel did that, but it also allowed serious amateurs to transition from film to a 6 MP DSLR that did not break the bank, coupled with decent EF-S lenses like the EF-S 17-85 IS (in 2004 for me). Yes I could have done a decent wedding with that equipment (OK, only 3 AF points...), but that was not my goal. It allowed a much larger demographic to get into the digital era, which led rapidly to upscaling to better gear as it became available. 3 years later I had a 5D and a 40D, the 17-40 L, 24-105L, 70-200 f:2.8 L IS and other more expensive glass and cameras. This broader market scope allowed Canon and other brands to develop and sell a wide variety of quality lenses at comparatively reasonable prices (excluding the super-telephoto gear) which would be a benefit to professionals as well.
Dec 02, 2025 at 03:24 AM
p.1 #18Remember 4?
I went digital in 1998, but bought my first good digital camera in 2000. It was a Sony Mavica FD-98 with a whole 2.1 megapixels ($1,200 US). A good, but not removable zoom lens though. It used 3 1/2" floppy disks to store the images. At full resolution, each floppy held 4 shots. I carried a fanny pack full of floppy disks with me. Facing one way, they were fully used. The other way meant they were ready to use. The smaller pocket held two charged batteries. I could get good detailed shots with it and enlarge them to 8 X 10, but trying to enlarge beyond 8 X 10 and get a good print was impossible.
Now I'm going to try to find two of the photos that I took with that camera. If I do, I will add it here.
Charley
Now I'm going to try to find two of the photos that I took with that camera. If I do, I will add it here.
Charley
Dec 02, 2025 at 07:36 AM
p.1 #19Remember 4?
anselwannab wrote:
8 inch floppies on work computers (they were old).
First digital camera was a Sony that used 1.44 floppies…
First real one was the Canon 20D. Treat it right, and those 8mp files could be printed fine on my Epson 2200 at 13x19,
When the 1DXII came out with FF and 20+MP, I was line DONE. Plus 14+ frames per second. I just keep collecting them…
My professional life back in the day was tied to music, specifically music created using electronic tools. Your mention of 8” floppies brought back a memory. Very early on I had my first experience with computer music software using a then-high-end facility during a summer workshop at the Stanford Artifical Intelligence Lab (SAIL), so I had a skewed notion of available computer power.
At some point later on I went to one of (if not the) first MacWorld Expos in San Francisco, where some guy was trying to do on an early personal computer what we took (almost) for granted using a PDP-11 at that workshop, namely get the computer to play back didigtal audio files in real time. But he didn’t have the same data storage capacity that SAIL had, so he…
lined up two 8” drives attached to his computer, sorted and stacked 8” floppies on top of each drive, inserted the first drive in each pile in its respective drive, and hit “play.” The computer would read a few seconds of audio off the first drive, then switch to the second to continue reading date, at which point the operator manically ejected the first drive’s disk, threw it over his shoulder, and inserted the next disk in the stack, finishing just in time for the computer to switch back to the first drive to continue reading the date…
… at which point he ripped the first 8” floppy out of the second drive, tossed it, inserted the next disk in its stack, and (again, just it time) it started reading that data as he repeated the operation on the first drive again. Lather. rinse, repeat. As I recall, he got a standing ovation at the end.
Back to photography…
I my first DSLR (XT?) used that 8MP sensor, and I cut my digital printing teeth on the Epson 2200. Printing that way was a marvel, though by later standards that printer was pretty awful. (Epson had to go through some crazy gyrations to get something close to balanced color out of it, and the metamerism failure was something… black and white prints weren’t great.) But still…
The XT was a great tool to test the waters, but not a camera for my serious photography. The first camera for me that fit that bill was the 5D.
- - -
Rivermist wrote:
Well yes the Rebel did that, but it also allowed serious amateurs to transition from film to a 6 MP DSLR that did not break the bank, coupled with decent EF-S lenses like the EF-S 17-85 IS (in 2004 for me). Yes I could have done a decent wedding with that equipment (OK, only 3 AF points...), but that was not my goal. It allowed a much larger demographic to get into the digital era, which led rapidly to upscaling to better gear as it became available. 3 years later I had a 5D and a 40D, the 17-40 L,...Show more →
That’s how the Rebel XT worked for me. I already had various SLR systems — an early Minolta system and then a couple of Pentax bodies and multiple lenses — but after using other very early digital cameras (as early as the mid-1990s) I was gradually moving in that direction, to the point that I wanted something to test the waters more fully. So the XT was it, equipped with a 50mm and 35mm prime plus that (IIRC) 17-85mm APS-C lens. Using the camera convinced me that digital “had legs” and after that I moved to full frame and more serious lenses.
(That 17-85mm lens was a real mixed bag. The focal length range was excellent for an APS-C camera, but the image quality was not great. To this day, I lament using it on those early tests as I found myself in some locations with conditions that will likely never repeat, making photographs of dubious image quality that I struggle to print at 13” x 19” sizes, much less larger.)
gdanmitchell wrote
I remember 640 x 480 pixels and 0.3 Mpx.First digital camera was a Sony that used 1.44 floppies…
First real one was the Canon 20D. Treat it right, and those 8mp files could be printed fine on my Epson 2200 at 13x19,
When the 1DXII came out with FF and 20+MP, I was line DONE. Plus 14+ frames per second. I just keep collecting them…
My professional life back in the day was tied to music, specifically music created using electronic tools. Your mention of 8” floppies brought back a memory. Very early on I had my first experience with computer music software using a then-high-end facility during a summer workshop at the Stanford Artifical Intelligence Lab (SAIL), so I had a skewed notion of available computer power.
At some point later on I went to one of (if not the) first MacWorld Expos in San Francisco, where some guy was trying to do on an early personal computer what we took (almost) for granted using a PDP-11 at that workshop, namely get the computer to play back didigtal audio files in real time. But he didn’t have the same data storage capacity that SAIL had, so he…
lined up two 8” drives attached to his computer, sorted and stacked 8” floppies on top of each drive, inserted the first drive in each pile in its respective drive, and hit “play.” The computer would read a few seconds of audio off the first drive, then switch to the second to continue reading date, at which point the operator manically ejected the first drive’s disk, threw it over his shoulder, and inserted the next disk in the stack, finishing just in time for the computer to switch back to the first drive to continue reading the date…
… at which point he ripped the first 8” floppy out of the second drive, tossed it, inserted the next disk in its stack, and (again, just it time) it started reading that data as he repeated the operation on the first drive again. Lather. rinse, repeat. As I recall, he got a standing ovation at the end.
Back to photography…
I my first DSLR (XT?) used that 8MP sensor, and I cut my digital printing teeth on the Epson 2200. Printing that way was a marvel, though by later standards that printer was pretty awful. (Epson had to go through some crazy gyrations to get something close to balanced color out of it, and the metamerism failure was something… black and white prints weren’t great.) But still…
The XT was a great tool to test the waters, but not a camera for my serious photography. The first camera for me that fit that bill was the 5D.
- - -
Rivermist wrote:
Well yes the Rebel did that, but it also allowed serious amateurs to transition from film to a 6 MP DSLR that did not break the bank, coupled with decent EF-S lenses like the EF-S 17-85 IS (in 2004 for me). Yes I could have done a decent wedding with that equipment (OK, only 3 AF points...), but that was not my goal. It allowed a much larger demographic to get into the digital era, which led rapidly to upscaling to better gear as it became available. 3 years later I had a 5D and a 40D, the 17-40 L,...Show more →
That’s how the Rebel XT worked for me. I already had various SLR systems — an early Minolta system and then a couple of Pentax bodies and multiple lenses — but after using other very early digital cameras (as early as the mid-1990s) I was gradually moving in that direction, to the point that I wanted something to test the waters more fully. So the XT was it, equipped with a 50mm and 35mm prime plus that (IIRC) 17-85mm APS-C lens. Using the camera convinced me that digital “had legs” and after that I moved to full frame and more serious lenses.
(That 17-85mm lens was a real mixed bag. The focal length range was excellent for an APS-C camera, but the image quality was not great. To this day, I lament using it on those early tests as I found myself in some locations with conditions that will likely never repeat, making photographs of dubious image quality that I struggle to print at 13” x 19” sizes, much less larger.)
Dec 02, 2025 at 09:13 AM
p.1 #20Remember 4?
Rivermist wrote:
Well yes the Rebel did that, but it also allowed serious amateurs to transition from film to a 6 MP DSLR that did not break the bank, coupled with decent EF-S lenses like the EF-S 17-85 IS (in 2004 for me). Yes I could have done a decent wedding with that equipment (OK, only 3 AF points...), but that was not my goal. It allowed a much larger demographic to get into the digital era, which led rapidly to upscaling to better gear as it became available. 3 years later I had a 5D and a 40D, the 17-40 L,...Show more →
Yes you are correct and I’m sure there were photographers like yourself who benefited greatly from having access to affordable photography gear to start a career who might not have been able to do so otherwise. If you were established and on the other side of the fence during this time you would have experienced the downsides to this technological progress as all of a sudden a market primarily dominated by actual highly skilled photographers was flooded by so called “pros” a high percentage of which were anything BUT professional other than having a nice looking website and polished marketing skills. This did put a financial squeeze on established talented pros who in many cases lost business or had to lower rates substantially to compete. It is what it is…….or what it was and just a cycle seen in many industries over time.
Ironically, what happened 20 years ago around the time of the Canon Rebel in terms of the professional photography market seems to be happening today in the world of video. I would venture to say there are a lot of established professional videographers who are getting seriously squeezed by so-called pros with iPhones and other relatively low cost video gear and that has to be a tough market to compete in. Always pros and cons to technological progress but better IMO to be on the hobbyist side of the fence these days.
Tom RC wrote
I miss those days and the 1D’s, 1DMKII’s & 1DS’s. Lots of memories shooting weddings with a 1DMKII and either a 24-70 or 70-200 over one shoulder and a 1DS and 85mm 1.2 over the other. Good photographers who actually had skill could make really good money back in those days particularly shooting high end portraiture and weddings. All started going downhill from a business standpoint about the time of the Canon Rebel when everybody and their mother bought one and called themselves "professional photographers”. Watered down the market something severe.Yes you are correct and I’m sure there were photographers like yourself who benefited greatly from having access to affordable photography gear to start a career who might not have been able to do so otherwise. If you were established and on the other side of the fence during this time you would have experienced the downsides to this technological progress as all of a sudden a market primarily dominated by actual highly skilled photographers was flooded by so called “pros” a high percentage of which were anything BUT professional other than having a nice looking website and polished marketing skills. This did put a financial squeeze on established talented pros who in many cases lost business or had to lower rates substantially to compete. It is what it is…….or what it was and just a cycle seen in many industries over time.
Ironically, what happened 20 years ago around the time of the Canon Rebel in terms of the professional photography market seems to be happening today in the world of video. I would venture to say there are a lot of established professional videographers who are getting seriously squeezed by so-called pros with iPhones and other relatively low cost video gear and that has to be a tough market to compete in. Always pros and cons to technological progress but better IMO to be on the hobbyist side of the fence these days.
Dec 02, 2025 at 09:56 AM