2016: a glut of cheap high quality digicams that nobody wants???

I wonder if there will be "cameras" except for niche applications in 2016.
If you could do everything with one device--a sooper dooper isomething--why would anyone buy a separate "camera" except for...?
Just sayin' dept...
Paul
 
DWScarpa said:
You could have made the same statement five years ago. We are already way past the point of diminishing returns.

For $500, a Nikon D5000 can deliver results that are undiscernable in print from just about any other digital camera, even at high ISOs. Everything beyond that level is essentially overspecc'd for all but a tiny percentage of specialized pro photographers. Any great photographer of the past -- Avedon, Nachtwey, whatever -- could have built a career with that camera.

Which means that when 2016 rolls around, the same group of people are going to be fantasizing about being able to buy that year's camera -- 80MP, ISO 1,000,000, whatever -- in 2020.

And that's what camera manufacturers now rely upon -- not the reality of photographers' needs, which were exceeded years ago, but a perceived need, a psychological need to keep up.
Click to expand...
Precisely. Well, apart from durability and the fact that the D500 will probably be used with a kit zoom that would make ANYTHING look bad.

Cheers,

R.
 
DWScarpa said:
Is there any practical value to any of this? No, not even for billboard photographers, because at some point you hit the resolution limits of the lens. But there's not much use for 36MP for most photographers either.
Click to expand...

Very true. The D800 already has that issue from what I hear.

Ergonomics aren't really a technological issue, they're a matter of personal taste. Some people will tell you a 50-year-old M3 has perfect ergonomics, others will tell you they're terrible. And, of course, the $7000 Leica M has no AF at all.

Either way I don't see any huge ergonomic barrier that's going to be broken in the near future that is going to enable us to take photos we can't take on a Nikon D5000.
Click to expand...

Right, but this is where manufacturers can continue to make people want to buy new cameras since ergonomics are more emotional based.

Better photos is subjective. Technically better photos, yes, that will happen. Better with regard to content and framing? no. I'm of the opinion that you'll make better photos with the camera that is the most comfortable to you.
 
DWScarpa said:
You could have made the same statement five years ago. We are already way past the point of diminishing returns.

For $500, a Nikon D5000 can deliver results that are undiscernable in print from just about any other digital camera, even at high ISOs. Everything beyond that level is essentially overspecc'd for all but a tiny percentage of specialized pro photographers. Any great photographer of the past -- Avedon, Nachtwey, whatever -- could have built a career with that camera.

Which means that when 2016 rolls around, the same group of people are going to be fantasizing about being able to buy that year's camera -- 80MP, ISO 1,000,000, whatever -- in 2020.

And that's what camera manufacturers now rely upon -- not the reality of photographers' needs, which were exceeded years ago, but a perceived need, a psychological need to keep up.
Click to expand...

Hard to argue with any of this. All we need to know is that each camera is better than the last. Or different in one or two key features.
 
DWScarpa said:
Is there any practical value to any of this? No, not even for billboard photographers, because at some point you hit the resolution limits of the lens.
Click to expand...

Assuming that DR and sensitivity continue to improve, even a typical 50mm lens at moderate apertures (say f/4) isn't Nyquist oversampled until the FF sensor exceeds 200 Mpix. And there can be sound technical reasons to oversample. Ctein has written a bunch about this and my calculations are in accord with his.

If you don't believe that, consider the pixel size on the newest cell phone sensors. Still much smaller than DSLR pixels and they are operating at or near the Nyquist limit with matched lenses. We've got a way to go. Note also that the cell phone sensors are now BETTER than DSLR sensors in terms of sensitivity per photosensitive area, because they are backside-illuminated. No DSLR sensor on the market has BSI yet. That will likely be necessary to retain sensitivity as pixel sizes continue to shrink.
 
I went digital in my studio 14 years ago with a Dycomed 4x5 scanning back and then went DSLRs with the D1 and later generation ikon and Canons. The evolution is amazing and it's happened in just a few years. I'm now using Hasselblad high mp gear, Nikon D800 and a Leica M9. The Hasselblad edges out everything particularly in color depth and edge to edge sharpness. The Nikon beats the Hasselblad in dynamic range by 2.5 stops, 14.4 stops of information. Unfortunately the Leica is the dog of the bunch. The Leica is very good but about two generations behind.

My prediction, sensors will improve in color rendering and dynamic range. I'm not sure how many pixels we need but that will increase as well but more emphasis in image quality vs pixels. What I see changing is improving optics. High mp sensors like the D800s 36mp CMOS really challenges the best of lenses. Hasselblad has fortunately kept up with lens quality vs pixel count. Optics for DSLRs really need to improve especial in regard to wide open performance before sensors increase in mp count.

Leica on the other hand has sharp glass corner to corner wide open with the new generation of asph glass. Unfortunately it has been at the price of flare. If the sun is over your shoulder they're great but put a backlit subject in front of them an be prepared for disappointment. Nikon especially has flare under controll and can handle the extremes but their lenses suffer in the corners wide open. Nikons image quality is really edging up on Hasselblad and on paper you just can't see any difference.
 
If there is one thing we know about our own nature it is that we never get tired of buying the latest, greatest thing.
How long have automobiles been a mature technology? A well-built car can last for 10, 20 years, if not longer. But as soon as people get a car paid off, they immediately start looking for another. If, that is, they can wait that long.

Canon, Nikon, etc. are never going to stop coming out with new cameras that offer new features the masses feel they have to have. It's just the way we are.
 
PKR said:
I think that more now than in the past (maybe just the ease of use with digital) photography is more about cameras and less about pictures.
Click to expand...

I think this is common with the amateur / enthusiast market in general whether it be guitars (or any music gear), sports, cars, bikes, etc. A lot of extra cash, extra time, and not a lot of motivation to put the time and effort into getting better for many folks. I had a friend who tried to get into music and make a record within a few months of starting (and it sounded like it). Once it was done, he then wondered why nobody liked it. He quit soon after. I think many people think creative or performance based activities are going to be easy. For some it is, but for most of us, it is not.
 
raid said:
Few people want to buy "outdated" digital cameras. This is also a fact.
Click to expand...

Two of my three digitals were last year's model when purchased. My 3.3 megapixel Coolpix 885 was bought refurbished from Nikon, my Samsung DSLR was a closeout.

I almost bought. Coolpix 7100 refurbished,but the store in New York refused to ship to the hotel I was staying in that month...
 
wray said:
The biggest potential problem with buying older digital cameras just might be finding batteries to power them!
Click to expand...

Actually, my current problem is finding a 1gig compact flash card. One of my older cameras was only tested to work with 1 gig cards, and the manufacturer never tested it with a larger card The smallest WallyWorld sells is 4 gig, and I don't want to waste 75% of a card....
 
The bigger issue might become corollary technology, like USB ports and SD cards.

There are some good scanners that are hard to keep working today because they require SCSI ports. Or how about those old Fuji digicam with xD cards.

There will always be a niche market for adapters and converters, but at some point it will become too much of a hassle to get images off the older cameras.

And let's pray manufacturers will one day agree to a universal RAW standard.
 
I suspect my 2003 Olympus E-1 will still be going strong in three years, and I'll still be using it. As should my M9, X2, E-PL1, and GXR. I'll likely have another camera or two by then as well, presuming something interesting comes along that helps me make the photos I want. I don't think I'll have any difficulties getting batteries for them, but if I do, they'll just join the little raft of no longer working film cameras in the bottom drawer.

I don't know what the problem is. "Equipment is transitory, Photographs endure." Make photographs, and enjoy your equipment while it lasts. Don't spend more than you can afford comfortably, in cash, on equipment.

G
 
2016....wow, I dunno if I will be shooting digital anymore by then. But if I am, it will have been 22 years since late actor James Whitmore's son, my then editor, handed me a $14,000 NC2000 and said, "This is the future man, ride it!"

Well I rode it alright, like a party train that just got bigger, louder, faster, hard corners, bad order track, bullet train.....you name it. The party is loud as hell now, tons of people, tons of hype....time to get off....and get some me time, some peace.....some quiet visual contemplation...

If you are true to your self, you listen the voice inside and when Steve was all gaga over this 1MP LCD free wonder-cam, that voice said...no, not forever man, I'll move on...

I just upgraded my 4x5 enlarger to a killer Saunders LPL4550XLG / VCCE unit, wow, what a top notch machine! And what a *wonderful* feeling to be moving away from something that I watched grow into a very usable medium......in order to follow my heart.

I have no regrets, I am think I am leaving digital behind right on time...the party is just too...................................

.............

...much......
 
I seldom buy the very latest camera when it first hits the shelves. I either buy new but after the next model has come out or last years model, low mileage second hand. Either way I get great deals on excellent technology that otherwise would cost heaps more.
 
Godfrey said:
I suspect my 2003 Olympus E-1 will still be going strong in three years, and I'll still be using it. As should my M9, X2, E-PL1, and GXR. I'll likely have another camera or two by then as well, presuming something interesting comes along that helps me make the photos I want. I don't think I'll have any difficulties getting batteries for them, but if I do, they'll just join the little raft of no longer working film cameras in the bottom drawer.

I don't know what the problem is. "Equipment is transitory, Photographs endure." Make photographs, and enjoy your equipment while it lasts. Don't spend more than you can afford comfortably, in cash, on equipment.

G
Click to expand...
By the way, note that I'm enjoying shooting with film cameras too. They become obsolete and nonfunctional over time too, requiring repairs more expensive than they're worth. Unless you're a little mad and don't mind spending for the repairs.

G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom