Anyone using older digital cameras ?

[Ronald M]

Image quality is indeed advancing, but not as fast as when digital was new.

It may advance some more, but the better cameras are capable of making large prints.

My D200 12 MP from 2006 makes wonderful 11x14 at base ISO. D750 works great at 3200 or 6400. D800 is 36 MP and I have yet to tax it.

Buy a camera made for what you want, sports, low light Nikon D5 or D750.
Landscape and studio D810.

They will serve you well until they can not be repaired. Buy new batteries when discontinued or buy battery holder that takes optional AA rechargeable.

 

[wjlapier]

D1h sitting in the corner these days. In it's day it was the high ISO king. Nice files too.

 

[BlackXList]

I use a 5d for street shooting, I have a mk3 for my concert work, but on the street the original is great.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Fujifilm S5 Pro.

 

[nikonosguy]

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Ah, well. I put the photo in the gallery, 1000px on long side, then put the url for that into the requisite box for moving it into a thread. Got my usual blue box with a question mark. Going to kill myself now; seems to be my only option.

 

[Godfrey]

With film , upgrading from a 60's SRT to an XD7 was merely a matter of convenience as the lenses would provide a similar image .

With digital , the IQ is constantly advancing , so cameras quickly become obsolete .

Strictly an amateur snap shooter , I am as content with a Panasonic L1 as I am with the Pentax K10D , and Sony A290/A390 'twins' . My most up to date camera being a Sony A35 .
I guess an advantage is that used 43/rds and Minolta lenses are inexpensive !

Do you feel a need to keep up with the latest trends and cameras ?

Regards dee.

Hello dee,

I still occasionally use my Olympus E-1 (new in October 2003). It still produces beautiful 5 Megapixel photographs. I miss the Panasonic L1 (new in mid-2006, bought in early 2007). That camera was a delight to shoot with and produced beautiful results. The friend I sold it to continues to use it and enjoy it.

My current cameras are the Leica M-P and SL, also the Olympus E-M1. These are state of the art, and (for me) I suspect there's nothing further needed; I have zero interest in even looking at anything else.

G

 

[rogue_designer]

Very early gen (6mp D100 etc) cameras don't hold up very well - but their successors, the D200 and newer are just fine for most uses. I traded a rarely used lens for a Pentax K10D and kit lens to learn on, and have been surprised by it's image quality.

I upgrade my professional bodies because my clients expect the resolution, but I'm fine with being not on the newest generation. Especially true of MF backs. The new ones are amazing, but frankly, so are some of the older ones (the P45+ and P65+ for instance, still hold their own nicely).

 

[Larry Cloetta]

There are 4 pages in the thread on how to post photos here. I read through two more of them, and am trying again after making a small modification. Am sorry to take up thread space, I would just like to know how to do this, finally. Obviously, since the "how to post photos" thread is 4 pages long, it's only simple if you know the secret.
So, am trying again with this shot from my Fuji S5 Pro (which is my remaining DSLR after I got rid of the D800E). Fingers crossed.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Lol. Dang. Maybe it's too big at 390,393bytes. I'll quit for now, try again some other time. In the gallery, anyway.

 

[peterm1]

There are 4 pages in the thread on how to post photos here. I read through two more of them, and am trying again after making a small modification. Am sorry to take up thread space, I would just like to know how to do this, finally. Obviously, since the "how to post photos" thread is 4 pages long, it's only simple if you know the secret.
So, am trying again with this shot from my Fuji S5 Pro (which is my remaining DSLR after I got rid of the D800E). Fingers crossed.

The method I use is simple. Put your image on an accessible web page like Photobucket which gives free space to store your images (The Photobucket site is as ugly as a wagon load of baboons' bums but it's convenient for this purpose). Each Photobucket stored image is provided with several linking methods available to you including one that allows you to embed your image in a bulletin board (ie forum) post. You will see the option on the page with your image. Copy that link into your post on this forum and when you save it - bingo. (I presume you could use Cloud storage too but the above method is better as it does not require you to know what to type in order to embed the image so it appears in the post rather than being a link to the image.)

I have not bothered with putting an image directly into this site in years. BTW the above method means your images are available to use on other forums too, if that's an issue. Most of my favorite images are on Flickr which is far better than Photobucket but works in much the same way by providing links you can copy to your RFF post to embed an image.

 

[peterm1]

Fujifilm S5 Pro.

I have wondered about their sensors. Are they as good as they were reputed to be? I loved the idea of having specific sensor sites to capture info on bright areas of the image to improve dynamic range. I presume later Fuji sensors are even better given the technology we have now. But the earlier Fuji range did have a great reputation especially for portraits / skin tones and dynamic range.

 

[ferider]

There are 4 pages in the thread on how to post photos here. I read through two more of them, and am trying again after making a small modification. Am sorry to take up thread space, I would just like to know how to do this, finally. Obviously, since the "how to post photos" thread is 4 pages long, it's only simple if you know the secret.
So, am trying again with this shot from my Fuji S5 Pro (which is my remaining DSLR after I got rid of the D800E). Fingers crossed.

Here is your picture, Larry:

In firefox, I did "Copy Image Location" and pasted into IMG tags. (if you "QUOTE" this message you can see what I did)

 

[Larry Cloetta]

The method I use is simple. Put your image on an accessible web page like Photobucket which gives free space to store your images (The Photobucket site is as ugly as a wagon load of baboons bums but it's convenient for this purpose). Each Photobucket stored image has several linking methods available to you including one that allows you to embed your image in a bulletin board (ie forum) post. Copy that link into your post on this forum and when you save it - bingo. (I presume you could use Cloud storage too but the above method is better as it does not require you to know what to type in order to embed the image so it appears in the post rather than being a link to the image.)

I have not bothered with putting an image directly into this site in years. BTW the above method means your images are available to use on other forums too, if that's an issue. Most of my favorite images are on Flickr which is far better than Photobucket but works in much the same way by providing links you can copy to your RFF post to embed an image.

Thanks, Peter. I don't have a flickr account or photobucket, but, incredibly, do have a Smugmug account which I rarely access. I did try moving a photo once from there with a similar method, but didn't quite nail that either. I think that the problem may be, as I seem to be following instructions such as you are offering, the images, even though resized for 1000px per side are still a tad over 390k. I don't know. I hate to keep posting squares with question marks in them to threads that people are trying to read, so only try every now and then. Will get it right eventually. Thanks, again.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Here is your picture, Larry:

In firefox, I did "Copy Image Location" and pasted into IMG tags. (if you "QUOTE" this message you can see what I did)

Thanks! I feel like a 4 year old, but that's okay! People do keep referencing Firefox, and I do have that installed, so that would be an easy fix.
Part of my problem with doing this correctly is that I started out with Aperture, then moved to Lightroom when Apple decided to more or less abandon Aperture. Desiring to learn Lightroom right the first time before I re-import thousands of photos. The plan was to do that, then put everything on Smugmug. Takes a long time, time I haven't had until recently, so nothing I have is adequately tagged, so, generally, if I have occasion to try to post something to a thread here, it has to come off the desktop. I'm too old for this. I preferred just having prints in packets in shoeboxes and inviting people over for drinks and chips.
Thanks, again, I appreciate it sincerely.

 

[Steve M.]

I'm not sure that the image quality is constantly advancing except for pixel peeping. My old Nikon D50 took wonderful digital files. They were just size limited.

I much prefer to shoot film, but for eBay photos of gear I've been using the same old 6 MP digital P&S camera for about 15 years, a Fujifilm E 550 that gave the Nikon a run for it's money if you got the exposure perfect. I bought it for it's almost non existent shutter lag, but the IQ was a surprise. Neat little camera. It also has a real optical finder.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

In firefox, I did "Copy Image Location" and pasted into IMG tags. (if you "QUOTE" this message you can see what I did)

FWIW, the link you copied over to Firefox was exactly the same as the link I put in the "Insert Image" window in the 'reply to thread' window here.

 

[Scrambler]

Thanks, Peter. I don't have a flickr account or photobucket, but, incredibly, do have a Smugmug account which I rarely access. I did try moving a photo once from there with a similar method, but didn't quite nail that either. I think that the problem may be, as I seem to be following instructions such as you are offering, the images, even though resized for 1000px per side are still a tad over 390k. I don't know. I hate to keep posting squares with question marks in them to threads that people are trying to read, so only try every now and then. Will get it right eventually. Thanks, again.

Link don't copy. I does work.

DSC08696 by Steve Cramb, on Flickr

EDIT - BBCode

 

[peterm1]

Thanks, Peter. I don't have a flickr account or photobucket, but, incredibly, do have a Smugmug account which I rarely access. I did try moving a photo once from there with a similar method, but didn't quite nail that either. I think that the problem may be, as I seem to be following instructions such as you are offering, the images, even though resized for 1000px per side are still a tad over 390k. I don't know. I hate to keep posting squares with question marks in them to threads that people are trying to read, so only try every now and then. Will get it right eventually. Thanks, again.

If you put an image on an external site like Flickr or Photobucket (and I presume SmugMug) there is no Rangefinder Forum file size limit for embedded photos. That is only an issue with images stored on RFFs own system I believe. The RFF file size limit is more to stop people using up all their disk space so of course if you are using someone else's disk space they do not care. Of course its still not advisable to link an image that is too big into a post as is does not look good. But again that is not an issue at least with the storage sites I am familiar with. Flickr gives you options for embedding various sized versions of your image (you choose a size in pixels eg 1024 x 768 and use that specific link to put in your RFF post. Photobucket seems to size all larger images to a standard size of about the above size.

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=104206&stc=1&d=1461714161

I will admit to having a 'problem' with liking these little guys.
They just keep finding their way onto my desk.