Sometimes less is what is needed though...
In defence of the DSLR.
- Thread starter Keith
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 106
- Views 13K
Sometimes less is what is needed though...
RObert Budding
D'oh!
There isn't a film available that can produce results that are as good as my D700 at ISO 6400.
JChrome
Street Worker
It's true. The high ISO capabilities of these new sensors is amazing. I don't shoot enough sports or nature photography to warrant the purchase of a good dslr though.
The biggest problem with DSLR's? The resale value goes to zilch the second you buy it. This is why I will rent a dslr when I shoot professionally (which I admit is rare) and I will keep shooting street with film.
The biggest problem with DSLR's? The resale value goes to zilch the second you buy it. This is why I will rent a dslr when I shoot professionally (which I admit is rare) and I will keep shooting street with film.
bugmenot
Well-known
The Sony EVFs in the NEX-7 (and optional one for NEX-5N), as well as the EVFs in the A65 and A77 have 2.4 Million Dots, or in other words a XGA resolution (1024x768), and are OLED. The Sony EVFs also have a 0.73x Magnification.
The OM-D EVF has a 1.44 Million Dots, or a 800x600 resolution, and are of the LCD type. It also has a 0.58x Magnification.
Just based on the resolution and contrast alone, I have compared the NEX-5N EVF vs. the OMD EVF, and the NEX-5N's EVF is quite the revelation.
It was as big a difference as the first time I looked through an OM-1n's viewfinder and compared it to my Canon 5DII's viewfinder.
The only downside is apparently on the NEX-7 only. Since the EVF is placed in a "rangefinder-style" position (rather than centre like the other three mentioned Sony cameras), and the magnification is so large, the left or right eye needs to be centred to get the best view, and since the viewfinder is to the side, that is more difficult than it should be. This is only NEX-7's problem when it comes to the EVF.
Magnification comparison images courtesy of Dpreview.com
jtm6
Well-known
Like you, this isn't a one vs other argument for me. There are pros and cons to both. I own and use both. After learning from the worthless laptops I have, I'm less concerned about the resale value of my DSLRS and more concerned with being able to simply turn them on in a few years. Even new-old stock batteries will be worthless because they age whether or not they are used. I refuse to buy mysterious box-o'-chocolates Chinese knockoffs.
This affects the digital Ms and mirrorless as much as DSLRs. One of the nice thing about older cameras is they didn't capitalize on proprietary batteries yet. I ran down to the local store and bought a pack of hearing aid batteries for a few dollars for my 22 and 30 year old film cameras (they are high tech because of the meters require electricity). The periods of depleting and resupplying batteries is measured in years, not exposures or hours.
Zilch? Current used DSLRs sell for 70-80% of new price repeatedly.
JChrome
Street Worker
jsrockit said:
Ok so my post was a bit hyperbolic. It doesn't go to zilch the second you buy it. You may be able to sell it for 70-80% of the price a year or two after. But what about 5 years? 10 years? Forget it. I'll be happily shooting with my Nikon FM 20 years from now (crossing my fingers that they still make 35 mm film)
Thardy
Veteran
Ran across this thread and thought " why in the world do these stupid dslr threads keep popping up?". "WHO CARES?"
I even remembered the header of a rah rah dslr thread from a couple of years ago called "let's hear it for the dslr"!
I even remembered the header of a rah rah dslr thread from a couple of years ago called "let's hear it for the dslr"!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Glad you could drop in ... maybe you'd prefer a nice bag thread ... or what M should I choose? 🙄
🙂
Thardy
Veteran
I can't get the link to work in the body of my previous post but you get the point! 😀
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90703
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Thardy
Veteran
Ain't irony great!
n5jrn
Well-known
Mirrorless (OM-D E-M5) works fine for what's important to me. Given that, I wouldn't want to take a heavy SLR along hiking.
I think that EVIL cameras will probably kill off the consumer-grade crop-sensor DSLR's in the not-so-distant future. They're pretty silly cameras when one thinks about it, having a significantly larger mirror box and lens-mount-to-sensor distance than they actually need, simply for historical and path-dependant reasons. EVIL cameras will continue to improve and erode at the performance difference between them and and such SLR's (I was floored at how much better today's EVF's are than the EVF's of 3 or 4 years ago).
Pro-grade full-frame DSLR's will doubtless last much longer, quite possibly indefinitely, much like rangefinders and medium/large format have.
I think that EVIL cameras will probably kill off the consumer-grade crop-sensor DSLR's in the not-so-distant future. They're pretty silly cameras when one thinks about it, having a significantly larger mirror box and lens-mount-to-sensor distance than they actually need, simply for historical and path-dependant reasons. EVIL cameras will continue to improve and erode at the performance difference between them and and such SLR's (I was floored at how much better today's EVF's are than the EVF's of 3 or 4 years ago).
Pro-grade full-frame DSLR's will doubtless last much longer, quite possibly indefinitely, much like rangefinders and medium/large format have.
back alley
IMAGES
that line looks like it's aimed directly at me...shall i stir the pot and look for some classic threads from you as well?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It wasn't aimed at you or anyone in particular ... you're now being paranoid about it!
back alley
IMAGES
i don't think so...but i'll take your word for it...
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
They just happen to be a couple of the most common threads around here.
Why would I pick on you ... you're a mod and you're bigger than me! 😀
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I spent a couple of hours this afternoon doing some searching on the net for information about setting up the D700's AF for sports shooting. I think this is the answer with these DSLRs ... you can spend a lot of time perusing the manual and not really achieve much IMO because how do you figure out what the various settings are going to do when you're attempting to prioritise the camera's performance to to suit a certain situation.
I'm also struck by the fact that the D700's menu system is not that complicated once you become familiar with it. Having a couple of different shooting setups in the personalised menus is quite straight forward and moving from one to the other takes seconds not minutes.
I'm also struck by the fact that the D700's menu system is not that complicated once you become familiar with it. Having a couple of different shooting setups in the personalised menus is quite straight forward and moving from one to the other takes seconds not minutes.
thegman
Veteran
Yes, but how much have you spent on film/processing in 5 or 10 years? Don't get me wrong, I favour film to digital, but if you shoot more than a small amount, digital is almost always going to be cheaper. Even if your £1000 DSLR is worthless the second you buy it.
Film photography will cost more, but for those of us who like it, it's worth more too.
Exactly...
Similar threads
