Keeping digital cameras for a long time

IstD and DP1 are my digital cameras.

Have been considering something newer, but for my needs this and some film stuff works really well. Probably, if Fuji would release X-30 with same universal zoom and APS-C sensor....as all-around compact.
 
My Monochrom will hopefully be a camera that I'll have for a long time -- hopefully Leica won't feel compelled to come out with a Monochrom 2 anytime soon!
 
Bought my D700 the day it was available locally and see no reason to sell it to up grade. Instead I bought a used D300 as a companion body for use with telephotos. Both are more than good enough for the foreseeable future for my needs. I think we are now at a level with digital cameras that the only reason to get a new one is a fatal failure of the old one.

Bob
 
Pentax Optio S30 bought 2005 already discontinued. The 64mB card cost $25 plus tax. Required for Pro work shooting for internet. Milady had it a few years and now it's back. Great skin colors. perfect working macro. Not good on infinity..The battery consumption fixed with the new AA rechargeable types. So small, fits in shirt pocket, in tightest pants.
added Canon P/S after.. simply were faster.
Oh! Great 8 x 10 and more from Pentax.3.1mp.
 
Still using my 300D when I need digital. Bought it in 2005. Recently it started to act up when I have removed the card to read it in the pc, then I have to format it in the camera. Otherwise still fine. I would like better results at higher iso as this is a situation I regulary encounter. But not enough to spend for another camera.
 
I have a Sony DSC-P100 that I've used for maybe 10+ years, and I also use a Sony NEX-7 that I'll keep when I get the full-frame version next year. Both are great cameras.
 
The idea that a D700 is an "old" camera is laughable, and an indication of how our mindsets have changed, and have been changed, since the advent of the digital age. I was thinking the same about my D3 -- same chip as the D700 just last week. The whole thing is farcical. But unlike your M2, which has been clicking away for 60 years and probably will for 60 more, our Nikons rely on proprietary batteries that will not be available (I speculate/predict) in 10 years or fewer, regardless of how the shutters are doing. Oh, they've got us now the camera companies. Phhhjoey.
 
I still have a D200, its only drawback is its size and weight.

One can take good "stock" photos with it, but one cannot be creative working with a dumbbell.
 
Still have my Sony Mavica FD73. Kept it as the next camera I bought (small Casio) didn't have a great macro lens to it and the Sony could get as close as 1/8" away.

Also. Paid $500 for it back in 2001 and not getting rid of it unless I can get my money back on it :)

2333460680_52e7d2d940.jpg


DON
 
Benjamin Marks said:
The idea that a D700 is an "old" camera is laughable, and an indication of how our mindsets have changed, and have been changed, since the advent of the digital age. I was thinking the same about my D3 -- same chip as the D700 just last week. The whole thing is farcical. But unlike your M2, which has been clicking away for 60 years and probably will for 60 more, our Nikons rely on proprietary batteries that will not be available (I speculate/predict) in 10 years or fewer, regardless of how the shutters are doing. Oh, they've got us now the camera companies. Phhhjoey.
Click to expand...

IMO, barring the involvement of the insane safetycrats (read no more mercury batteries for our light meters), there will be batteries if there is a market for them. Capitalism has self-balancing component.
 
Bought my Fuji Finepix S7000 new in 2006 and still use it extensively. Although it doesn't have interchangeable lenses, indoor flash isn't great, the ISO range is very small, reds come out a little too orange at times, and the minimum aperture is a pretty crap f8, I have taken some of my best pictures with it.
Harris2011Eriskaypony.jpg
 
Shift and change comes from the balance between attractiveness of the new and comfort with the old. The argument that my -whatever- makes good images is only one side of things. The other side is when the new entries start looking pretty nifty. My D70 was a revolution, a real eye-opener. That lasted quite a while, until I saw others getting clean images at ISO 800. And, we've moved on from there.

Maybe the pace of change in digital photography is slowing down, so we'll keep our cameras longer. Maybe it isn't.

At this point, in classic cameras, I'm buying for nostalgia the cameras I always wanted to own. I'm not doing that for digital.
 
I use my Canon 1DMKIII to shoot soccer. It seems to work just as it did when new. I should say it is low shutter count and I keep ISO to 400 or less.
8715455954_fe1ca557ef_z.jpg
 
I've long had an affinity for the Nikon D2h and D2hs. I took the D2h with me as issued-gear to Iraq in the latter half of 2004 and it performed amazingly. Since then I've owned two D2hs bodies (one was stolen) and paid for a D3 (still a generation behind) with one photo shoot from the recent D2hs. Those really big photosites and the lack of AA/UV/IR filtration on that sensor really shine. Even though I own a camera that is so much finer in most respects, I may still grab another D2hs one day just to have as a spare and to play with its unique imaging capabilities (UV and IR photography.)

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