'Professional' DSLRs

Ade-oh

Ade-oh

Well-known
Local time
11:27 PM
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
558
Location
London, Shropshire and Occitanie
View My Gallery
I was thinking about the new Nikon D850 today and it occurred to me that cameras like this, and whatever Canon 5D Mk'X' we're currently up to, have basically rendered the solid, brick-like 'professional' DSLR obsolete. A bit like naval airpower - lighter, less well armoured but far more flexible - signalled the demise of the old battleship. Unless one also needs to hammer nails in with one's camera, of course.

Back in the days of film, with mechanical wind-on, autofocus etc, a big beast like an F5 or an EOS-1 was a necessity for a pro - and particularly news photos - but I'm not sure it is any more. Thoughts?
 
When I had my business, I bought equipment that would last a long time. It had to work each time I used it even tho, at each gig, I had others I could use. I never had a hick up. But at one wedding I was lucky to photograph, another photographer, pro camera on a tripod, making photos near a swimming pool had an oops, camera and everything went into the pool. He got occupied with the pretty bridesmaids! Even pro stuff usually isn't meant to swim!

Interesting article testing three pro (Canon, Nikon, Sony) cameras:

https://petapixel.com/2017/08/31/sony-a9-vs-canon-1d-x-ii-vs-nikon-d5-flagship-camera-shootout/

I would consider this one as I like the vibrant colors with Fuji cameras:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1283336-REG/fujifilm_gfx_50s_medium_format.html
 
Where cameras with the form factor of a prosumer suffer (relatively) is in handling. A D850, even with a grip, doesn't handle like a D5. And there is the overall durability issue. However, with the advances that are being made in respect of high iso performance from high MP sensors, the gap is closing massively. Nikon really should make a 5X version of the D5 with the 850's sensor.
 
I use the big pro cameras for my underwater photography which is done mostly in near freezing temperatures (single- digit on the C scale). Even the big batteries take a temperature hit. These bodies tend to have better AF as well but the gap is closing with the more recent small pro bodies (Canon 5D series and Nikon 3-digits).
 
Ade-oh said:
I was thinking about the new Nikon D850 today and it occurred to me that cameras like this, and whatever Canon 5D Mk'X' we're currently up to, have basically rendered the solid, brick-like 'professional' DSLR obsolete. A bit like naval airpower - lighter, less well armoured but far more flexible - signalled the demise of the old battleship. Unless one also needs to hammer nails in with one's camera, of course.

Back in the days of film, with mechanical wind-on, autofocus etc, a big beast like an F5 or an EOS-1 was a necessity for a pro - and particularly news photos - but I'm not sure it is any more. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
In terms of quality of photo I think you are right - but then this was pretty much always true, or at least pretty close to it.

Regards size of professional cameras - 35mm cameras that we all consider small (screw mount Leicas come to mind) were professional cameras in their day. The original Nikon SLRs are not huge cameras compared to early DSLR models. Both of these film cameras would have survived a swim in a pool though the lens and body would have required professional cleaning immediately. The film would probably have been usable as well!

On the other hand, most professionals wanting higher quality in the film era would have used larger formats. Think "full plate" or up to quite recently think 120. These cameras are not small - indeed cannot be made small.

These days there are professionals using iPhones.

I have a long run of Pentaxes - including a professional auto-everything film Z-1 (PZ-1). It's about the size of my APS-C DSLR K100d. The film era auto-everything cameras weren't THAT big - but the first professional DSLRs were camera-sized boxes added onto the back and bottom of professional film SLRs. That's where the super-size habit started.

Once you have photographers prepared to lug 1kg bodies twice the size of a film body there is little reason to downsize - you can just add more electronics, larger batteries etc. instead.

Water resistance? You all know that's just a fine plastic film inside the bodies don't you? Would add <10g and 1/2 a mm to dimensions. I have a 5m waterproof digital P&S smaller than any of my other cameras.
 
Ade-oh said:
I was thinking about the new Nikon D850 today and it occurred to me that cameras like this, and whatever Canon 5D Mk'X' we're currently up to, have basically rendered the solid, brick-like 'professional' DSLR obsolete....
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say "obsolete", but it is true that they've become more of a specialty item with feature sets and abilities skewed toward a special segment of the market.

What amounts to a "pro" tool is not simple to define. 30-40 years ago, the so called "pro" 35mm cameras were not the main type of camera used by real working professionals. It's true that a lot of working professionals used them, but an equally large or perhaps larger number wouldn't touch such small cameras for their paying work. Press, sports, and wildlife photographers generally used miniature cameras (read: 35mm), but wedding and portrait photographers largely used medium format cameras with many portrait photographers using 4x5 frequently. Architectural photographers primarily used 4x5.
 
I think it just shows the fact that these cameras (D5, 1D) are extremely niche. They aren't meant for consumers, they aren't even meant for wedding photographers or casual event photographers. They are meant for journalists (able to operate in natural disasters and war zones), sports photographers (where speed is paramount and there is a real possibility of the photographer getting hit by a player), and wildlife photographers going off into the wilderness (although I think the D500's crop makes it better for that role than a D5).

The thing is, while journalists, NGO photographers, and combat-camera-operators (military photographers) need a camera that can survive anything anywhere, they make up a tiny tiny niche. Nikon and Canon have to sell these cameras to a larger market just to be able to sell them at all.

So yes, unless you *know* you need a D5, chances are the D850 is a better camera for you. Heck, I'd say that for many people, the D750 is a better camera (46MP is great, but complete overkill for posting online or print at 8x10 ).

As Dwig and others have pointed out, 35mm in the professional realm was really limited to people who needed mobility over quality. If you could afford the size and weight of a medium format, you used that.

In many many ways crop sensors have replaced 35mm for people who chose 35mm for cost or weight reasons.

Top tier D5/1D cameras have replaced 35mm for people who chose it for robustness and mobility.

>30MP cameras like the D850 have replaced 645 and 6x6 film cameras for people who needed a mix of mobility and quality (Wedding photographers)

33x44 Medium format (Pentax, Fuji, Little Hassy) has replaced the larger medium formats like 6x7 and 6x9 for people who need extremely high levels of quality and the ability to operate at speed (commercial photographers).

40x54 Medium format (PhaseOne, Big Hassy) has replaced sheet film for people who need extremely high levels of quality and speed of operation is not a concern (very high end studio photographers, architecture).

Is this list absolute? No, it's generalities.

It reminds me of the auto industry these days. BMW sells a lot of M5 cars. I doubt many of them see track time, but in many ways either a lesser 5-series (more comfortable) or a smaller M (sportier) would be better for the buyer - but the buyer wants "the best" and BMW needs to sell enough M5s to justify the development and production cost.
 
I'm a working pro who migrated to all Fuji and while it works for most jobs, weddings, editorial and portraits, I miss the quality of the full frame Canons I was using a few years ago. Those big guns are like medium format quality and the images have a different presence. I might be getting an 850 and one lens just for portrait work?
 
Much of the bulk of the "Pro" cameras is battery. When I used the D1, D1x and went to Canon with a 1D, 1Ds and 1DsII the entire bottom was for the battery. The chases was magnesium / aluminum but so are the D800-D850 and Df.

A little note, On a job yesterday my Df was pulled off a table and hit the floor. No physical damage to the eye but something was bent inside and the aperture actuator lever was hanging. Just life! It's headed to NPS service today with an estimate of $304 and turnaround of a week or less. This is one of the benefits (to pro customers) of owning Nikon or Canon. It's more than rugged construction and features, it comes down to customer service and a genuine interest in the people that built the business. (Listening Leica?)
 
Agree on battery, even with my volunteer experience, I have to use DSLR and grip to have two batteries. This makes it last for several hours and constant shooting up to thousand and more shots taken with AF and AF racking .

Where I'm, I see young professionals mostly with Canon 5D series cameras and L lenses. Those are well balanced together. Local press photogs are showing up still with same gear I see them in ten or so years. Nikon DSLRs with big zooms. Or Canon similar DSLRs, again, with L lenses.

I also see from time to time people with 1D series cameras, but surprisingly, those are showing up not on assignments. Clean, not beaten or worn out cameras.

For professionals it is tools. They must be sufficient, yet, simple, durable and serviceable. Size is the last thing local professionals care about, it seems. My daughter purchased 5D MKII DSLR from another professional, who has shutter in camera replaced by Canon. She asked me once, what to do then she makes it fail. I told her, if everything else is going to work still, just get another shutter. Camera is still supported by very local Canon Canada. And it is not 27 weeks service...

Same department is also servicing video professional gear. Don't know about Nikon, but Canon DSLRs like 5D series are widely in use for television for sometime now. And Canon has cinema line of cameras based on DSLR platform also for some time. Not to mention independent clip makers. Some very popular hip-hop clips are made with Canon FF DSLRs and wide L lenses. You can't get this look with Panasonic stuffed with tiny sensor.
 
Since we're on service, I've been a NPS member since the early 80's or at lest thats as far back as I can remember being. In the film days NPS service was 1 day in house. 1 day shipping, 1 day in service and 1 day return. Now with digital it's about 5 days. NPS shows up at every major news event like the Kentucky Derby. They show up with trucks with a service department in one to repair equipment on the spot. If they can't repair it at that moment they have a truck(s) full of cameras and lenses to loan you absolutely free, yes FREE!

If you need a loaner while yours in in the shop at any other time they provide the same lens or body FREE until yours is repaired. If you need a specialty lens for a one time job, guess what, they loan it to you for a reasonable time absolutely FREE.

Oh yes, other than proving you're a pro the service costs nothing.

NPS is even servicing some of the film body's still.

Canon has a similar service but last I checked they charged for it.
 
Every pro I know or see shoots whatever the latest Canon pro body is
Whatever the cameras merits may be it's ,like XRay said, the service from the manufacturer that keeps them coming back

I see a fair number of amateurs with the pro bodies too especially at horse events
 
Paulbe said:
Nahhhh-not yet! The big DSLRs have better weather sealing and are generally more rugged--for professional use! They still have a place...
Click to expand...

i stopped using pro DSLRs about 10 years ago. since then i have used consumer point and shoots/mirrorless in war zones, jungles, deserts and non-stop for paid work. i have yet to have a camera fail in the field. computers? yes. thuraya? yup. camera? nope.

just an observation.
 
Maybe I wasn't enough of a pro, but I shot my work with a Nikon D600 when the D800 or D4 were the going cameras. The online reviews were pretty clear on all three cameras having the same innards, where the D4 was optimised for speed and the D800 for resolution, the D600 had a bit of both and video capability.

Results were excellent, video was a useful extra in my business and I saved money too. Camera never failed me and customers were pleased with results. They don't care what it was shot with anyway when the images are good.

If I'd enter that business again now, I'd get a D600 or D610 again, for sure.
 
Ade-oh said:
I was thinking about the new Nikon D850 today and it occurred to me that cameras like this, and whatever Canon 5D Mk'X' we're currently up to, have basically rendered the solid, brick-like 'professional' DSLR obsolete. A bit like naval airpower - lighter, less well armoured but far more flexible - signalled the demise of the old battleship. Unless one also needs to hammer nails in with one's camera, of course.

Back in the days of film, with mechanical wind-on, autofocus etc, a big beast like an F5 or an EOS-1 was a necessity for a pro - and particularly news photos - but I'm not sure it is any more. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Having always shot canons for work except for a short time with 5dmk2s always used 1d series bodies at the moment 1dxs and even though nikon d810 or canon 5dmk4 are great and probably if I didn't do just newspaper work thats what I would use the bigger bodies still have the edge on speed and durability.
Saying that I would love to have a couple of nikon Dfs with two or three primes just to get a break from the weight of the big bodies!
 
Weight from the pro bodies is one of the reasons I went to the DF and D800. Doing commercial work I rarely need a motor drive muchness 12 fps and a sealed body. What I do is very structured as a rule. It's the kind of work I did for many years on large format and 2-1/4. I'm more interested in dynamic range, color accuracy and resolution.
 
I have a D700 and a D3S. Either one could be my only camera (my 700 was for many years) but the button placement and ruggedness of the 3S are even better than the already good build of the 700, and honestly its a smaller package than my 700 with the grip. Its a handling difference, thats it. IQ wise there's no difference.
 
As mentioned above, it's also weather sealing. I use a D4 and D700 together when covering sports. Last spring I covered a lacrosse match in light, on and off, rain; not enough to drag out the rain gear, but enough to get both bodies damp. Both cameras survived, but now my D700 has started fogging on the inside of the LCD and occasionally the viewfinder, where as the D4 is good as new.

I may need to replace the D700(although it has given me years of great service) and swinging the price for a D5 is not looking doable. But I'm concerned that something like a D850 will not hold up weatherproof-wise.

Best,
-Tim
 
Timmyjoe said:
As mentioned above, it's also weather sealing. I use a D4 and D700 together when covering sports. Last spring I covered a lacrosse match in light, on and off, rain; not enough to drag out the rain gear, but enough to get both bodies damp. Both cameras survived, but now my D700 has started fogging on the inside of the LCD and occasionally the viewfinder, where as the D4 is good as new.

I may need to replace the D700(although it has given me years of great service) and swinging the price for a D5 is not looking doable. But I'm concerned that something like a D850 will not hold up weatherproof-wise.

Best,
-Tim
Click to expand...

(D3S's are starting to get cheap...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom