Trailing Edge (not Leading Edge) Cameras -- where's today's "sweet spot"

Funny, the Nikon DF seems to be going for about $1,400 used on eBay, while there are plenty of examples of the D810 for under $1000. The D800 seems to be hovering around the $500 mark and the D700 is in the $300-400 range. That's an unintended consequence of the digital churn where the business model says you need to come out with a new model every year or two. In the old days a Nikon F3 held its value pretty well, based on condition, for around 10 years. I think there is a D800 and an XPro-2 in my future at those prices.
 
I just recently bought a second Nikon D80 (for about $150) with less than 2000 clicks on it, to replace my well-used new-in-2008 model that died over this summer. I also have a D7000 but in sunny bright daylight I much prefer the look of the photos from the D80 and its CCD sensor over the D7000.

I also have a D750 but I like having a DX-format camera around, even if it's just for the added reach it gives my long lenses.
 
With your K1 and D3, I see nothing attractive about D800’s, Canons, or even any newer DSLR. The K1 is very nice.

Smaller than that - your X-Pro1 and OM cameras are good choices. As an X-Pro1 owner myself since 2012, I think the X-Pro3 is where Fuji’s implementation is best in terms of features and removing all the button clutter on the back.

So, for something that you can carry everywhere and at all times and still have respectable performance, I’ll vote for the Ricoh GRIII I mentioned earlier.
 
Pál_K said:
With your K1 and D3, I see nothing attractive about D800’s, Canons, or even any newer DSLR. The K1 is very nice.
Click to expand...

No argument about the K1 -- its image quality is really amazing. The missing piece of the equation is that I have used Nikons since 1994 or so and have many, many of their AIS lenses and a handful of D series autofocus ones. I have four modern lenses for the K1, a couple of older autofocus lenses (50/1.7, 50/1.4, 35/2)

With my Fuji, I have a few lenses (35/1.4, 27/2.8)

It is certainly possible that the older Nikon lenses wouldn't hold up on the D800. Some of the older K-mount lenses that I loved on my LX (100/2.8) have never worked well on the K-1.
 
Benjamin Marks said:
…The missing piece of the equation is that I have used Nikons since 1994 or so and have many, many of their AIS lenses and a handful of D series autofocus ones. ..
Click to expand...
Don’t these work well with your D3? D700 is a possibility, as they’re inexpensive now, but D3 is everything a D700 is and more. Df would let you use inexpensive non-AI lenses if you have them and would offer a more traditional experience with its discrete controls, but the Df retains a high price even today.
 
Benjamin, I can tell you, as the owner of the X Pro2 and a D800E, I have made 21" x 42" image area prints from both cameras and find the Fuji's compare very favorably to the Nikon.
Have to admit, I was a bit surprised at first.
 
Benjamin Marks said:
...

It is certainly possible that the older Nikon lenses wouldn't hold up on the D800. Some of the older K-mount lenses that I loved on my LX (100/2.8) have never worked well on the K-1.
Click to expand...


Actually I very much love using the old Nikkors on my D800 and D810. Especially the 50/1.4 Nikkor-S and the 35/2 Nikkor-O. Both ancient but AI'D they fit perfectly. They have character and are built beautifully. The D800/D810 both are more accurate than my other Nikons in manual focusing when using the green dot confirmation.
 
jsrockit said:
The RX0 is too square for the pocket IMO.
Click to expand...

Maybe not jeans pocket, but my RX0 is in my jacket pocket every single day that I'm out. It's simply the best pocket camera for me.

As for the OP - if you have a M9 and Pentax K1, you already have the sweet spot of performance vs price. Nick Trop wrote a super post about the sweet spot a few years ago, and it still seems valid to me. Controversial but it makes a lot of sense.

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/node/168651

Even today, I have to agree about m43 sensors not being up to full frame standards. Even my 5D Mark II regularly shot better low ISO images than my Panasonic G9, although the Canon's shadow banding has made me all but give up using it. m43 sensor tech may change, but it's not here right now, so it's not the sweet spot of price/performance.

The D750 seems to give a lot of benefit for reasonable money these days, and since you have a D3, you already have Nikon lenses. I nearly got a D750 because of Nick's post, then I figured out lens costs (I don't own any Nikon lenses) and bought the Panasonic S5. Although it's a completely new mount, I can use all legacy lenses with adapters, including my existing Leica M, Minolta SR and Canon EF lenses, and the video quality is perfect for my work.

Depending on what you shoot, what you want to shoot, and handling preferences, a secondhand Sony A7 III or A7R III can make a lot of sense, especially if you get secondhand lenses, too. They have been around for a few years and can be had for decent prices now, and while I wonder if the A7R III sensor is significantly better than the Pentax K1, it would certainly be better with autofocus.

I just wonder what you think your current cameras aren't giving you that makes you curious about getting something else.
 
Archiver said:
I just wonder what you think your current cameras aren't giving you that makes you curious about getting something else.
Click to expand...

That's a fair question, and the answer is really "nothing" -- in the sense that I haven't put my existing cameras to anything like full use since Covid hit. Having said that, I do suffer a fair bit from retroactive GAS, where past lust for a particular piece of gear surfaces years later after the actual need has passed. I backed into a complete Mamiya RB system a couple of years ago for exactly that reason. I had always wanted one when I was using my Pentax 67 in the 90's. There is nothing rational about it, except that over time used gear does generally trend down in price to the point where it hits "fun budget" as opposed to "house payment." In fact, there has probably never been a better time to be a gearhead as there is tons of used pro gear from the film era with life left in it and living repair people available but also digital cameras that really are light years ahead technically of where the comparably sized film equipment was.

Generally these days, I buy lenses not bodies as the former can always be attached to some new platform and the latter have been "good enough" for a while. But every five to seven years or so, something comes along which does offer new technical capabilities, and when that stuff goes down in price on the used market, it is worth it (to me) to ask the question. And by the way, a big "thank you" to all those who responded.

So, yes, the D3 is a fabulous camera, but I use it less since the K1 joined the family gear stable. And if a D800 were to fall into my lap at a reasonable price, the fact that it is surplus to actual requirements wouldn't matter to me at all. It would be like saying "yes" to seeing Star Wars on family movie night, even though I have seen it so many times that I don't actually need to ever see it again. So, yeah. Han shot first, and a D800 for under $500 would be tempting.
 
Yep, it’s called ‘behind the curve’. Costs way too much to be ahead of the curve or even at the apex of the curve so…. Depending on model, 4-10 years or 2-4 iterations back suit me fine in this current market. Bodies are often cheap enough that you can have two Mk1 models for less than the price of one of the latest Mk4 models. And, bless those who have the disposable income and need to always have the latest and greatest and are constantly upgrading. This supplies the used market for folks like us who posted on this thread.
 
Last edited:
Benjamin Marks said:
That's a fair question, and the answer is really "nothing" -- in the sense that I haven't put my existing cameras to anything like full use since Covid hit. Having said that, I do suffer a fair bit from retroactive GAS, where past lust for a particular piece of gear surfaces years later after the actual need has passed. I backed into a complete Mamiya RB system a couple of years ago for exactly that reason. I had always wanted one when I was using my Pentax 67 in the 90's. There is nothing rational about it, except that over time used gear does generally trend down in price to the point where it hits "fun budget" as opposed to "house payment." In fact, there has probably never been a better time to be a gearhead as there is tons of used pro gear from the film era with life left in it and living repair people available but also digital cameras that really are light years ahead technically of where the comparably sized film equipment was.

Generally these days, I buy lenses not bodies as the former can always be attached to some new platform and the latter have been "good enough" for a while. But every five to seven years or so, something comes along which does offer new technical capabilities, and when that stuff goes down in price on the used market, it is worth it (to me) to ask the question. And by the way, a big "thank you" to all those who responded.

So, yes, the D3 is a fabulous camera, but I use it less since the K1 joined the family gear stable. And if a D800 were to fall into my lap at a reasonable price, the fact that it is surplus to actual requirements wouldn't matter to me at all. It would be like saying "yes" to seeing Star Wars on family movie night, even though I have seen it so many times that I don't actually need to ever see it again. So, yeah. Han shot first, and a D800 for under $500 would be tempting.
Click to expand...

All of that makes sense. As prices on some gear goes down, the prices on others goes up - witness the rise in prices of Leica R and Contax Zeiss SLR lenses because cinematographers are snapping them up. 'Trendy' high quality compacts like the Contax T2 and T3 have shot up, as well as Hasselblad X Pan, Contax G system, and more. There were times in the past when I held a perfectly good champagne gold Contax G2, but passed on it because I couldn't see myself actually using it. Same with a mint silver chrome Leica MP, a well kept Konica Hexar AF in black, even an Epson R-D1x back in 2010 in Japan. With the exception of Leica R lenses and the R-D1x, I would have no actual use for these things today, but the original 'want' still floats around from time to time. But back then, I had no use for Leica R lenses at all, didn't even know they could be adapted to my 5D Mark II. Had I bought a few back then, I'd have a set which would serve me very well in my video work. But I couldn't have predicted that future.

Right now, there's a D750 with very low shutter count for under AUD $1300 at a local shop. That's a crazy price in my neck of the woods. Yes, I'd have to buy a few Nikon lenses, but we're talking about a model that has been a solid workhorse for events, weddings and journalism for years before it was superseded. Even now, people are still rocking their D750s and making awesome work. I follow a Russian glamour photographer called Marat Safin who works almost exclusively with the D700 and 35mm f1.4 G. He says it is the only camera he needs. And yet I remind myself that I have a lighter and much more up to date camera in my Panasonic S5, which ought to last me another ten years at least. My Canon 35L doesn't autofocus with it at all, though, so my next thing is to get a Sigma 35/1.4 DG DN when one comes up for a good price. And so it goes.

Tangentially: while a Nikon DSLR kit sounds like a good idea in isolation, I already have a reasonable investment in Canon EF lenses which I use on my 5D Mark II, 30D, and Panasonic G9 and S5 using Speedbooster/adapter respectively. Getting a Nikon kit means yet another mount system, which would be a headache. I already have enough lenses to give me pause when choosing ones that are appropriate for situations/jobs, and another system would cause even more hesitation.
 
jsrockit said:
You could... but that cropper's high ISO is actually comparable not worse and you get 5 stops of IBIS to help out with non moving subjects.
Click to expand...

Here is no high ISO compatible croppers to FF like 6D series.

And why limit yourself with only static objects and dunky AF in the low light which doesn't work well even with 2.8 zooms, while where is loads of EF lenses with stabilization.

X-H1 was ditched by Fuji in record short period and is ditched now by users for reasons.
 
Benjamin Marks said:
I wondered about that. What was the complaint? I thought the in body stabilization was what got folks all excited about these cameras.
Click to expand...

I know some. Camera got too large for crop, according to some people. LCD instead of dials you can't see in the dark, but Fuji base is not about practicality, it must be sexy first. And in the dark environment it was not able to AF with zooms, according to some. It was kind a pro body, but with old processor. Again, not too fast to AF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom