Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > DEbate: Whay Expensive DSLRS vs Consumer Bodies?

Reply
Thread Tools

DEbate: Whay Expensive DSLRS vs Consumer Bodies?

 
 
Jerry McG
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-05-2004
I'm a D1x owner, watching the thing rather quickly migrate to the land of
obsolete junk. I am beginning to wonder if it isn't more prudent to shoot
with consumer level bodies like the D100, and now the D70, since none of
them will be worth beans soon anyway. The large metal framed bodies like the
Nikon D1 series and the Canon EOS I digitals may be robust, like their old
film ancestors, but so what? They'll be junk in a year anyway as their
sensors become obsolete.

Also, has anyone wondered why with DSLRs the mfrs can't simply upgrade the
chips, rather than requiring an entire new body be purchased? The current
business practices are akin to requiring everyone to upgrade film bodies
every time Fuji reformulates Velvia!


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-05-2004
>From: "Jerry McG" http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

>I'm a D1x owner, watching the thing rather quickly migrate to the land of
>obsolete junk. I am beginning to wonder if it isn't more prudent to shoot
>with consumer level bodies like the D100, and now the D70, since none of
>them will be worth beans soon anyway. The large metal framed bodies like the
>Nikon D1 series and the Canon EOS I digitals may be robust, like their old
>film ancestors, but so what?


Canon's pro models like the 1D Mark II have shutters tested to a minimum of
200,000 exposures, while bodies built on less robust consumer models like, say,
the Kodak 14n/c are more like 25,000 cycles. That's one reason to buy the more
expensive bodies, if you think you'll shoot that many frames.

If you shoot enough the high end models pay for themselves through film costs
you don't have to pay, but if you don't shoot much they are not a good buy, I
think.

>Also, has anyone wondered why with DSLRs the mfrs can't simply upgrade the
>chips, rather than requiring an entire new body be purchased?


Kodak did that with the 14n, giving users of the older model the option of a
new sensor, so maybe that's coming. But the sensor was the same size and pixel
count as the earlier model. If there's a larger sensor (either physically
larger or the same size with more pixels) then this becomes increasingly
unfeasible.

>The current business practices are akin to requiring everyone to
>upgrade film bodies every time Fuji reformulates Velvia!


In a few years things will maybe settle down but right now change is happening
so fast we're seeing improved models every year or so. As one pro friend said,
"I used to spend a lot of money on film but now I spend it on digital bodies".

Bill


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
JT
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-05-2004

They'll be junk in a year anyway as their
> sensors become obsolete.
>


Not true - My 10D will always take as good a picture 10 years from now as it
does today. It will be just as fast and it's internal software will never
degrade.

But, I know what you are saying - there is *always* a better model in a few
months. . .

My wedding was done on a 10D - and I'm *extremely* pleased with the results.
Although the results may be better with a 1D (or whatever is the current
high line Canon), I doubt I would notice a difference or become disappointed
in the future by viewing wedding pics taken with a 1D.

So, although it would be nice to have the best of the best, it simply will
never be possible with a dSLR (at least for me).

For now, I'm thinking with each doubling of pixels I'll consider upgrading.
.. .so, when the 12MP 10D equal comes along I'll probably be ready 'just
because'. Then when the 24MP 10D equal comes along, ditto. . .etc. . .


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bowzer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-05-2004
On Wed, 5 May 2004 08:40:50 -0600, "Jerry McG"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I'm a D1x owner, watching the thing rather quickly migrate to the land of
>obsolete junk. I am beginning to wonder if it isn't more prudent to shoot
>with consumer level bodies like the D100, and now the D70, since none of
>them will be worth beans soon anyway. The large metal framed bodies like the
>Nikon D1 series and the Canon EOS I digitals may be robust, like their old
>film ancestors, but so what? They'll be junk in a year anyway as their
>sensors become obsolete.
>
>Also, has anyone wondered why with DSLRs the mfrs can't simply upgrade the
>chips, rather than requiring an entire new body be purchased? The current
>business practices are akin to requiring everyone to upgrade film bodies
>every time Fuji reformulates Velvia!
>


Your D1x will still be as viable as the day you bought it for years to
come. Unless you truly need the capabilties of the newer bodies,
there's no compelling reason to dump it and upgrade.

I think the main reasons for using pro bodies are reliability, quick
response, and durability. In this respect, it isn't different from
film bodies. If the D100, D70, and D1x produce similar images, what
differentiates them? Same for the F100 and N80. Same basic images, but
totally different cameras.
 
Reply With Quote
 
[BnH]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-05-2004
Drop them on an assignment and need not to worry bout it to break apart?

Saw an F4 that dropped from 1m high n it is not even dented !
Do that with a 300D and I would like to see the result

Sensor wise ... well if you will still print in 8R size for the next 10
years ...
ur D1X can still match the quality of what's in the future.

=bob=


"Jerry McG" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I'm a D1x owner, watching the thing rather quickly migrate to the land of
> obsolete junk. I am beginning to wonder if it isn't more prudent to shoot
> with consumer level bodies like the D100, and now the D70, since none of
> them will be worth beans soon anyway. The large metal framed bodies like

the
> Nikon D1 series and the Canon EOS I digitals may be robust, like their old
> film ancestors, but so what? They'll be junk in a year anyway as their
> sensors become obsolete.
>
> Also, has anyone wondered why with DSLRs the mfrs can't simply upgrade the
> chips, rather than requiring an entire new body be purchased? The current
> business practices are akin to requiring everyone to upgrade film bodies
> every time Fuji reformulates Velvia!
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark B.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-06-2004
"Jerry McG" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I'm a D1x owner, watching the thing rather quickly migrate to the land of
> obsolete junk. I am beginning to wonder if it isn't more prudent to shoot
> with consumer level bodies like the D100, and now the D70, since none of
> them will be worth beans soon anyway. The large metal framed bodies like

the
> Nikon D1 series and the Canon EOS I digitals may be robust, like their old
> film ancestors, but so what? They'll be junk in a year anyway as their
> sensors become obsolete.
>
> Also, has anyone wondered why with DSLRs the mfrs can't simply upgrade the
> chips, rather than requiring an entire new body be purchased? The current
> business practices are akin to requiring everyone to upgrade film bodies
> every time Fuji reformulates Velvia!
>
>


New sensors will typically require an upgraded processing system. Software
can be upgraded of course, but it's not as easy to upgrade the hardware.
The 10D has a completely new processor even though it's still a 6mp 1.3x
sensor like the D60.

Mark


 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-06-2004
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
"JT" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>My wedding was done on a 10D - and I'm *extremely* pleased with the results.
>Although the results may be better with a 1D (or whatever is the current
>high line Canon), I doubt I would notice a difference or become disappointed
>in the future by viewing wedding pics taken with a 1D.


The 1D is not "better" than the 10D, as far as image quality is
concerned. The 10D has higher resolution, and lower noise.

The 1D is a high-end camera because of its ruggedness, weatherproofing,
high-speed flash sync (1/500), burst mode, etc. Things you may need for
certain kinds of shooting, but not higher quality images, AOTBE.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-06-2004
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, I,
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>"JT" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>My wedding was done on a 10D - and I'm *extremely* pleased with the results.
>>Although the results may be better with a 1D (or whatever is the current
>>high line Canon), I doubt I would notice a difference or become disappointed
>>in the future by viewing wedding pics taken with a 1D.


>The 1D is not "better" than the 10D, as far as image quality is
>concerned. The 10D has higher resolution, and lower noise.


I should have wrote, "The 10D has higher absolute resolution, ...",
meaning it resolves the focal plane better per unit of area (besides
having more pixels than the 1D).
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The beginning of the end for consumer DSLRs? Bruce Digital Photography 80 10-31-2010 07:54 AM
Battery types for consumer DSLRs; 3rd party lenses? PossumTrot Digital Photography 42 07-17-2007 10:04 PM
Re:Original Brand Ink Is More Expensive Than Vintage Champagne SayThe UK Consumer Association Heidy Computer Information 3 04-06-2007 11:54 PM
Re:Original Brand Ink Is More Expensive Than Vintage Champagne SayThe UK Consumer Association Heidy NZ Computing 3 04-06-2007 11:54 PM
Whay do I lose viewstate in my usercontrol Gerald Klein ASP .Net 0 01-24-2004 04:32 AM



Advertisments