Seems funny...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by BG250, Jan 5, 2005.

  1. BG250

    BG250 Guest

    With film, I'd shoot with cheap used manual cameras. I had cheap Ricoh
    bodies with lenses I purchased from ebay for under $100. It worked. I looked
    at AF bodies over $600 and said, "no way would I spend that kind of cash".
    Enter digital. I think it was $500 I spent on the Epson photoPC in '96. $900
    on the 2mp Kodak DC260 in '99 The dRebel is introduced at $1,000 with lens.
    Seems a no brainer, so I bought one.

    Just seems funny when put into perspective. Still have the Ricoh XR-7 with
    motor winder and autoflash. Don't get used much now!
    bg
    BG250, Jan 5, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. BG250

    emski Guest


    >
    > Just seems funny when put into perspective. Still have the Ricoh XR-7 with
    > motor winder and autoflash. Don't get used much now!


    and you looking on passing cars and think ...no way, I have to spent 20K to
    by such a crap ? let's take a walk :))
    mark
    emski, Jan 5, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. BG250

    Fyimo Guest

    I really thought that the DSLR market wouldn't move much until the
    prices of DSLR bodies came down to where similar film bodies were
    priced. Boy was I wrong as people are buying the 10D and now the 20D
    like they are candy and willing to pay at least twice as much as for a
    similar film bodies in terms of build quality and features.
    I know because I have one

    Art
    Fyimo, Jan 5, 2005
    #3
  4. BG250

    bob Guest

    "Fyimo" <> wrote in news:1104937488.526927.245820
    @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

    > I really thought that the DSLR market wouldn't move much until the
    > prices of DSLR bodies came down to where similar film bodies were
    > priced. Boy was I wrong


    [snip]

    I think another variable that people consider is the cost of film and
    processing.

    But what value can you place on being able to edit the photos?

    Bob
    bob, Jan 5, 2005
    #4
  5. BG250

    Fyimo Guest

    I never thought I would say this after only two months of shooting
    digital with a 20D & 10D but I never will shoot film again. I gave away
    a bunch of film last week to my daughter and I will be giving the rest
    away in the near future.
    I love digital and I take way more pictures then I did with film. I
    spend a lot more time analyzing the pictures as I work on them in
    Photoshop then I did looking at the pictures when they came back from
    the film lab.
    I guess I will keep my Canon 1N only because they aren't worth anything
    anymore. I'll keep it like I did my record player that I use to impress
    my grandkids. yes sound actually did come from that black pieces of
    vinyl. I suspect film will be like the vinyl record in the near future.
    Art
    Fyimo, Jan 5, 2005
    #5
  6. On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 07:55:31 -0500, BG250 wrote:
    > With film, I'd shoot with cheap used manual cameras. I had cheap Ricoh
    > bodies with lenses I purchased from ebay for under $100. It worked. I looked
    > at AF bodies over $600 and said, "no way would I spend that kind of cash".
    > Enter digital. I think it was $500 I spent on the Epson photoPC in '96. $900
    > on the 2mp Kodak DC260 in '99 The dRebel is introduced at $1,000 with lens.
    > Seems a no brainer, so I bought one.
    >
    > Just seems funny when put into perspective.


    Well, the 'perspective' is: The $300 (IIRC) that I paid for
    a 35MM SLR back in 1963 is approx. $4000 now.
    (I figure inflation = 2X every decade...)

    Jonesy
    Allodoxaphobia, Jan 5, 2005
    #6
  7. BG250

    Fyimo Guest

    Yea, but the Pro film camera body the Canon 1V with power winder sells
    for $1800 today and the top of the line Canon digital sells for $8,000.
    I think there is a differential for digital and it would take a lot of
    savings for film and processing to save 6K.
    We are paying Pro camera prices as compared to film for consumer level
    camera bodies in terms of build quality, weather sealing, and less then
    full size 35mm sensor.
    I love my 20D but it's not built like my Canon 1N film camera. I'm just
    saying that if all was equal a 20D should cost as much as the EOS 3 did
    not nearly twice as much.

    Art
    Fyimo, Jan 5, 2005
    #7
  8. BG250

    Guest Guest

    20k? I wish most cars were this price.

    "emski" <> wrote in message
    news:ZWRCd.10954$...
    >
    > >
    > > Just seems funny when put into perspective. Still have the Ricoh XR-7

    with
    > > motor winder and autoflash. Don't get used much now!

    >
    > and you looking on passing cars and think ...no way, I have to spent 20K

    to
    > by such a crap ? let's take a walk :))
    > mark
    >
    >
    Guest, Jan 5, 2005
    #8
  9. This is an interesting point.

    I love my 20D but I wonder how solid EOS cameras and EF lenses are compared
    to the FD versions (mind you I only have one decent EF lens the other being
    the 18-55 kit lens).

    Both my FTb and A1 feel a lot more solid, and the old FD lenses too.

    I guess this is because metal is much more obvious in construction, modern
    plastics can have very high performance.

    It would be interesting to see some "I dropped my equipment.." / "..used my
    camera to fight off a rabid dog" and it worked fine stories.


    Cheers


    Lester


    "Fyimo" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Yea, but the Pro film camera body the Canon 1V with power winder sells
    > for $1800 today and the top of the line Canon digital sells for $8,000.
    > I think there is a differential for digital and it would take a lot of
    > savings for film and processing to save 6K.
    > We are paying Pro camera prices as compared to film for consumer level
    > camera bodies in terms of build quality, weather sealing, and less then
    > full size 35mm sensor.
    > I love my 20D but it's not built like my Canon 1N film camera. I'm just
    > saying that if all was equal a 20D should cost as much as the EOS 3 did
    > not nearly twice as much.
    >
    > Art
    >
    Lester Wareham, Jan 9, 2005
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim Yohn

    Wireless Adapter Seems Capped at 1300 MTU

    Jim Yohn, Dec 13, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    5,338
    Carey Holzman
    Dec 13, 2004
  2. =?Utf-8?B?UGF1bDI3?=

    Network printer....seems to time-out ??

    =?Utf-8?B?UGF1bDI3?=, Jan 11, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    6,086
  3. Ron
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    427
    Tom Betz
    Jul 23, 2005
  4. The Rev [MCT]
    Replies:
    42
    Views:
    1,485
  5. joevan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    605
    joevan
    Jun 29, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page