Why are DSLRs so huge ?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Alfred Molon, Apr 10, 2004.

  1. Not even close.
     
    Simon Gardner, Apr 11, 2004
    #81
    1. Advertisements

  2. - In article <JX4ec.905$%>,
    -
    - > As I said before, you would need to buy multiple cameras,
    - > but this is typical of the pro in any case.
     
    Simon Gardner, Apr 11, 2004
    #82
    1. Advertisements

  3. I have used Canon 100 mm Macro lenses for about 20 years. I will do as you
    say, but I would be flabergasted if my insect photography could be sorted
    with a "Nikon Coolpix". And what a silly moniker.
    You're the one making such claims, not me mate.
     
    Simon Gardner, Apr 11, 2004
    #83
  4. Alfred Molon

    stewy Guest

    Well yes they do.

    The cynical would say that if you7re spending all that moolah, you need to
    feel you're getting your money's worth, however I feel the manufacturers
    feel it will be abused by pros (dropped, knocked and wet) so they add a lot
    of padding to protect the vital innards
     
    stewy, Apr 11, 2004
    #84
  5. Whilst it may, or may not, be as good as an SLR with a specialist lens,
    it's certainly worth a look. Sorry you don't like the name! The coverage
    is about 17mm field width. Less working distance than you will have, of
    course.
    No. There is clearly no such lens, so you would need a selection of
    lenses if your needs covered that range, whether zoom or fixed.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 11, 2004
    #85
  6. I have certainly seen Pros with two cameras - one wide angle and one zoom
    or telephoto. The "10" was your figure, not mine. I be the Pros who have
    to carry their own kit would welcome a weight reduction, though.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 11, 2004
    #86
  7. If it isn't as good as an SLR with a specialist lens, it certainly isn't
    worth a look. That's the point - which you keep insisting on missing.
    Really really naff. But no mind. If it does the business, I'll live with
    it.
    That's a particularly problem with dragonflies. In fact with those
    bastards, a 200mm Macro lens is better. Even some of the Lepidoptra are
    somewhat flighty.
    That's right.

    Again you insist on missing the point.
    That's right.

    That's why a DSLR with interchangeable lenses is the best tool for the
    job. Knew you'd get there in the end.
     
    Simon Gardner, Apr 11, 2004
    #87
  8. Yup. It was common in Fleet Street 30 years ago with wet film cameras.
    Still is. Note - still SLRs with interchangeable lenses.
    Nope. It was yours.
     
    Simon Gardner, Apr 11, 2004
    #88
  9. []


    No, it's the best tool for _your_ job, not for everyone.

    You didn't comment on the potential weight reduction, though. Wouldn't
    that be welcomed?

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 11, 2004
    #89
  10. []
    No, I said "multiple". You said "10".

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 11, 2004
    #90
  11. Alfred Molon

    leo Guest

    You are absolutely right that not everyone needs DSLR. In terms of video
    cameras, we are not suggesting everyone needs a camera from Sony or JVC's
    professional line that weigh more than 15lbs and likewise, you don't expect
    to watch a show shot with a palm size camcorder.

    The point is with the current CCD design, even the new DSLR is bearly
    reaching the quality of 35mm film. And professionals need the best and even
    the top of line Canon 1Ds, which is a full frame 35mm can't provide the
    necessary quality and resolution for some jobs.

    You're also right that camera should be smaller if the technology warrants
    it. We have to wait for the next wave of sensor innovation to see minature
    cameras that don't compromise quality. As the noisy A2 picture shows, a
    small camera isn't for everyone.
     
    leo, Apr 11, 2004
    #91
  12. Alfred Molon

    Skip M Guest

    That kind of argues against the claim of obsolescence you made earlier,
    doesn't it?

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Apr 11, 2004
    #92
  13. Alfred Molon

    Skip M Guest

    I've never seen a pro using multiple fixed lens cameras, if, indeed I've
    seen them with multiple cameras, it has been with SLRs. In fact, the only
    time I saw a pro with a fixed lens camera, it was at his daughter's birthday
    party.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Apr 11, 2004
    #93

  14. I think there have been two distinct markets in the short history of digital
    photgraphy, as the camera manufacturers see it. The casual snapshooters, and
    the pro/advanced amateurs. The former group is by far the bulk of camera
    sales, so the trend has been smaller and smaller with more and more gimmicks
    (live preview, movie-mode etc) to pull that group in. Quality is sacrificed
    in the point-and-shoots in favor of smaller size and more gimmicks because
    that market cares less about image quality and more about convenience and
    automation. Traditionally, that's how the manufacturers have always done
    best at selling to that huge market (film or digital), and it's where they
    have made the most money.

    The pros and advanced amateurs came out of the film SLR ranks, and when
    digital image quality got good enough (recently) that much smaller group of
    photographers was addressed by (very expensive) digital versions of the
    cameras they had been using for 50 years. That group was used to (and
    wanted) an optical viewfinder, a familiar form-factor, and interchangeable
    lenses, so that's what the manufacturers gave them. Canon and Nikon led the
    way in dSLRs, just as they have in film SLRs, and it should therefore be no
    surprise that the dSLRs look and feel similar to the cameras that the
    emerging dSLR market has been using all this time.

    So now we apparently have a new market segment emerging; and I think it's
    made up primarily of the point-and-shooters who want the best of both
    worlds -- size/gimmicks/convenience AND high quality images. Can the
    manufacturers do that, and adequately address that market? Of course they
    can, with perhaps only a few compromises. But bear in mind that digital
    photography is only 5 or 6 years old, really. Market analysis is difficult
    in this rapidly changing market and the photography landscape is littered
    with camera companies that misjudged the market. Add in a typical 2-3 year
    product development cycle, and it seems pretty apparent that
    surprise/disgust that such a p&s / dSLR hybrid doesn't exist yet is probably
    very premature. Hell, the dSLR market isn't even mature yet, IMHO.

    It looks to me like that new middle-market is for real and growing, and I
    have no doubt that ultimately, Canon or Nikon, maybe Olympus, will bring
    David's ideal camera to a Best Buy close to him. It's just gonna take some
    time. Will such a middle-of-the-road camera have interchangeable lenses? I
    don't know, but it seems to me that Canon/Nikon will be reluctant to pull
    people out of the interchangeable-lens dSLR ranks since that will
    cannabilize their lens sales. Likewise I doubt that 4/3 will ever get much
    traction in the marketplace for the same reason. The market demand for 4/3
    would have to be pretty strong for those two photographic behemoths to
    switch gears and risk a whole new product line.

    IMHO..


    HMc
     
    Howard McCollister, Apr 11, 2004
    #94
  15. Alfred Molon

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    No, there were egrets posing in front of small maples that were changing
    color. No time to think about shooting photographers, although I often
    do.
    --
     
    JPS, Apr 11, 2004
    #95
  16. (zbzbzb) wrote in @mb-m03.news.cs.com:
    Smaller - but not all that small.

    I am used to the Pentax brand of SLR.
    Comfortable size cameras generally.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Apr 11, 2004
    #96
  17. No, people are buying obsolescent things all the time - most PCs and
    digital goods fall into that category.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 11, 2004
    #97
  18. I never said I had seen them with multiple fixed-lens cameras, either.
    Simply that I had seen them with multiple bodies, and typically with
    wide-angle and telephoto lenses, be they zoom or fixed focal length.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 11, 2004
    #98
  19. Alfred Molon

    Tom Monego Guest

    Maybe not 10 but to cover a sports game most photographers use 3, short
    telphoto, medium telephoto, long telephoto on tripod ( OK that one is not
    around the neck) then they would also carry a wide angle lens to switch out,
    most would have prime focal length lenses not zooms especially at the long
    telephoto range. Can't have less because cahnging lenses means missing the
    action.

    Tom
     
    Tom Monego, Apr 11, 2004
    #99
  20. Alfred Molon

    Tom Monego Guest

    I was shooting a dance group, I was using film with a Leica and a 90mm lens,
    400 speed film, was very frustrated best I could do was 1/125 at f2,8.
    Photographers were fairly far back, the 90 was barely adequate. The guy next to
    me had a D-1 and a 10D 2 Canon zooms one was an IS, could use 1600 and could
    shoot at a 250 at f4 and isolate the dancers. My god I was envious.


    Tom
     
    Tom Monego, Apr 11, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.