Sometimes I wish...

[[Hyuni]]

That consumer grade bodies were never made.
I don't mean any malice against anyone that has it nor am I knocking on the quality of photos it can take. I just don't like how they are being marketed as an upgrade to a P&S, when it's literally in a league of it's own.

My main gripe is that they've become affordable enough so many misinformed buyers don't really think things through before they buy. I see or get asked countless, "Should I buy the D40/40x/60 or the XT/XTi/Xs/XSi" questions without any reason WHY they are jumping into the world of DSLRs, WHAT they want to take photos of, and IF they realize a DSLR isn't nearly as simple nor comfortable to carry around as a P&S.

There's too many people buying DSLRs for the wrong reasons.
1) They automatically assume a DSLR will give them great pictures 100% of the time
2) They buy it as a gadget of the month or because everyone else is getting one
3) They buy it because they think 'sel-ca' photos will come out better

1) There's a LOT of features and functions that aren't on a regular P&S that allows taking one-of-a-kind pictures, but if they don't take the time to learn them, their pictures will most likely always be under/over exposed, blurry, mis focused, or just plain boring.
2) Sure it's great to pop it out at your next family gathering or when you're hanging out with friends, but it's uncomfortable to carry around, costs more, and it's harder to use for quick shots like you do with your P&S. Most times, these groups of people buy it, and within a month, it becomes nothing more than a large paperweight.
3) Don't get me wrong, DSLRs are GREAT for portraits, but when you're taking a photo of yourself... that's another story. It's big and bulky compared to your regular P&S, so angling it at the 45 degree angle is not easy nor recommended. Plus, even if you manage to get a decent shot, the picture will be so clear that it will show all your blemishes. For 'sel-ca' pictures, the BEST would be the old-school instant polaroid cameras. Those make ANYONE look good because they always come out overexposed and not only hide your blemishes, but makes your face look smaller. heh

It's such a diservice to the camera to be used as some kind of glorified P&S camera. That's like buying a BMW 7 series and slapping on $10 tires, the cheapest fuel, and only driving it around the neighborhood. You'll never realize it's potential.It's dishearting to see people blaming cameras or lenses for their lack of functions or features when the source of their problem is an unwillingness to invest the time and effort into learning about photography.

I'm still a newbie at photography, but I'm constantly learning new things, expanding my boundaries, experimenting, and thus resulting in gaining a more creative eye to capture something unique that is usually overlooked.

The reason I got into DSLRs is because I've always been interested in photography (I was an early P&S adopter and brought it with me everywhere I went), but never had enough disposible cash to invest more into my hobby. Now that I started my career, I'm indulging in the limitless opportunities in this amazing art ;)

Here's my updated response to what everyone's been saying.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=7684130&postcount=23

[Marloon]

and now, you've caused hell on POTN again....

and i for one, am going to start it by saying i totally disagree... if people want to buy a consumer grade camera... let them. i dont know why you are being so whiny about it.

-people ask which camera they should buy because they have a lack of information... that and they generally want to take better pictures... thats good enough a reason.

-DSLRs are really simple to use these days. slap on the scene modes and the user is going to have a great day shooting!

There's too many people buying DSLRs for the wrong reasons.
1) They automatically assume a DSLR will give them great pictures 100% of the time
- they assumed correctly. better noise capabilities, better AF accuracy, more accurate colors...

1) There's a LOT of features and functions that aren't on a regular P&S that allows taking one-of-a-kind pictures, but if they don't take the time to learn them, their pictures will most likely always be under/over exposed, blurry, mis focused, or just plain boring.

pictures will not really look under/over exposed, blurry, mis focused, or just plain boring...

with today's camera advancements, theres a high chance that a lot of shots, even noob shots are keepers! and didnt you start off like this? heck? didnt we all start like this?! then we learned the rules and then we modified the rules...

i'm too lazy to continue on...

;7682222']That consumer grade bodies were never made.
I don't mean any malice against anyone that has it nor am I knocking on the quality of photos it can take. I just don't like how they are being marketed as an upgrade to a P&S, when it's literally in a league of it's own.

My main gripe is that they've become affordable enough so many misinformed buyers don't really think things through before they buy. I see or get asked countless, "Should I buy the D40/40x/60 or the XT/XTi/Xs/XSi" questions without any reason WHY they are jumping into the world of DSLRs, WHAT they want to take photos of, and IF they realize a DSLR isn't nearly as simple nor comfortable to carry around as a P&S.

There's too many people buying DSLRs for the wrong reasons.
1) They automatically assume a DSLR will give them great pictures 100% of the time
2) They buy it as a gadget of the month or because everyone else is getting one
3) They buy it because they think 'sel-ca' photos will come out better

1) There's a LOT of features and functions that aren't on a regular P&S that allows taking one-of-a-kind pictures, but if they don't take the time to learn them, their pictures will most likely always be under/over exposed, blurry, mis focused, or just plain boring.
2) Sure it's great to pop it out at your next family gathering or when you're hanging out with friends, but it's uncomfortable to carry around, costs more, and it's harder to use for quick shots like you do with your P&S. Most times, these groups of people buy it, and within a month, it becomes nothing more than a large paperweight.
3) Don't get me wrong, DSLRs are GREAT for portraits, but when you're taking a photo of yourself... that's another story. It's big and bulky compared to your regular P&S, so angling it at the 45 degree angle is not easy nor recommended. Plus, even if you manage to get a decent shot, the picture will be so clear that it will show all your blemishes. For 'sel-ca' pictures, the BEST would be the old-school instant polaroid cameras. Those make ANYONE look good because they always come out overexposed and not only hide your blemishes, but makes your face look smaller. heh

It's such a diservice to the camera to be used as some kind of glorified P&S camera. That's like buying a BMW 7 series and slapping on $10 tires, the cheapest fuel, and only driving it around the neighborhood. You'll never realize it's potential.It's dishearting to see people blaming cameras or lenses for their lack of functions or features when the source of their problem is an unwillingness to invest the time and effort into learning about photography.

I'm still a newbie at photography, but I'm constantly learning new things, expanding my boundaries, experimenting, and thus resulting in gaining a more creative eye to capture something unique that is usually overlooked.

The reason I got into DSLRs is because I've always been interested in photography (I was an early P&S adopter and brought it with me everywhere I went), but never had enough disposible cash to invest more into my hobby. Now that I started my career, I'm indulging in the limitless opportunities in this amazing art ;)

[JeffreyG]

I think the Rebel line is a great thing. Nobody is born a photographer, and if the price of entry to even try it was high then there would be no hobbiests.

I think a lot of people buy entry level dSLR bodies expecting some automated quantum leap from their P&S. A lot are probably satisfied by the lack of noise at ISO400 and the lack of shutter lag and take it no further.

Some are bitten by the bug and really get into it.

What is the downside? Most people end up with a camera that is better than a P&S even when used mindlessly in auto mode, and some become serious hobbiests.

[HSK]

This will not end well...

[HSK]

But i'll be honest with you, not one person I know that owns a "consumer" grade DSLR camera, uses it in the way that you've described. As a glorified P&S. They all try utilize it for creativity and to its' abilities.

[timnosenzo]

I think the Rebel line is a great thing. Nobody is born a photographer, and if the price of entry to even try it was high then there would be no hobbiests.

I think a lot of people buy entry level dSLR bodies expecting some automated quantum leap from their P&S. A lot are probably satisfied by the lack of noise at ISO400 and the lack of shutter lag and take it no further.

Some are bitten by the bug and really get into it.

What is the downside? Most people end up with a camera that is better than a P&S even when used mindlessly in auto mode, and some become serious hobbiests.

I agree 100%. And for what it's worth, this is nothing new with digital SLR's, people were doing the same thing with film SLRs.

[artyman]

I would have thought that the SuperZoom bridge cameras would be the logical upgrade for a P&S user that wanted to upgrade without going the whole hog of DSLR. Mind you as a 'consumer' model user I'm glad there was an affordable replacement entry into DSLR after my OM1n

[DC Fan]

Blame George Eastman. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Eastman) He's the man who made photography cheap and popular. If Eastman hadn't made roll film and Kodak Brownies in 1895, photography would still be in the hands of artists and experts who used real, glass-plate cameras.

[KjellG]

;7682222']My main gripe is that they've become affordable enough so many misinformed buyers don't really think things through before they buy.

This goes for... every product in the world.

;7682222']There's too many people buying DSLRs for the wrong reasons.
1) They automatically assume a DSLR will give them great pictures 100% of the time
2) They buy it as a gadget of the month or because everyone else is getting one
3) They buy it because they think 'sel-ca' photos will come out better

1) There's a LOT of features and functions that aren't on a regular P&S that allows taking one-of-a-kind pictures, but if they don't take the time to learn them, their pictures will most likely always be under/over exposed, blurry, mis focused, or just plain boring.
2) Sure it's great to pop it out at your next family gathering or when you're hanging out with friends, but it's uncomfortable to carry around, costs more, and it's harder to use for quick shots like you do with your P&S. Most times, these groups of people buy it, and within a month, it becomes nothing more than a large paperweight.
3) Don't get me wrong, DSLRs are GREAT for portraits, but when you're taking a photo of yourself... that's another story. It's big and bulky compared to your regular P&S, so angling it at the 45 degree angle is not easy nor recommended. Plus, even if you manage to get a decent shot, the picture will be so clear that it will show all your blemishes. For 'sel-ca' pictures, the BEST would be the old-school instant polaroid cameras. Those make ANYONE look good because they always come out overexposed and not only hide your blemishes, but makes your face look smaller. heh

1) I wouldn't make that sweeping generalization, alot of people buy dSLRS for the higher ISO they can use or the better FPS (people documenting events, concerts, their kids sportsgames, e.t.c.). Features the P&S often lack.

2) And? I'm sure everyone has something in their homes they bought and later isn't using. Be glad their money is "supporting the industry".

3) I'm not sure what kind of people we're talking about here.

;7682222']It's such a diservice to the camera to be used as some kind of glorified P&S camera. That's like buying a BMW 7 series and slapping on $10 tires, the cheapest fuel, and only driving it around the neighborhood. You'll never realize it's potential.It's dishearting to see people blaming cameras or lenses for their lack of functions or features when the source of their problem is an unwillingness to invest the time and effort into learning about photography.

Yes I'm sure the dSLRS are crying about it every night.

;7682222']I'm still a newbie at photography, but I'm constantly learning new things, expanding my boundaries, experimenting, and thus resulting in gaining a more creative eye to capture something unique that is usually overlooked.

Good for you. I hope you're treating every device you have with a similar philosophy. Not everyone does, and I don't see why anyone would care if they do.

[smorter]

I am of the opinion that a quality FF camera like a 5D or 5D Mark II should be the very first camera that anyone buys. I mean, whenever a photographer is asked what they wish they started off with, nobody says "a 450D" or something like that, yet Rebels and the xxD series are the most often recommended cameras for newbies.

After using a FF camera, I realise that everyone who told me to get a 400D when I first started was actually doing me a huge disservice. Cameras like the xxxD and even xxD series hold back your development as a photographer and really should not be recommended at all except in this instances of where budget is a really big issue.

[SBWorking]

I am of the opinion that a quality FF camera like a 5D or 5D Mark II should be the very first camera that anyone buys. I mean, whenever a photographer is asked what they wish they started off with, nobody says "a 450D" or something like that, yet Rebels and the xxD series are the most often recommended cameras for newbies.

Spoken like a true 5D owner ! ;)

[malla1962]

Who cares what people buy, its a free world.;)

[guntoter]

Since upgrading from P&S to DSLR's (2.5 yrs ago), I have studied constantly. These cameras will do so much with the proper lenses, settings, etc. Sure is a fun hobby/business.

Lately I have come acroos quite a few people who use their new DSLR lke a P&S (auto only). When you talk about Aperture, SS, ISO, etc, they are looking at you with a blank stare.

My urge is to help them understand what a good tool they have. All most all of them seem very interested. However, many of them never follow through. NO PROBLEM. As long as they feel good with their purchase, it is fine. Any of them that I can impart some knowledge, I am willing, because I am grateful for all the knowledge that others have imparted to me. Some of the main things I recommend to them is to get on POTN, read their owners manual to get familiar with their toy, buy Understanding Exposure, and practice, practice, practice.

It is all good.

[DAMphyne]

I am of the opinion that a quality FF camera like a 5D or 5D Mark II should be the very first camera that anyone buys. I mean, whenever a photographer is asked what they wish they started off with, nobody says "a 450D" or something like that, yet Rebels and the xxD series are the most often recommended cameras for newbies.

After using a FF camera, I realise that everyone who told me to get a 400D when I first started was actually doing me a huge disservice. Cameras like the xxxD and even xxD series hold back your development as a photographer and really should not be recommended at all except in this instances of where budget is a really big issue.


I am of the opinion that,
1) this statement is "Elitist", and has nothing to do with reality.:rolleyes:
2) in no way does the APS-C DSLR hold back development.:confused:
3) Budget is' Always' an issue.:cool:

[ebann]

Heck, I would prefer a consumer DSLR + cheap lens over any P&S.

[bauerman]

Consumers in general over-buy in a lot of areas - photography equipment simply being one of them.

I know a guy that drives a Humvee to work everyday on pavement, owns a garage full of tools he can't use properly, purchased HAM radio equipment he can only power up, bought a telescope that he cannot even look at the moon in and so forth and so on. He buys top of the line not because he needs it, but because it is top of the line or he had a whim about it one afternoon.

It's a shame that there are tens of thousands of DSLR's out there in Auto mode indefinitely as you and I know what they are capable of when used to their fullest extent. This pleases Canon like punch though - because now these people that probably should be shooting with A590's are buying lenses. Canon is not a charitable organization by any means....they want our dollars.

[GoneTomorrow]

So what if someone buys a DSLR on an impulse. True, many have limited knowledge about DSLRs going in, but most will come to terms with what using a DSLR entails and actually become competent amateur photographers, those who don't will just sell them and return to their p&s. And the consumer level SLR is not new - it was same with film SLRs. I have 25 year old Nikon FM that meters and sets shutters speed automatically; there is no manual adjustment and the 50mm lens for it is even marked with various weather related symbols on the aperture rings. It was marketed towards the same sort of people. It was designed specifically for a new SLR user, just like the Rebel line up is. Therefore it can't really be argued that p&s users shouldn't get an entry level DSLR, because if you think about, they are "glorified p&s cameras." The Rebels have the four-way directional buttons on them just like p&s cameras do, and scene modes, green-square auto mode, integrated flash, all things mostly absent in FF bodies.

So consumer grade DSLRs aren't diluting and sandbagging DSLRs; as someone just said they bolster the industry. And besides, I would not want DSLRs to be esoteric and elitist.

[smorter]

Spoken like a true 5D owner ! ;)

hehe I am being a bit of a 5D snob aren't I :D

I am of the opinion that,
1) this statement is "Elitist", and has nothing to do with reality.:rolleyes:
2) in no way does the APS-C DSLR hold back development.:confused:
3) Budget is' Always' an issue.:cool:

Forgive my defensiveness here but if you can be bothered checking my post history from 2+ months ago, you'll see that even before I got a 5D2 I was extolling the virtues of a FF camera

APS-C cameras have the following issues (to me) imo:
- Being able to use lenses at their intended FOV's
- IQ is just not as good (not just noise but also issues like the "feel" of the file
- DOF control
- Hard to get the edge bokeh (FF users will know what this is...those ovalish type OOF highlights that appear to curve around the edges of the frame)

Of course cameras like a 5D are a tad more expensive than a new 450D, however my recommendation is to save a bit longer to get these items. Cameras are not a short term consumption good, they do last for quite a while.

[yogestee]

Ever thought many people buy a DSLR for the right reason?? A long time experienced SLR film user for example.. Maybe they are just testing the water buying a xxxD body..

The wonderful thing about consumerism is, we have a choice.. You started using a P&S.. Did anyone tell you you are buying a DSLR for the wrong reason??

Maybe it's time you give photography the flick and take up golf or fishing!!

[snyderman]

A rebuttle of sorts:

1) Some guys spend $499 every golf seaons for the latest-greatest driver in hopes of lowering their score only to find out it's not the club, but the guy swinging it.

2) My buddy spent nearly $3 large on a Carlos Santana model Paul Reed Smith guitar to get that 'Carlos' tone. Sadly, he sounds more like Juan Valedez than Carlos Santana!

3) Camera gear is both a blessing and a curse. Most of my shots are bad, IMO. To the average parent, they are fantastic and want them.

4) Why do you have a worry in the world about whether or not 'consumer-grade' DSLR is available to the masses? Think everybody should have a P&S until they're ... what? I'm sorry, but having difficulties getting your point.

dave

[Kingsofronin]

hehe I am being a bit of a 5D snob aren't I :D



Forgive my defensiveness here but if you can be bothered checking my post history from 2+ months ago, you'll see that even before I got a 5D2 I was extolling the virtues of a FF camera

APS-C cameras have the following issues (to me) imo:
- Being able to use lenses at their intended FOV's
- IQ is just not as good (not just noise but also issues like the "feel" of the file
- DOF control
- Hard to get the edge bokeh (FF users will know what this is...those ovalish type OOF highlights that appear to curve around the edges of the frame)

Of course cameras like a 5D are a tad more expensive than a new 450D, however my recommendation is to save a bit longer to get these items. Cameras are not a short term consumption good, they do last for quite a while.


Dude. If youre such a FF snob why dont you go Hasselblad? Take it a step higher.

What youre saying about us APS-C users can be said about you as well my friend. Yes, that's right. MF>FF.

People like you need to understand something. When someone looks at your portfolio to hire you for a job, they don't CARE what camera you use. All they care about is your ability to capture moments. And my EOS 20D makes capturing moments easier for me. And I'm very happy with it. I doubt I will ever go FF unless my 20D dies and the 5D drops to under 800 bucks.

Oh yeah. You're only a college student, yet you have thousands and thousands and THOUSANDS of dollars in gear. Not all of us have rich parents. Some of us have to save a WHILE. If I wanted to buy a 5D MK II I'd have to save half of every paycheck for about 6 months.

[Kingsofronin]

And what the (explicative) is the "feel" of a file?

[[Hyuni]]

My apologies, everyone. My comment is not about consumer grade cameras, but the refusal to learn even the basic knowledge of DSLRs from some of their owners.

I knew my post wouldn't be popular, but it irks me when people with a Nikon D40 tell me they bought it mainly because it was such a 'bargain'; play around with mine, review some pictures I took with it and say, "My DSLR sucks! It doesn't take pictures anywhere close to the quality of yours! I should have gotten a Canon (or a D90, etc) instead!"

The main reason why they don't get a decent picture is not because their DSLR isn't capable, but they never learn some basics like the exposure triangle nor have never heard about basic composition tips like the rule of thirds. I've tried explaining it, and like another poster said, they are very interested, but don't seem to follow through by actually going home and learning. So now I just smile, and thank them for their indirect compliment and gently take my out of their hands before they have a chance to drop it.

What bothers me the MOST is those same users believe they are profficient enough and when they ask to 'see' my camera, they handle my camera like some toy. They take dozens or even hundreds of pictures that I end up deleting because they are just bad or boring. Besides the quality of the image, there's no difference between taking the shot they did with a P&S opposed to a DSLR. I noticed a lot of D40/60 owners use their camera to take shots of themselves. Some have actually taken MY camera, held in upside-down with one hand on the barrel of the lens, raise it high and with the other hand press the shutter release with one finger to take a picture of themselves with MY camera. At least those who don't own a DSLR appreciate that it costs a pretty penny and take utmost care when holding it.

Sure they can do whatever they want with their camera. Great, it's helping the economy. But the real danger is when they feel like they deserve to grab my camera out of my hands and treat it like they do with theirs.

[tharmsen]

I'm still trying to figure out why you care what other people do with their money. Who cares if someone buys a DSLR for the wrong reasons. Who cares if they use it a like a P&S. How on earth does that effect you in any why what-so-ever?

I think you should focus less on what others are doing and focus more on your own affairs. You'll get further in life and with far less frustration.

[Tammy T]

;7682222']That consumer grade bodies were never made.

My main gripe is that they've become affordable enough so many misinformed buyers don't really think things through before they buy.

Those consumer grade bodies are also for people

- who want to "test the water" before getting serious about spending money on this hobby. That's what I did. Without trying out an XSi and the kit lens first, I would have NEVER had enough courage to spend money on L lenses or, recently, a 50D.

- who have LOTS of TALENT and not much money. Check out the "Rebel XSi / 450D Users Unite" thread for many wonderful photos.

But more importantly, without the sales of those consumer grade bodies, Canon (or Nikon, Sony, etc.) may not make enough profit to invest in research and development for professional or semi-professional bodies like the xD and xxD series. You might have had to pay double for your 40D and got less features and worse IQ.

So cheer up :D and be grateful of buyers of consumer grade bodies (even impulsive and impatient buyers who never follow through or learn).

P.S.: Just to clarify that I am not included in that "LOTS of TALENT" group :D

[tharmsen]

I know a guy that drives a Humvee to work everyday on pavement,
Well, at least he got that right. Humvee's are definitely better on pavement than they are off road.

Now, if you said he bought a Jeep Rubicon and had it all tricked out for rock crawling... and he drove it on the road I might have to cringe. As is stands, I get a kick out of all the crazy Humvee drivers that think their cars are off road worthy and I get to take pictures of them being pulled off wet grass by Jeeps.

:D

[smorter]

Oh yeah. You're only a college student, yet you have thousands and thousands and THOUSANDS of dollars in gear. Not all of us have rich parents. Some of us have to save a WHILE. If I wanted to buy a 5D MK II I'd have to save half of every paycheck for about 6 months.

Are you kidding me? Who are you confusing me with? Not that it matters but yeah I'm a college student (not sure how you knew this) but my parents are immigrants who own a tiny shop in a crappy suburb. I'm not sure where you get the impression that I have rich parents, I purchased every item brand new through legit means, except for the 430EX I have which was a present.

I have a lot of gear because I save up, and don't waste money on peripherals that I don't need personally (e.g. battery grips, fong dongs, poor value lenses like the 17-85 IS or 10-22 (though I do have useless lenses (hence bad value to me) like the 18-55 IS and 50 f/1.8) etc.)

btw I don't think MF cameras are appropriate for the photography I usually do (high ISO event photography with flash)

[HoldDaMayo]

Those consumer grade bodies are also for people

- who want to "test the water" before getting serious about spending money on this hobby. That's what I did. Without trying out an XSi and the kit lens first, I would have NEVER had enough courage to spend money on L lenses or, recently, a 50D.

- who have LOTS of TALENT and not much money. Check out the "Rebel XSi / 450D Users Unite" thread for many wonderful photos.

But more importantly, without the sales of those consumer grade bodies, Canon (or Nikon, Sony, etc.) may not make enough profit to invest in research and development for professional or semi-professional bodies like the xD and xxD series. You might have had to pay double for your 40D and got less features and worse IQ.

So cheer up :D and be grateful of buyers of consumer grade bodies (even impulsive and impatient buyers who never follow through or learn).

P.S.: Just to clarify that I am not included in that "LOTS of TALENT" group :D

fantastic point.

[smorter]

^Not necessarily, as competition is fierce in the low end, and profit margins are presumably very low.

I think it's the upper market where the profits are made (e.g. 1DsIII which costs more than a 1D3 and 5D2 combined (even though a 1D3 with a 5D2 sensor is essentially the 1Ds3)

[smorter]

And what the (explicative) is the "feel" of a file?
I guess I would say it's the vibe or intangible quality of a photograph that's come out of the camera, but different people have different definitions

[cdifoto]

;7682222']That consumer grade bodies were never made.
I don't mean any malice against anyone that has it nor am I knocking on the quality of photos it can take. I just don't like how they are being marketed as an upgrade to a P&S, when it's literally in a league of it's own.

My main gripe is that they've become affordable enough so many misinformed buyers don't really think things through before they buy. I see or get asked countless, "Should I buy the D40/40x/60 or the XT/XTi/Xs/XSi" questions without any reason WHY they are jumping into the world of DSLRs, WHAT they want to take photos of, and IF they realize a DSLR isn't nearly as simple nor comfortable to carry around as a P&S.

There's too many people buying DSLRs for the wrong reasons.
1) They automatically assume a DSLR will give them great pictures 100% of the time
2) They buy it as a gadget of the month or because everyone else is getting one
3) They buy it because they think 'sel-ca' photos will come out better

1) There's a LOT of features and functions that aren't on a regular P&S that allows taking one-of-a-kind pictures, but if they don't take the time to learn them, their pictures will most likely always be under/over exposed, blurry, mis focused, or just plain boring.
2) Sure it's great to pop it out at your next family gathering or when you're hanging out with friends, but it's uncomfortable to carry around, costs more, and it's harder to use for quick shots like you do with your P&S. Most times, these groups of people buy it, and within a month, it becomes nothing more than a large paperweight.
3) Don't get me wrong, DSLRs are GREAT for portraits, but when you're taking a photo of yourself... that's another story. It's big and bulky compared to your regular P&S, so angling it at the 45 degree angle is not easy nor recommended. Plus, even if you manage to get a decent shot, the picture will be so clear that it will show all your blemishes. For 'sel-ca' pictures, the BEST would be the old-school instant polaroid cameras. Those make ANYONE look good because they always come out overexposed and not only hide your blemishes, but makes your face look smaller. heh

It's such a diservice to the camera to be used as some kind of glorified P&S camera. That's like buying a BMW 7 series and slapping on $10 tires, the cheapest fuel, and only driving it around the neighborhood. You'll never realize it's potential.It's dishearting to see people blaming cameras or lenses for their lack of functions or features when the source of their problem is an unwillingness to invest the time and effort into learning about photography.

I'm still a newbie at photography, but I'm constantly learning new things, expanding my boundaries, experimenting, and thus resulting in gaining a more creative eye to capture something unique that is usually overlooked.

The reason I got into DSLRs is because I've always been interested in photography (I was an early P&S adopter and brought it with me everywhere I went), but never had enough disposible cash to invest more into my hobby. Now that I started my career, I'm indulging in the limitless opportunities in this amazing art ;)
The fact that they're asking means they are thinking things through before they buy.

[Kingsofronin]

Are you kidding me? Who are you confusing me with? My parents are immigrants who own a tiny shop in a crappy suburb. I'm not sure where you get the impression that I have rich parents.

I have a lot of gear because I save up, and don't waste money on peripherals that I don't need personally (e.g. battery grips, fong dongs etc.)

btw I don't think MF cameras are appropriate for the photography I usually do (high ISO event photography with flash)



Well. Im just saying. Most college students here are poor as crap. Yet you have 7k+ to spend on your photo gear. My main point was that you dont need a 3000 dollar camera to make great photo's.

[smorter]

I don't know...I guess it's because I have a job (teaching at uni(Head TA for accounting (the irony...) :D)) and I find I take nicer photos with better gear.

[HSK]

Those consumer grade bodies are also for people

- who want to "test the water" before getting serious about spending money on this hobby. That's what I did. Without trying out an XSi and the kit lens first, I would have NEVER had enough courage to spend money on L lenses or, recently, a 50D.



This totally applies to me. I wanted to try photography, wanted to learn. I researched about it and had the basics down before hand. But there was no way i was going to splash out on pro-sumer or a full frame just to satisfy my curiosity. Now I'm still learning, but I've got a better understanding on what I need, what i need to save and what the next step is with my hobby. So I say consumer bodies are great.

[cdifoto]

I would have thought that the SuperZoom bridge cameras would be the logical upgrade for a P&S user that wanted to upgrade without going the whole hog of DSLR. Mind you as a 'consumer' model user I'm glad there was an affordable replacement entry into DSLR after my OM1n
They would be if they were anything like a digital SLR. They're just a digital SLR shaped P&S though....complete with the same lack of responsiveness and mediocre autofocus.

[cdifoto]

;7684130']My apologies, everyone. My comment is not about consumer grade cameras, but the refusal to learn even the basic knowledge of DSLRs from some of their owners.

I knew my post wouldn't be popular, but it irks me when people with a Nikon D40 tell me they bought it mainly because it was such a 'bargain'; play around with mine, review some pictures I took with it and say, "My DSLR sucks! It doesn't take pictures anywhere close to the quality of yours! I should have gotten a Canon (or a D90, etc) instead!"

The main reason why they don't get a decent picture is not because their DSLR isn't capable, but they never learn some basics like the exposure triangle nor have never heard about basic composition tips like the rule of thirds. I've tried explaining it, and like another poster said, they are very interested, but don't seem to follow through by actually going home and learning. So now I just smile, and thank them for their indirect compliment and gently take my out of their hands before they have a chance to drop it.

What bothers me the MOST is those same users believe they are profficient enough and when they ask to 'see' my camera, they handle my camera like some toy. They take dozens or even hundreds of pictures that I end up deleting because they are just bad or boring. Besides the quality of the image, there's no difference between taking the shot they did with a P&S opposed to a DSLR. I noticed a lot of D40/60 owners use their camera to take shots of themselves. Some have actually taken MY camera, held in upside-down with one hand on the barrel of the lens, raise it high and with the other hand press the shutter release with one finger to take a picture of themselves with MY camera. At least those who don't own a DSLR appreciate that it costs a pretty penny and take utmost care when holding it.

Sure they can do whatever they want with their camera. Great, it's helping the economy. But the real danger is when they feel like they deserve to grab my camera out of my hands and treat it like they do with theirs.
Sounds to me like you just need to learn to keep a better grip on your own camera. At the very least - insure it. :rolleyes:

[cdifoto]

^Not necessarily, as competition is fierce in the low end, and profit margins are presumably very low.

I think it's the upper market where the profits are made (e.g. 1DsIII which costs more than a 1D3 and 5D2 combined (even though a 1D3 with a 5D2 sensor is essentially the 1Ds3)
The real money is in calculators and the ink and paper for inkjets.

[[Hyuni]]

Those consumer grade bodies are also for people
But more importantly, without the sales of those consumer grade bodies, Canon (or Nikon, Sony, etc.) may not make enough profit to invest in research and development for professional or semi-professional bodies like the xD and xxD series. You might have had to pay double for your 40D and got less features and worse IQ.

P.S.: Just to clarify that I am not included in that "LOTS of TALENT" group :D
I always thought Canon made most of their profit from their 'official' accessories like hoods, tripod collars, remotes, bags, and such. haha They can get away with highway robbery when we're such captive audiences heh

I hope I was able to convey that I'm not 'whining' about photographers who use consumer grade bodies, but people who expect the show-stopping photos without any knowledge of how to, and feel like they have the right to grab my camera and handle it like a toy.

I'm not included in the "LOTS of TALENT" group either, but we're all on this forum to aspire to be :D

I have to thank smorter for taking the brunt of the backlash. I feel like I tiptoed my way out of a public verbal beatdown :cool:

[Wilt]

;7682222']That consumer grade bodies were never made.
I don't mean any malice against anyone that has it nor am I knocking on the quality of photos it can take. I just don't like how they are being marketed as an upgrade to a P&S, when it's literally in a league of it's own.

My main gripe is that they've become affordable enough so many misinformed buyers don't really think things through before they buy. I see or get asked countless, "Should I buy the D40/40x/60 or the XT/XTi/Xs/XSi" questions without any reason WHY they are jumping into the world of DSLRs, WHAT they want to take photos of, and IF they realize a DSLR isn't nearly as simple nor comfortable to carry around as a P&S.

There's too many people buying DSLRs for the wrong reasons.

This has been true for over 30 years, when the Canon AE-1 was launched along with the Nikon FE, the Olympus OM-10, the Pentax ME, the Minolta 370, and on and on and on!

Back then, you could get into an SLR for much less than a week's pay

[Tammy T]

;7684443']I always thought Canon made most of their profit from their 'official' accessories like hoods, tripod collars, remotes, bags, and such. haha

Exactly ... That XSi kit led me to buying an extra Canon battery, a Canon bag, a Canon remote switch, 4 more Canon lenses, a bunch of Canon lens hoods, and a few other Canon things I can't remember. That's how Canon make their money, luring us into the trap using lower cost bodies :D

Just like car dealers. They don't make much money from selling cars, but mostly from extended warranty, rust proof warranty, oil change, repairs and other services. But they must first sell cars to get other businesses.

Please don't feel offended. I was just offering another point of view to calm you down and cheer you up :D

[S.Horton]

They make them because there is demand.

They create demand by advertising 'pro' results for the masses.

[charliec]

Just for the record, anyone that complains about a company they use getting sales is foolish.

This isn't an elite club. It's a business. Canon, Nikon, and every other camera manufacturer out there sells products to make money.

I've seen a lot of people on here act like they're a high school senior and Canon was their sweetheart, and they just found out she went on a date with a freshman and now they want to fight. Get over it. She gets around. That's her thing.

Canon doesn't know you. They aren't committed to YOU as an individual. If anyone, they're committed to their shareholders.

I don't care if Canon wants to sell cameras to people that use them for door stops. As long as they maintain their quality, reputation, and competitiveness, ALL OF WHICH REQUIRE SUBSTANTIAL R&D FUNDING WHICH THE CONSUMER MODEL CAMERAS HELP TO SUPPLY, I think we will all continue to benefit as buyers of their products.

Just my 2¢.

[Brett]

I have first-hand experience with this very topic, and it occurred only two days ago.

I shot film SLRs for years. Got married, family, etc. and didn't shoot for a long time. Decided to get back to the hobby, and digital seemed to make sense. I did a ton of research, and bought an XSi.

I quickly outgrew it, because I was so used to film. I needed FF, so I bought a 5D. AHA, now I'm seeing what I expect.

My cousin had played around with my XSi at Christmas, and without really knowing what he wanted or why, he decided to buy one. I just saw him Sunday; he says "I bought the same camera you have!". I told him about the 5D, and he didn't understand why I'd already bought another camera. "Oh, so you're telling me the XSi sucks now?".

I asked to see some of what he'd shot. The majority are shot in green box, with a few indoors, no flash shot in Sport mode "because the kids were moving fast". "I shot this one in A-Dep because I wanted both kids in focus", etc. Tons of motion blur (although he has a surprisingly steady hand at 1/8 ). I said "bump up your ISO and you'll get better shutter speeds". Blank stare.

He's a smart guy, but his camera is used as a "glorified P&S".

One last thing that kind of got my goat. Looking at some of my images, he said "the camera really does make anyone look like a good photographer". :rolleyes:

[Wilt]

;7684130']My apologies, everyone. My comment is not about consumer grade cameras, but the refusal to learn even the basic knowledge of DSLRs from some of their owners.


A camera is a tool.

Do you get upset if someone spends $3k on a fancy stove for their pretty and remodelled kitchen, and all they do with it is boil water to cook spaghetti with canned sauce, but they know little else about cooking gourmet food?

Look at all the people with PCs who can scarcely do more then turn them on or off, and log into the internet. Is it upsetting that the PC is a tool that does little more than what they need of it?

Is it a shame when someone cannot take greater advantage of the potential of the items that they buy? Yes. Is it something you or I should be bothered about? No, it's their money to waste!

[Kingsofronin]

Haha. What a kick in the nuts.

[Grimes]

Consumer grade cameras are a great thing. There is practically ZERO chance that a person thinking of upgrading from a P&S is going to consider popping for a $2700 5D2.

More people are exposed to photgraphy by having consumer grade cameras, and that is always and awesome thing. Perhaps some may never leave the "green box" but there are going to be those that do!

[cdifoto]

My first SLR was an XT aka 350D. I didn't take it out of Av mode until shortly before I sold it. I sold it because I couldn't use the button layout in Manual effectively. Otherwise I'd probably still have it.

[tkbslc]

Yet another camera/photog snob thread. What else is new? Although the 40D that the OP has is not a very big horse to be looking down from.

[outbri]

I am of the opinion that a quality FF camera like a 5D or 5D Mark II should be the very first camera that anyone buys. I mean, whenever a photographer is asked what they wish they started off with, nobody says "a 450D" or something like that, yet Rebels and the xxD series are the most often recommended cameras for newbies.

After using a FF camera, I realise that everyone who told me to get a 400D when I first started was actually doing me a huge disservice. Cameras like the xxxD and even xxD series hold back your development as a photographer and really should not be recommended at all except in this instances of where budget is a really big issue.

Here's the problem: FF's are 3-5 times as expensive as a 450D, and their values drop like a rock. I'm just getting into photography, so I'm going to get a cheaper body and invest in glass that I'll have when I do get a FF eventually. To someone starting out, spending $1500-$2500 on a body that is going to be worth $100 is 5-10 years is not economical.

[narci]

I don't see the point of this rant.

People buy stuff they never fully utilize everyday.

See that Dodge Viper going speed limit?

See that laptop with quad core cpu?

See that 10 bedroom house for a family of 2?

The dSLR world is not much different then the car sales business. You see a model you like, then you think, for a few thousand more, I can get the next model, or you start off with a civic, you like Hondas so much your next car is an Accord, then next thing you know you'll be driving a RL.

[Dragos Jianu]

1) Why do you care how other people spend their own money
2) Why does it bother you that DSLRs have become so affordable that you don't have to be filthy rich to own an "artist's tool"
3) Why does it upset you that other people take simple family memories using anything better then crappy P&S? Do you think that shooting your newborn with anything better then a crappy cellphone camera is not worth it since they are not art ?

PS: you do realize that most of the luxury sport cars on the streets aren't owned by race track drivers right ? :)

[cdifoto]

Those fancy expensive NICE 5 start hotels aren't owned by architects and/or interior designers either. Which sad considering only architects and interior designers are the only ones who can truly appreciate the design...

[DDCSD]

^Not necessarily, as competition is fierce in the low end, and profit margins are presumably very low.

I think it's the upper market where the profits are made (e.g. 1DsIII which costs more than a 1D3 and 5D2 combined (even though a 1D3 with a 5D2 sensor is essentially the 1Ds3)

Trust me, Canon makes more on those 5,000 Rebels that they sell for every one 1DsMkIII.

The big money is in everything else though. They make their money on lenses and accessories. Just like the fact that it costs more to make an Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 than what they are sold for. The money is in accessories, licensing and games for those systems.

[Karl Johnston]

;7682222']

There's too many people buying DSLRs for the wrong reasons.


So because your opinion is that you can't buy a DSLR if you dont use it "the right way" (your way) you seem to figure thats how everyone else representing the art of photography should see things too...Ah i see...What size is your straightjacket?

Consumer grade cameras are a great thing. There is practically ZERO chance that a person thinking of upgrading from a P&S is going to consider popping for a $2700 5D2.


Actually I did just that. The thing is; consumer grade cameras are not bad cameras because they're cheap or inexpensive...as long as its full manual and you can learn on it, the only thing that diffrentiates between consumer grade and pro grade is 1) reliability, 2) sturdiness, 3) consistent results.

[DAMphyne]

I have first-hand experience with this very topic, and it occurred only two days ago.

I shot film SLRs for years. Got married, family, etc. and didn't shoot for a long time. Decided to get back to the hobby, and digital seemed to make sense. I did a ton of research, and bought an XSi.

I quickly outgrew it, because I was so used to film. I needed FF, so I bought a 5D. AHA, now I'm seeing what I expect.

My cousin had played around with my XSi at Christmas, and without really knowing what he wanted or why, he decided to buy one. I just saw him Sunday; he says "I bought the same camera you have!". I told him about the 5D, and he didn't understand why I'd already bought another camera. "Oh, so you're telling me the XSi sucks now?".

I asked to see some of what he'd shot. The majority are shot in green box, with a few indoors, no flash shot in Sport mode "because the kids were moving fast". "I shot this one in A-Dep because I wanted both kids in focus", etc. Tons of motion blur (although he has a surprisingly steady hand at 1/8 ). I said "bump up your ISO and you'll get better shutter speeds". Blank stare.

He's a smart guy, but his camera is used as a "glorified P&S".

One last thing that kind of got my goat. Looking at some of my images, he said "the camera really does make anyone look like a good photographer". :rolleyes:


Now let me get this straight,
You up-graded to a FF because your APS-C camera was producing crappy pictures.
Your relative gets an XTI and you also think his pictures are crappy because of,
1) The in-experienced shooter keeps his POS camera on Auto Zone
2) He doesn't have a clue how to use it even if it was any good.

Then, he pisses you off because He thinks you get better pictures with your very good camera.
Did I miss something?:confused:

[DennisW1]

I am of the opinion that a quality FF camera like a 5D or 5D Mark II should be the very first camera that anyone buys. I mean, whenever a photographer is asked what they wish they started off with, nobody says "a 450D" or something like that, yet Rebels and the xxD series are the most often recommended cameras for newbies.

After using a FF camera, I realise that everyone who told me to get a 400D when I first started was actually doing me a huge disservice. Cameras like the xxxD and even xxD series hold back your development as a photographer and really should not be recommended at all except in this instances of where budget is a really big issue.

I started off with a Brownie. Seeing as I was a kid I probably broke it somewhere along the line, I honestly don't remember.
My first real attempts at taking photographs was with my dad's Praktica 35mm. He also had an Argus C3 but I never could figure that one out. (I still have the Argus, among some of the things of my father's). it didn't even have an in-camera meter, you learned how to figure exposures the hard way. (remember hand-held light meters?)
When dad got tired of me "borrowing" his camera all the time he bought me a Vivitar 35mm kit, body/2 lenses/flash/case. And damn! It had TTL match-needle metering!! I used that until I discovered the Canon AE-1 and its been all Canon ever since.
And I do own a 400D. I find it to be an excellent carry-around camera instead of lugging around either my MkIII or MkIIn when I just want to take snapshots of my grandkids. Would I take it out to the next motorsports event I shoot? Probably not unless one of my 1D bodies failed, and it would be a bit harder to work with in that environment, but not impossible.

I think the possibility is being overlooked by the OP that buying such an entry-level DSLR may well be the springboard for some people to discover they have a real love and talent for photography and the begining of a lifelong passion. If it accomplishes that then I think making it easier and more economical for someone to take a "step up" from the P&S world without taking out a second mortgage is a good thing.

Sorry, but I'll disagree that having a camera on along the lines of say, a 400D is going to hinder your development as a photographer as opposed to a 5D or something similar. The ability to see with your mind and translate that vision onto film or digital media isn't going to be determined by how expensive of a camera you own. At worst, the image quality may not be quite up to the IQ of a more costly rig, but the ability to capture the moment is solely in the mind and eyes of the photographer. I've seen far too many people who consider themselves pros or serious hobbyists with tons of the most expensive gear available that couldn't produce images that were as interesting to look at as some that people with real talent took with their $100 P&S cameras.

[DAMphyne]

DennisW1,
Hear-Hear!

[snyderman]

;7684130']Some have actually taken MY camera, held in upside-down with one hand on the barrel of the lens, raise it high and with the other hand press the shutter release with one finger to take a picture of themselves with MY camera. At least those who don't own a DSLR appreciate that it costs a pretty penny and take utmost care when holding it.

Sure they can do whatever they want with their camera. Great, it's helping the economy. But the real danger is when they feel like they deserve to grab my camera out of my hands and treat it like they do with theirs.

You need to find a different set of people to hang out with. Like one of my nearly $3000 guitars ... you ain't TOUCHING it unless, a) I know you; b) I know you are a player; c) I know that YOU know you're playing a $3k guitar and if you break it, you bought it.

Same thing with my camera gear. I certainly don't hand my camera to somebody and let them 'play' with it. No WAY!!!

dave

[yogestee]

Sorry, but I'll disagree that having a camera on along the lines of say, a 400D is going to hinder your development as a photographer as opposed to a 5D or something similar. The ability to see with your mind and translate that vision onto film or digital media isn't going to be determined by how expensive of a camera you own. At worst, the image quality may not be quite up to the IQ of a more costly rig, but the ability to capture the moment is solely in the mind and eyes of the photographer. I've seen far too many people who consider themselves pros or serious hobbyists with tons of the most expensive gear available that couldn't produce images that were as interesting to look at as some that people with real talent took with their $100 P&S cameras.

Dennis,,so eloquently spoken and 100% true.. Being able to "see" the image before you trip the shutter is a skill that takes practice and years to develop.. It has nothing to do with equipment but your mental vision..

When I got my first job in photography my boss and mentor explained to me I should learn to look "square" and not rely on my peripheral vision.. Look to see where the shadows are and how the light falls.. After 30 years I still practice this..

[Algorithm]

OP, your attitude is unfortunate and sad. I am one beginner of many and it's tough to develop my skills when I wonder if folks watching me shoot and viewing my results share your judgemental and poisonous attitude. I wonder, how many beginners are turned off to sharing their work due to posts like this one? Thankfully the rest of the members of this forum have positive and helpful attitudes that I've found immensely informative.

Please, get some perspective, and keep your mouth shut. Thanks.

[Brett]

Now let me get this straight,
You up-graded to a FF because your APS-C camera was producing crappy pictures.
Your relative gets an XTI and you also think his pictures are crappy because of,
1) The in-experienced shooter keeps his POS camera on Auto Zone
2) He doesn't have a clue how to use it even if it was any good.

Then, he pisses you off because He thinks you get better pictures with your very good camera.
Did I miss something?:confused:

I upgraded to FF because APS-C isn't like shooting 35mm I was used to, with regards to lens choices and DoF. The XSi produces very nice images, and I have some real keepers from that camera, some of which I've printed and been very happy with.

He actually took some nice shots. Again, the camera is fine. But he uses is as a P&S, and has no idea about exposure whatsoever. I don't begrudge him that.

I just didn't like that he looked at my images, liked them (there was more than one "WOW"), and then gives credit to the camera. It's like that old quote about telling the cook at the end of the night that her pans made a nice meal. ;)

[DAMphyne]

Didn't you expect that your new camera would get a few "Wows"?

I get it, he doesn't have a clue why your pictures are so good and the compliment should have gone to you, not the new camera you bought because it takes better pictures.

[Tunneruk]

I have a work colleague that is thinking of selling his (Less than 1000 clicks) XT because he can't justify owning a piece of kit that's uncomfortable to carry and which he is able to utilize about 10% of it's features. he's now bought a little Canon Ixus silver box and he's happy as Larry. He bought the XT thinking he would get amazing photographs from it, However he has only enough interest to shoot in Auto ................... We all know how that always turns out.

I've had my 400D for about 3 years and around 50-60000 clicks. I'm about a month away from being able to get myself a 5D and some L glass. I know it'll be a big step but I think if I'd not had the 400D first then I might never be where I am now.


I can't wait to get the 5D ............. It's such a great camera It'll be able to take fantastic shots so easily!! ............................ [spoken sarcastically]

[Wilt]

I've had my 400D for about 3 years and around 50-60000 clicks. I'm about a month away from being able to get myself a 5D and some L glass. I know it'll be a big step but I think if I'd not had the 400D first then I might never be where I am now.


I can't wait to get the 5D ............. It's such a great camera It'll be able to take fantastic shots so easily!! ............................ [spoken sarcastically]

since you have your initial learning under your belt, slow down with the trigger finger to really learn the artistry, not merely the mechanics of photography. [Spoken not sarcastically}

[[Hyuni]]

I have a work colleague that is thinking of selling his (Less than 1000 clicks) XT because he can't justify owning a piece of kit that's uncomfortable to carry and which he is able to utilize about 10% of it's features. he's now bought a little Canon Ixus silver box and he's happy as Larry. He bought the XT thinking he would get amazing photographs from it, However he has only enough interest to shoot in Auto ................... We all know how that always turns out.

That is EXACTLY what I'm talking about.
Your friend was smart enough think about selling it. Most people who are in the same predicament don't realize that their DSLR that isn't getting much use is already a sunk cost. Better to sell it now, than have it collecting dust in their house.
The same people then have this false sense of confidence and believe they know how to handle DSLRs because they own one, regardless of if they know how to use it, and then proceed to mess with mine.

Sure I can decline and have done exactly that in many cases, but most people have the decency to understand that the camera should not be treated as a toy. Unfortunately, from what I experienced, specifically those people whom I'm speaking of, do not.

btw, congrats on your upcoming 5D :)

[cdifoto]

;7693703']Better to sell it now, than have it collecting dust in their house.

Why is it better? It's not usually a business decision so there's really no harm in keeping a sunk cost rather than taking a further loss. At least keeping it means having a really nice Point & Shoot always on hand.


;7693703']The same people then have this false sense of confidence and believe they know how to handle DSLRs because they own one, regardless of if they know how to use it, and then proceed to mess with mine.

Sure I can decline and have done exactly that in many cases, but most people have the decency to understand that the camera should not be treated as a toy. Unfortunately, from what I experienced, specifically those people whom I'm speaking of, do not.

So make it a rule that NO ONE touches your camera. Period. I don't see the problem if you do that. So instead of coming on a forum and whining, grow a spine for the real world.

[[Hyuni]]

^
Time value of money. Money to spend now is better than money to spend later due to devaluation of the dollar, inflation, and other little factors.
Not selling it when you don't use it is not allowing you to spend the money you could have if you sold the camera and 'invested' it in something else.
His friend's P&S is his IXUS. He said the XT was too bulky and uncomfortable to bring it to take quick pics.

Anyways, I have been whining. I'm satisfied that most understand where I'm coming from. That'll be all

[cdifoto]

;7693770']^
Time value of money. Money to spend now is better than money to spend later due to devaluation of the dollar, inflation, and other little factors.
Not selling it when you don't use it is not allowing you to spend the money you could have if you sold the camera and 'invested' it in something else.
His friend's P&S is his IXUS. He said the XT was too bulky and uncomfortable to bring it to take quick pics.

Anyways, I have been whining. I'm satisfied that most understand where I'm coming from. That'll be all
I understand where you're coming from. Your premise is essentially "if you're not a photographer, you don't deserve a nice camera." I feel that such a notion is absurd, selfish, and misguided.

Non-photographers buying up cameras is what makes cameras more affordable to photographers.

[Wilt]

;7693770']^
Time value of money. Money to spend now is better than money to spend later due to devaluation of the dollar, inflation, and other little factors.
Not selling it when you don't use it is not allowing you to spend the money you could have if you sold the camera and 'invested' it in something else.
His friend's P&S is his IXUS. He said the XT was too bulky and uncomfortable to bring it to take quick pics.

Anyways, I have been whining. I'm satisfied that most understand where I'm coming from. That'll be all

...and in the case of dSLR, not selling it now (when you don't use it) is going to result in LOST VALUE on the used market, because of the market attributing a declining value because newer products are available! dSLR depreciates at close to 35% per annum, losing 1/2 of its value every two years. $8k 1Ds bodies have sold on POTN for $1k after 6 years.

[cdifoto]

...and in the case of dSLR, not selling it now (when you don't use it) is going to result in LOST VALUE on the used market, because of the market attributing a declining value because newer products are available! dSLR depreciates at close to 35% per annum, losing 1/2 of its value every two years. $8k 1Ds bodies have sold on POTN for $1k after 6 years.
You can only lose money if you sell it. If you keep it, it's not a lost value (other than money already spent). Even as a P&S in full auto, a digital SLR is quite a capable camera...and if money isn't an issue the same as it wasn't when the camera was initially purchased, keeping it is harmless even if it's rarely ever used.

[DAMphyne]

Boy, that guy sure stirred the crap.
I'm just glad he's not looking over my shoulder.
Everybody knows what's best for somebody else.
Durn do-gooders.

[Wilt]

You can only lose money if you sell it. If you keep it, it's not a lost value (other than money already spent). Even as a P&S in full auto, a digital SLR is quite a capable camera...and if money isn't an issue the same as it wasn't when the camera was initially purchased, keeping it is harmless even if it's rarely ever used.

Truth, a camera does not get worse with time, it merely loses its resale potential. A 20D makes just as excellent shots as it did four years ago. It is merely worth 25% of its original value when sold.

[cdifoto]

Truth, a camera does not get worse with time, it merely loses its resale potential. A 20D makes just as excellent shots as it did four years ago. It is merely worth 25% of its original value when sold.
Yeah. As a buyer I love it. I don't buy new bodies anymore.

[Wilt]

Once in a while I get the thought about buying a 20D as a spare, at a price which is 1/2 of the price that I sold my 20D for, over a year ago!

[cdifoto]

Yeah they're laughably cheap now. :D

[yogestee]

Truth, a camera does not get worse with time, it merely loses its resale potential. A 20D makes just as excellent shots as it did four years ago. It is merely worth 25% of its original value when sold.

but still worth every cent of it's full price if kept!!

[kasey]

I am of the opinion that the more ppl using DSLR, the better it is:

1) It makes me somewhat less guilty of the cost I spent on photographic equipment. Even those auto-mode people are spending a thousand bucks on theirs. Yay!

2) The bigger the market, means more products, more variety, more availability, more sales, more competition, faster development and lower cost. I would prefer a electronic store devoting 100% of its shelf space on DSLR equipment rather then the current 30% or so.

3) Sometimes tourists like to ask me to take photos for them, assuming that the guy with the big camera takes better photos. If everyone has a DSLR. the probability of them asking me would then be lower. Also, I would much prefer to take photo for others using a DLSR rather then a useless piece of P&S - slow and inaccurate.

That brings me to P&S. Personally I am quite disguested by the new crop of P&S cameras. Nowadays they come with bonus features that are rather imaginative:

1) Smile detection - I am quite surprise that this actually work very well
2) Auto-sliming feature - it makes your face look smaller by applying darker tone towards the edge of your face/body
3) Auto Facial blemish reduction - it takes away your pimples, blackheads and scars
4) Vivid color - which is basically increased saturation and contrast

Camera manufactuerers keep coming up with 12+ mp P&S that has comes with these jokes with the same sensor size. I think everyone who "upgraded" their P&S from around the 8 mp range (thats where I think the limit of those peanut size sensor is) is seriously being cheated. That doesn't disgust me, what disgust me is that they actually love these "features".

[cdifoto]

I am of the opinion that the more ppl using DSLR, the better it is:

1) It makes me somewhat less guilty of the cost I spent on photographic equipment. Even those auto-mode people are spending a thousand bucks on theirs. Yay!

2) The bigger the market, means more products, more variety, more availability, more sales, more competition, faster development and lower cost. I would prefer a electronic store devoting 100% of its shelf space on DSLR equipment rather then the current 30% or so.

3) Sometimes tourists like to ask me to take photos for them, assuming that the guy with the big camera takes better photos. If everyone has a DSLR. the probability of them asking me would then be lower. Also, I would much prefer to take photo for others using a DLSR rather then a useless piece of P&S - slow and inaccurate.

That brings me to P&S. Personally I am quite disguested by the new crop of P&S cameras. Nowadays they come with bonus features that are rather imaginative:

1) Smile detection - I am quite surprise that this actually work very well
2) Auto-sliming feature - it makes your face look smaller by applying darker tone towards the edge of your face/body
3) Auto Facial blemish reduction - it takes away your pimples, blackheads and scars
4) Vivid color - which is basically increased saturation and contrast

Camera manufactuerers keep coming up with 12+ mp P&S that has comes with these jokes with the same sensor size. I think everyone who "upgraded" their P&S from around the 8 mp range (thats where I think the limit of those peanut size sensor is) is seriously being cheated. That doesn't disgust me, what disgust me is that they actually love these "features".
I love face detection.

You may now proceed to vomit.

[DDCSD]

3) Sometimes tourists like to ask me to take photos for them, assuming that the guy with the big camera takes better photos. If everyone has a DSLR. the probability of them asking me would then be lower. Also, I would much prefer to take photo for others using a DLSR rather then a useless piece of P&S - slow and inaccurate.

People look me funny when I fiddle with the P&S like a guy born with 5 thumbs on each hand. :lol:

[Brett]

Didn't you expect that your new camera would get a few "Wows"?

No, I didn't. I bought a FF camera because I wanted what it offered. I never expected to impress others with the "difference" between it and the shots produced by my (since sold) XSi.

I get it, he doesn't have a clue why your pictures are so good and the compliment should have gone to you, not the new camera you bought because it takes better pictures.

I'm not interested in his compliments. I do photography as a hobby for me, not to please my relatives. And I don't think the camera takes "better" pictures...just more like the images I took on 35mm film.

He can thank the camera itself all he wants. I know better. :D

[Tunneruk]

No, I didn't. I bought a FF camera because I wanted what it offered. I never expected to impress others with the "difference" between it and the shots produced by my (since sold) XSi.



I'm not interested in his compliments. I do photography as a hobby for me, not to please my relatives. And I don't think the camera takes "better" pictures...just more like the images I took on 35mm film.

He can thank the camera itself all he wants. I know better. :D

Brett, I may be wrong but I think you may have taken the comments made by DAMphyne out of context, If I'm wrong then please tell me to go boil my own head!

[chauncey]

Are we overlooking the fact that all those "non-photographers" out there buying that high end gear is what supports R&D and lowers the cost to us due to volume sales.

[DAMphyne]

Are we overlooking the fact that all those "non-photographers" out there buying that high end gear is what supports R&D and lowers the cost to us due to volume sales.

bw!

[Tunneruk]

since you have your initial learning under your belt, slow down with the trigger finger to really learn the artistry, not merely the mechanics of photography. [Spoken not sarcastically}

I absolutely couldn't agree more, I'd like to think that technically I've become quite a competent shooter, However there's no substitute for experience with regards to composition, the art of capturing the atmosphere with the camera.

We have a photographer that comes to my place of work once a week, He's about 60, Been shooting all his life. I think if he was honest he would say he's not that interested in digital photography, He shoots everything at ISO1600 (even in broad daylight) so his images are noisy as hell. It's fair to say that the digital age has left him behind, He does what he needs to on a day to day basis (With his 150000 click XTi) so in that respect he get's the job done. I've spent many hours chatting to him about photography and discussing my shots. What he has and allways will is the developed eye for a photograph, I'll show him a print that I'm really proud of, thinking that I've really nailed it. He'll often tale a look and point out the slightest of details which albeit slight will transform my photo, He has the knack of seeing what I miss (As I'm sure many people of this parish would do also)

So yes you are right, It's time I stepped back and really try to learn the 'art' of creating a beautiful image.

[Wilt]

Tunneruk, I'm very glad that you have the ability to recognize the value of improving compositional skills, that simply taking tons of photos is not the way to attain the perfect photo.

Digital is terrific for the immediate feedback, and the learning opportunity that affords. But digital also too readily fosters the run and gun approach to photography, simply because 'exposures are free'. One does read too often about 25000 photos per year going thru a digital, I've even heard about 60000! Makes you wonder about just how incredibly good the legendary film photographers might have become if they could have run 25k-60k photos thru their cameras in a year, rather than being constrained by film and processing expense. :rolleyes:

[20droger]

Obviously, this is a topic about which very few would have a strong opinion.

Personally, I find the initial concept of the OP to be offensive. He can love and use FF cameras all he wants, but it does not give him the right to belittle others who use what he considers to be lesser cameras.

I would love to go out and buy a nice EOS-1Ds Mark III to play with. I would also love it if my 401K wasn't so deep in the toilet that it's now fertilizer in my leach field! Not all of us can afford a nice FF shooter; some of us would rather eat.

[Wilt]

We have a photographer that comes to my place of work once a week, He's about 60, Been shooting all his life. I think if he was honest he would say he's not that interested in digital photography, He shoots everything at ISO1600 (even in broad daylight) so his images are noisy as hell. It's fair to say that the digital age has left him behind

A somewhat different perspective on this gentleman's outlook about noisy ISO 1600...Pre WWII, films were incredibly grainy particularly with fast emulsions. I remember shooting ASA 1250 Royal Pan film in a press camera for night high school football coverage 40 years ago as the school newspaper photo editor, and my very fuzzy memory seems to recall almost seeing grains with the naked eye! So to your 60 year old, ISO 1600 noise is still better than the film grain which he became accustomed to seeing!