For People Who Love Cameras

[MikeG50]

I love cameras. You love cameras. We all (mostly) love cameras, or we wouldn't be here in a forum devoted to them.

Yet there is strange behavior encountered in these pages. An awful lot of advice is given to "don't buy it". "Invest in glass". "Why would you trade?"

Let's get some facts established:

1. If you love cameras, you get a special delight in owning the very best camera that you can afford. There is nothing wrong with this.

2. Of course, you want to put the best lenses you can afford on your best camera. Fortunately, there is a wonderful dichotomy in photography in your equipment purchasing strategy. For long term, your purchase lenses. For short term, your purchase cameras. No doubt, great glass does wonders, but there has been leaps and bounds in camera technology over the last 10 years which have had significant effect on a photographers abilities and results.

3. If money were no object, if you love cameras, your best strategy would be to upgrade your camera every time the manufacturer brings forth new technology. A reputable manufacturer can't afford to bring forth new camera models that aren't improvements over the models they are designed to replace. They have to protect their own reputations with each new model they introduce.

4. If a camera has a 3 year technology curve, you are better off to take ownership and advantage of the first 3 years rather than years 3,4, and 5 IF you can afford it or IF you are willing to make the financial sacrifice required.

5. Reputable manufacturers will make occasional mistakes. If they make very many, switch companies.

6. Canon isn't perfect, but they are highly reputable, highly capable, and worthy of a lot of trust.

7. If Canon comes out with a new camera, and you want it, buy it if you can afford it. Odds are about 98 out of 100 that you will be very glad you did (my estimate only).

I don't work for Canon and I don't know anyone that does. I have just gotten a little fed up with the jealousy, envy, self justification, and arrogance that passes for wisdom on these pages. Some people seem to love throwing water on other people's fancy.

That said, there are mountains of good advice on these pages from which I have learned a lot. Thanks go to all of you.

Mike

[bohdank]

Now that you have convinced yourself to get the latest, greatest, go fot it ;-)

[DocFrankenstein]

It's amazing what canon would resort to when sales are dropping. They now are planting rogue posters in the forum to increase sales!

PS: If you're for real, why don't you post a link to your amazing portfolio which canon's latest and greatest allowed you to achieve.

[twofruitz]

It's great to see the kids posting their English propaganda assignments on the internet for everyone to analysis and provide feedback.

[Er1kksen]

panties in a bunch, anyone?

They sounded like perfectly reasonable points to me, when they're applied to your average photography enthusiast.

[DocFrankenstein]

panties in a bunch, anyone?

They sounded like perfectly reasonable points to me, when they're applied to your average photography enthusiast.
Your average photography enthusiast won't benefit any from higher resolution. They should pick up a couple of books instead.

[mikekelley]

I have often thought about this. OP makes a valid point.

Also, so many people just blindly say "lens before body"

I disagree a lot of the time. You have to remember that the body is what you use, and how you interact with photography.

You use the body more than any lens. Lenses are of the utmost importance, don't get me wrong, but a good body will improve the enjoyment of taking photos so much.

so often I see people being told to upgrade their glass before upgrading their rebel or similar.

ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?

What good is a 70-200 2.8is if the focus tracking on the camera is no good?

[yogestee]

panties in a bunch, anyone?

They sounded like perfectly reasonable points to me, when they're applied to your average photography enthusiast.

I agree.. In my opinion we have to move away from the gear side of photography and look more at the art/craft side of photography..

[jacobsen1]

now that you have that all written out so nice, print it, hand it to the wife, and click the "submit order" button! ;)

[Brett]

Let's get some facts established:

1. If you love cameras, you get a special delight in owning the very best camera that you can afford. There is nothing wrong with this.

You're giving an opinion here. I don't necessarily share it. And, what is the "best" camera? It's different for different people.

2. Of course, you want to put the best lenses you can afford on your best camera. Fortunately, there is a wonderful dichotomy in photography in your equipment purchasing strategy. For long term, your purchase lenses. For short term, your purchase cameras. No doubt, great glass does wonders, but there has been leaps and bounds in camera technology over the last 10 years which have had significant effect on a photographers abilities and results.

Meh. I just looked at an image of Muhammad Ali taken in 1975 by an acquaintance of mine, and I find it far more compelling than a lot of the images I see bandied about as "fantastic" today.

3. If money were no object, if you love cameras, your best strategy would be to upgrade your camera every time the manufacturer brings forth new technology. A reputable manufacturer can't afford to bring forth new camera models that aren't improvements over the models they are designed to replace. They have to protect their own reputations with each new model they introduce.

Again, your opinion. Most body upgrades of equal sensor size aren't going to make the images better in most cases. ISO performance may be slightly better, it may have more MP, but it's largely the photographer who makes the images. There have been new cameras that don't improve greatly on the prior model, and it's many people's opinion that the 50D in fact has lower performance than the 40D it replaced.

4. If a camera has a 3 year technology curve, you are better off to take ownership and advantage of the first 3 years rather than years 3,4, and 5 IF you can afford it or IF you are willing to make the financial sacrifice required.

Another opinion, and one I disagree with. I shoot a 5D, because it has a full-frame sensor, sufficient MP for the printing I do, and I'm very happy with it. It was introduced in August, 2005. I can see myself shooting with it for years to come, new models be damned.

5. Reputable manufacturers will make occasional mistakes. If they make very many, switch companies.

Agreed.

6. Canon isn't perfect, but they are highly reputable, highly capable, and worthy of a lot of trust.

Opinion, or troll...hard to tell which. Agreed for the most part, but they don't have a lick of loyalty to you or I, and I don't to them. They just happen to make the gear that works for me.

7. If Canon comes out with a new camera, and you want it, buy it if you can afford it.

Your opinion, and meh, again. There's a fine line between photographer and gear-head. I've seen people in this very forum who own tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear, own a 5DII and a 1D variant, and never post an image. That's not to say they don't shoot with the camera, but I strive to be more impressed with my images than I am with the value of my gear, or whether it's the latest/greatest.

Odds are about 98 out of 100 that you will be very glad you did (my estimate only).

Evidently you haven't been around long enough to read all the haranguing that goes on every time a new model comes out. I know it's the people who aren't happy who will speak up, but saying 98% of people are very glad they bought the latest body is a bit of a stretch.

[Er1kksen]

Your average photography enthusiast won't benefit any from higher resolution. They should pick up a couple of books instead.

Many photography enthusiasts have read a few books on the subject and know what they're doing and would, in fact, benefit from higher resolution (depending on what they like to shoot) or faster handling or certain new features (again, depending on what they shoot).

There are a LOT of people out there who shoot for their own enjoyment, not for pay, and many of them are extremely competent at it and are fully capable of taking advantage of the improvements we see in newer bodies.

I just don't get the attack-happy atmosphere here. The OP posted his opinion on a topic that there will inevitably be a lot of different opinions about. If you disagree, great, feel free to say so and explain why, but why the rude tone of dismissal and hostility coming from so many posters?

Maybe I'm just too new to this place.

[mikekelley]

Many photography enthusiasts have read a few books on the subject and know what they're doing and would, in fact, benefit from higher resolution (depending on what they like to shoot) or faster handling or certain new features (again, depending on what they shoot).

There are a LOT of people out there who shoot for their own enjoyment, not for pay, and many of them are extremely competent at it and are fully capable of taking advantage of the improvements we see in newer bodies.

I just don't get the attack-happy atmosphere here. The OP posted his opinion on a topic that there will inevitably be a lot of different opinions about. If you disagree, great, feel free to say so and explain why, but why the rude tone of dismissal and hostility coming from so many posters?

Maybe I'm just too new to this place.


Because people want to feel smart, that's all.

[MikeG50]

Every bit of what I posted is opinion. By the way, I'm a 59 year old farmer from the midwest. I've had my 5D MkII since May and my 40D for a couple years. I'm not looking to upgrade anything for several years. To me, money IS an object (a qualifier i my original post) and I don't live in a perfect world.

My post was stimulated (mostly) by the reactions posted to those that were pre-ordering new 7Ds. But, those posts were just the most recent examples of some fairly common remarks made to people who are enthusiastically looking to buy a new camera and pretty much told they are silly/stupid to do it.

It's usually, but not always, easy to distinguish good advice from remarks that are a reflection of the posters envy. There is an awful lot of "if I don't need a new camera, neither do you" in these pages.

I think that "CANON EOS CAMERAS" forum needs to allow for the fact that many people love cameras and they want to buy the latest and greatest. Someone else's perceived "need" isn't always factor number 1.

[timnosenzo]

It's amazing what canon would resort to when sales are dropping. They now are planting rogue posters in the forum to increase sales!

PS: If you're for real, why don't you post a link to your amazing portfolio which canon's latest and greatest allowed you to achieve.

Wow, I think you were able to miss the ENTIRE point of his post. :rolleyes:

[DocFrankenstein]

Wow, I think you were able to miss the ENTIRE point of his post. :rolleyes:
Yes, I miss the entire point of caring about the gear too much.

On the other hand some people miss the entire point of photography.

[mikekelley]

To acquire as much gear as possible as fast as possible with no regard to money?

[yogestee]

To acquire as much gear as possible as fast as possible with no regard to money?

And then hardly ever use their gear and when they do complain about the poor image quality they are getting on forums like these..

[mikekelley]

And then hardly ever use their gear and when they do complain about the poor image quality they are getting on forums like these..
But who else will they tell that their 24-70 is soft?

[timnosenzo]

On the other hand some people miss the entire point of photography.

Whatever makes them happy. That's the point of a hobby.

[tkbslc]

Yes, I miss the entire point of caring about the gear too much.

On the other hand some people miss the entire point of photography.

Photography was never mentioned, only cameras.

Comments like yours always seem to stem from jealousy. You are simply trying to justify why you don't need the cameras you can't afford. Just like I get a sick smile while cycling when I pass a guy on a bike twice as nice as mine.

You know you would rather be using a 1DSmk3 and the entire collection of L primes. I know that if I were a billionaire I would own them. We all love the gear.

[Methodical]

What amazes me is folks that have these expensive camera bodies (older 1D’s for example) for long periods of time with only minimal clicks on it (ex. only 5,000) over the life of the equipment. Hell I may put more than that on my camera body in a couple months let alone over 5 years. I think to myself…what is the purpose for getting such equipment if you don’t use it? Can anyone explain this phenomenon to me?

And to the OP what I’ve learned in my life – if you ask 20 people’s opinion you get 20 opinions, but the only one that matters is mine. However, I do like to ask folks about equipment that they have used. If they have not used the equipment, I don't put much stock in their opinion(s).

Just One Man's Opinion

[FlyingPhotog]

now that you have that all written out so nice, print it, hand it to the wife, and click the "submit order" button! ;)

bw!

[yogestee]

And to the OP what I’ve learned in my life – if you ask 20 people’s opinion you get 20 opinions, but the only one that matters is mine. However, I do like to ask folks about equipment that they have used. If they have not used the equipment, I don't put much stock in their opinion(s).

And you are wrong ;)

Actually,,pretty well put..

[evilatco]

Hi Everybody,

I love all this arguing about equipment. The people who care about kit argue about equipment... And that's fine (each to their own interests). I love my kit and I change stuff periodically as my usage and interests change. But when all said and done, what I love more than my camera... Is the act of making a nice image :) It doesn't matter what it's shot on and how expensive it was. For me, the act of pressing the shutter and taking something I'm proud of is what floats my boat. I don't really care what everybody else shoots with, although if they show me their equipment I will be interested in it. I could quite happily wend my way through other peoples photos for hours on end though and try and glean as much as I can from it in order to learn.

Only my opinion, not necessarily important to anybody.

[Jahled]

I don't really get the point of this thread to be honest. You appear to be criticising the entire point of these forums by their very nature (discussions, shared experience, and advise about photography) and then contradicting yourself suggesting the forums serve a useful purpose for this very point! :rolleyes:

Then again it has been a long day

[MikeG50]

Good question. The point is:

Would you tell your neighbor he was foolish for buying a Corvette because he doesn't need it? Would you ask him to explain his logic? Would you insult him? I don't think so.

Take it easy on people that are wanting to buy a new camera. Good advice is good advice but it doesn't need to be driven by jealousy and sour grapes. There is too much of that in these forums.

There are extraordinary mountains of helpful advice in here also. Otherwise, I wouldn't waste my time. But civility needs to be the rule.

[Er1kksen]

Comments like yours always seem to stem from jealousy. You are simply trying to justify why you don't need the cameras you can't afford. Just like I get a sick smile while cycling when I pass a guy on a bike twice as nice as mine.

You know you would rather be using a 1DSmk3 and the entire collection of L primes. I know that if I were a billionaire I would own them. We all love the gear.

I got to do that for the first time yesterday morning... riding back to my house unbreakfasted and unshowered. We don't have enough people on expensive bikes around here. ;) He seemed a bit surprised but it turned into a nice conversation.

Of course, if I could afford to spend $4000 on a bike, I would (probably before buying a car). As it is, I'm lucky enough to have what I have, as a college-age low-wage worker who spends $15 per week on groceries each week while saving the rest for travel plans this winter... I wonder what gear I can buy with travel as an excuse? ;) My 85mm as my only lens certainly isn't going to cut it... that GF1 is looking interesting...

[_aravena]

I love cameras. You love cameras. We all (mostly) love cameras, or we wouldn't be here in a forum devoted to them.

It's actually for Canon and photography. There are many many many subsections so, no point here.

Yet there is strange behavior encountered in these pages. An awful lot of advice is given to "don't buy it". "Invest in glass". "Why would you trade?"

Strange? It makes perfect sense if you actually read those threads.

Let's get some opinions established:

1. If you love cameras, you get a special delight in owning the very best camera that you can afford. There is nothing wrong with this.

Ok, sure. As said, an opinion. As nothing to do with anything other than, people like new things. Duh. I just bought a 20D for my cousin. I already have one, but I loved getting it. I had ti shipped to me as I collected a whole package for her. So, yeah, old camera, just new to me. So, it's jsut anything new really.

2. Of course, you want to put the best lenses you can afford on your best camera. Fortunately, there is a wonderful dichotomy in photography in your equipment purchasing strategy. For long term, your purchase lenses. For short term, your purchase cameras. No doubt, great glass does wonders, but there has been leaps and bounds in camera technology over the last 10 years which have had significant effect on a photographers abilities and results.

Huh? Short term? As in...you're new to it so initially buy the latest and greatest if you can? Sure. People out there buying Rebels for their kid's games, go get an XSi or Ti, whatever is still there and one can afford. You don't spend $1000+ for short term or you have so much money, have fun!

3. If money were no object, if you love cameras, your best strategy would be to upgrade your camera every time the manufacturer brings forth new technology. A reputable manufacturer can't afford to bring forth new camera models that aren't improvements over the models they are designed to replace. They have to protect their own reputations with each new model they introduce.

Yes and no. Yes, if you have money, buy whatever you want. I know I'd have a 1DMkIII and 5DMkII pulling up to weddings and sporting events in a GT-R 35 or rather 34 shipped and converted from Japan but I don't and can't.

No, they upgrade with any little change they can think of because people like you will buy it. It's called marketing. Take a college course on it or buy a book. 20D to 30D. Nothing major and surprisingly they left the MP the same, which is their big consumer ringer, but they made the screen bigger (the other ringer) bit faster/better AF, spot metering I think? and...something else? Yeah, BIG DIFFERENCE eh? This is what is stated. If you don't use spot or don't bother with too much sports, then...huh? Is it worth the the several hundred? No.

4. If a camera has a 3 year technology curve, you are better off to take ownership and advantage of the first 3 years rather than years 3,4, and 5 IF you can afford it or IF you are willing to make the financial sacrifice required.

What? Why? My 20D is still as useful as my 40D. I'd get another 20D, which I plan to, if they had a low shutter count, it's just hard to find thus my reasoning for the 40D. The 6.5fps is nice but that's about it. I like the 30D, perfect size out of them all actually, so I might get that. I hate the huge screens and will try to stay away from them. I can't wait to get a 5D so what?

5. Reputable manufacturers will make occasional mistakes. If they make very many, switch companies.

Pending what someone calls a mistake, but sure.

6. Canon isn't perfect, but they are highly reputable, highly capable, and worthy of a lot of trust.

No one is. What's this have to do with anything? Nikon is quite awesome as well but I couldn't afford their lenses (though I have no Canon) if I wanted too like I plan to go Canon once I start teaching with the 100-400L and 70-200 F2.8L IS.

7. If Canon comes out with a new camera, and you want it, buy it if you can afford it. Odds are about 98 out of 100 that you will be very glad you did (my estimate only).

Duh. If you can, why not? And obviously afford means you'll still be able to go out every night, not afford where you must live on Ramen for months. Once again, has nothing to do with anything, just the same random obvious crap as been stated already by you.

I don't work for Canon and I don't know anyone that does. I have just gotten a little fed up with the jealousy, envy, self justification, and arrogance that passes for wisdom on these pages. Some people seem to love throwing water on other people's fancy.

That said, there are mountains of good advice on these pages from which I have learned a lot. Thanks go to all of you.

Mike

I love the last bit. Apparently you can buy whatever you want if you can afford it, but don't stray from Canon and claim something else is better (even if it is) 'cause you have a loalty to Canon even if you can afford better.

So once again, what was the point of this?

[lungdoc]

What amazes me is folks that have these expensive camera bodies (older 1D’s for example) for long periods of time with only minimal clicks on it (ex. only 5,000) over the life of the equipment. Hell I may put more than that on my camera body in a couple months let alone over 5 years. I think to myself…what is the purpose for getting such equipment if you don’t use it? Can anyone explain this phenomenon to me?

Just One Man's Opinion

Conceivable that they practice a style of photography that is different from yours, and/or that they are financially successful amateurs with limited time to do their hobby. I doubt anyone would have criticized a landscape photographer who took a 36 exposure roll every two weeks (roughly 5000 pictures in 5 yrs), month in and month out.

[acpoweradapter]

It's actually for Canon and photography. There are many many many subsections so, no point here.



Strange? It makes perfect sense if you actually read those threads.



Ok, sure. As said, an opinion. As nothing to do with anything other than, people like new things. Duh. I just bought a 20D for my cousin. I already have one, but I loved getting it. I had ti shipped to me as I collected a whole package for her. So, yeah, old camera, just new to me. So, it's jsut anything new really.



Huh? Short term? As in...you're new to it so initially buy the latest and greatest if you can? Sure. People out there buying Rebels for their kid's games, go get an XSi or Ti, whatever is still there and one can afford. You don't spend $1000+ for short term or you have so much money, have fun!



Yes and no. Yes, if you have money, buy whatever you want. I know I'd have a 1DMkIII and 5DMkII pulling up to weddings and sporting events in a GT-R 35 or rather 34 shipped and converted from Japan but I don't and can't.

No, they upgrade with any little change they can think of because people like you will buy it. It's called marketing. Take a college course on it or buy a book. 20D to 30D. Nothing major and surprisingly they left the MP the same, which is their big consumer ringer, but they made the screen bigger (the other ringer) bit faster/better AF, spot metering I think? and...something else? Yeah, BIG DIFFERENCE eh? This is what is stated. If you don't use spot or don't bother with too much sports, then...huh? Is it worth the the several hundred? No.



What? Why? My 20D is still as useful as my 40D. I'd get another 20D, which I plan to, if they had a low shutter count, it's just hard to find thus my reasoning for the 40D. The 6.5fps is nice but that's about it. I like the 30D, perfect size out of them all actually, so I might get that. I hate the huge screens and will try to stay away from them. I can't wait to get a 5D so what?



Pending what someone calls a mistake, but sure.



No one is. What's this have to do with anything? Nikon is quite awesome as well but I couldn't afford their lenses (though I have no Canon) if I wanted too like I plan to go Canon once I start teaching with the 100-400L and 70-200 F2.8L IS.



Duh. If you can, why not? And obviously afford means you'll still be able to go out every night, not afford where you must live on Ramen for months. Once again, has nothing to do with anything, just the same random obvious crap as been stated already by you.



I love the last bit. Apparently you can buy whatever you want if you can afford it, but don't stray from Canon and claim something else is better (even if it is) 'cause you have a loalty to Canon even if you can afford better.

So once again, what was the point of this?

Don't you think you're overreacting? He was just saying his opinion.

The the whole time he was saying if you have the money, do what you want, be it a new camera or new glass. He also said to buy the best camera, if you think the 20D is the best camera, then thats what you would get. If he thought the 5DM2 was the best camera he would get it. Just calm down a little bit...

[timnosenzo]

So once again, what was the point of this?

He's just saying "it's OK to be a gearhead", and it is. :D

[DocFrankenstein]

Photography was never mentioned, only cameras.

Comments like yours always seem to stem from jealousy. You are simply trying to justify why you don't need the cameras you can't afford. Just like I get a sick smile while cycling when I pass a guy on a bike twice as nice as mine.

You know you would rather be using a 1DSmk3 and the entire collection of L primes. I know that if I were a billionaire I would own them. We all love the gear.It's easy to tell you've never shot enough film and never shot anything than canon.

It might SEEM to you like jealousy, but at the end of the day it's the fact that once you have shot with more than 5 cameras of different caliber you start seeing that it really doesn't matter what you're shooting and how your photos turn out. If you actually start shooting instead of looking at the cameras you don't have, you'll come to the same conclusion... eventually.

[dan_bgblue]

MikeG50, thanks for growing the crops, or the meat we eat everyday, so that 98% of the US population does not have to do it for themselves and can spend more of their time being photographers or picture takers with their favorite camera and lenses.

I too do not understand the reaction to your OP nor many of the reactions I see here in dozens of threads. Having an opinion is something common to all humans, but trying to harshly force that opinion on others is not civil discourse.

[Er1kksen]

It's easy to tell you've never shot enough film and never shot anything than canon.

It might SEEM to you like jealousy, but at the end of the day it's the fact that once you have shot with more than 5 cameras of different caliber you start seeing that it really doesn't matter what you're shooting and how your photos turn out. If you actually start shooting instead of looking at the cameras you don't have, you'll come to the same conclusion... eventually.

What a startlingly quick judgement.

I spent three years shooting away with a K1000, OM-1, XA-1 and Yashica Samurai Z2 half-frame, even though I could have afforded a digital SLR. Even today, some of my favorite images were captured on these rather "disadvantaged" cameras with cheap film. Since then, I've also gone through three different digital SLRs and a couple digital compacts. All of them gave me great results when I used them right. So no, what you're shooting isn't really important.

That doesn't change the fact that this stuff is *fun.* Getting a new camera feels like christmas. Taking pictures and playing with capabilities your old camera didn't have is exciting. Naturally, it follows that a bit of jealousy might be induced by gear that can do things that yours can't; not because it would necessarily get you a better picture, but because it would be fun to have.

[MikeG50]

Thanks Dan (? on name). We've got another record crop coming this year so there will be plenty of food for every person and animal, export and ethanol plant plus adding to surplus! :-)

And thanks to all of you "defenders". There are truly some "debaters" in here that love to argue and enjoy putting words into your mouth and picking apart nuances that don't really exist. But that's ok. It's probably their other hobby.

Mike

[Methodical]

... Having an opinion is something common to all humans, but trying to harshly force that opinion on others is not civil discourse.

Isn't this the US way!!!;)

Democrats ideology vs Republicans ideology vs Independents ideology

Just saying

[kitacanon]

My opinion...there isn't a perfect tecnology, but you can perfect technique...

Getting the latest greatest technology isn't necessarily an improvement...but that doesn't stop people from buying new gear rather than taking the time to learn how to use it....

I see the same issue in my other hobby...people buy $500 golf clubs every year, (total of $4.7 billion in 2002 according to one source) convinced it will cure all that ails them...and statistics over the last 25 years prove them wrong...(the nice thing about golf are the statistics to quantify such things)....amateur scores have not appreciably dropped in 25 years, despite the "revolutionary" new gear we have available today....

Pros' golfers hope/expectations is a bit different...the difference of one stroke a round (one out of 70) can make the difference between success and failure, whereas amateurs saving 1 out of 97 (the average amateur score) makes little difference.

The camera as a tool requires much less dynamic interaction with the user than a golf club...so many more muscles used to swing a club than to manipulate a camera...call it ergonomics if you will, but it doesn't take hours of practice every day to perfect the physical/muscular relationship with it...and yet there are so many aspects of photography that one can practice daily regardless of the camera in hand that can yield greater results than going out and getting a newer camera...some physical, of course, developing faster reaction times, focusing in the dark...but practicing photography is an aesthetic, dare I say intellectual activity that requires as much time as the physical act...in golf think in terms of "reading greens" developing the visual acuity to see undulations in the putting surface that is independent of whatever gear used to "make the putt"...few amateurs practice reading greens....

This is NOT to deny that some cameras are better suited to some people and some needs than are others...whether those are physical needs, (e.g. physical size/weight being one obvious variable) or personal preferences for certain tools in certain situations...

For years I used only Nikon F bodies without any batteries or electronics of any kind just to reduce the likelihood of gear breakdown (and even there I had a back up for the back up) on the job....I often had to shoot in rain and simply could not worry about the tool failing....

Nor is it to deny that there are USES for which certain cameras (and golf clubs) are better suited, such as shooting sports or flowers....faster reacting mechanics or bigger windows, greater DoF or less is not just a preference but a necessary factor in getting the photo....
or, again, some gear is better suited to the photographer's preferred STYLE....think of the different media a painter can choose to paint a landscape, water, oils, etc....yes, DoF can be a preferred way to express a scene, but that's a choice...some scenes in some media require less, or more DoF....(I remember well my sports editors telling me not to bring back "art"...and to just bring back something they could use)....

But changing cameras without knowing why one technology is better suited than another, leaves the photographer at the mercy of manufacturers who market THEIR need to sell their latest model....

Any amateur can buy the latest tool that pros use, but without the hours of disciplined practice that pros put it to, the amateur won't likely find any improvement....and it can be worse for photographers than golfers...

The case can be made the tendency to make more technologically complex cameras can complicate photography....it takes time to learn how to use any machine, and getting a new one every 18 months may not give the user enough time to become adept at using it...think of computer operating systems and software that people update and barely become comfortable with when the new OS and program comes out...the rejection of VISTA I think reflects this issue...

And so the advice some are given to hold on to a camera for more than a couple of years rather than switching every time a new model comes out is not advice given to people out of perverse envy, but from the practical experience and sincere view that technique can make more difference than technology...

my opinion based on 40 years of practicing photography....

[MikeG50]

No doubt you are right on - absolutely good words of wisdom. I agree 100%. BUT -

I referenced a 3 year life cycle. At today's rate of technology improvement, after 3 years, cameras have improved enough that you "want" to take advantage of those improvements. IF you can afford them. No, you don't need them, but you "want" them - or at least many of us do.

You are discussing facts. I'm discussing emotions and appealing for civility. I'm justifying a person's right to upgrade his camera anytime he wants.

I cringe when I read someone with a 30D getting excited over a 7D and then being blasted in here as if he not only doesn't need it but should be ashamed for even wanting it.

That new golf club isn't going to make a Tiger Woods out of any amateur, but he gets pride of ownership and a fresh injection of enthusiasm and inspiration to make his game better. Besides, why swing a club that will hit the ball 270 yards when you can buy a new one that will hit it 272 yards. As long as your family isn't starving and it makes you happy - go for it!

I wonder if the golfing forums have people admonishing their friends for upgrading their clubs?

And by the way, if average photographer only traded cameras every 10 years, the rate of technology change would be drastically lower because the investment in research would be much lower. I consider that a disadvantage - new technology is good even if it does lower the value of your camera. After all, just as the naysayers say, your camera works just as good as it always did even if they new one IS 15% better. I'm looking forward to the day that ISO6400 is as good as ISO 400 and dynamic range is doubled. The sooner the better.

[oaktree]

If you want my opinion about which of 2 choices or more is better, I'll give it to you. If you want my opinion about whether to buy something or not, I usually say "If you really need/want it and can afford it, buy it!"

I hope I can stop people from repeating the same mistakes I've made. But then, my "mistakes" may be other photographer's way to fulfillment.

It's best to be humble.

I love cameras and lenses and tripods and flashes...etc.

It's people I can't stand ;)

[sjones]

...I cringe when I read someone with a 30D getting excited over a 7D and then being blasted in here as if he not only doesn't need it but should be ashamed for even wanting it...

Yes, buy what you want folks; it's your money, and that's fine.

But I also cringe when someone intimates that buying the latest camera will suddenly improve their photography; this is a horrible message to send to newcomers. Going to the golf analogy; it would not be a matter of admonishing friends for upgrading their clubs, but simply reminding them that doing so may or may not improve their game. And this reminder is hardly sanctimonious or a sign of "gear envy."

It's good for someone who is about to make a major investment to hear all sides, not just ones coming from those who promote conspicuous consumption. To note, if a person is bad at golf, then yes, better gear might get them a couple extra yards. If a person is bad at photography, they are bad at photography---no amount of new gear will rectify this problem.

Technology has expanded the possibility of photography, but the overall quality of photography has not improved over the past century; this is not even remotely debatable. I have seen photographs from the 1800s that are as gorgeous as anything that has been produced since the advent of digital, let alone autofocus.

I agree, if someone wants something, then they want it; it does not require rationality or need. But why does someone want that something; maybe because they have been fed misinformation that obtaining such item will benefit them, when in fact, it might not. Consequently, it's not simply a matter of focusing on the "want," but the underlying forces that might be fostering that want. And there is nothing wrong with questioning those forces, on the contrary.

Anyway, on POTN, justifying the materialistic compulsions of gear-heads seems a bit redundant; it is like bar with a bunch of drunks trying to vindicate their love of alcohol.

[kitacanon]

Mike, there's a honeymoon period with a new driver...it usually lasts a couple of rounds and then the old habits return with the same old scores...
You are right...facts never get in the way of emotions...but when someone asks about "upgrading," facts are all I allow myself to offer...if not I'd go off the deep end and...

If I WERE to admonish anyone for posting "I have $3k to spend...What should I do?" I'd ask them if there was any way they could spend it on improving the world rather than increasing their pride (the point you made...pride of ownership, NOT pride in their art)

...but I don't...despite the fact that they ARE making it my business by asking...it's still none of my business how they live in this world...at some point how we live (and spend money) IS a moral issue...just look at how our country is losing its bearings,its moral compass....
But I'm not a priest or rabbi...and no one's annointed me prophet or nominated me as their spokesman...and though my students have on occasion accused me of sermonizing, here I try, hard as I may, to focus on the facts and on photography...THAT is enough...

[MikeG50]

There are very very few of us that couldn't better spend our money than on what is (for most of us) a hobby. When you look at most forum contributors equipment list, they far exceed what Mother Teresa would have gotten by on. Most also drive a car that would have allowed for a very generous contribution to world peace had we purchased a Volkswagon Rabbit instead. We also spend quite a lot to travel to photogenic locations, which is basically pure self-indulgence.

Hopefully, everyone contributes both time and money to endeavors that exceed or are in addition to their own self interest. After you do that, then go purchase the camera of your choice. Hopefully, when someone comes into these forums seeking advice on what to purchase, they have already fulfilled their humanitarian duties. How you balance the scale of justice/economics/humanitarianism is purely personal and not something many of us care to discuss publicly.

I'm rather disappointed that this topic was moved. It was intended to address advice given to camera purchasers in the EOS Digital Camera forum. It doesn't fit the description given for the "General Photography Talk" section. A good way to "kill" it, I guess.

[DocFrankenstein]

There are very very few of us that couldn't better spend our money than on what is (for most of us) a hobby. When you look at most forum contributors equipment list, they far exceed what Mother Teresa would have gotten by on. Most also drive a car that would have allowed for a very generous contribution to world peace had we purchased a Volkswagon Rabbit instead. We also spend quite a lot to travel to photogenic locations, which is basically pure self-indulgence.

Hopefully, everyone contributes both time and money to endeavors that exceed or are in addition to their own self interest. After you do that, then go purchase the camera of your choice. Hopefully, when someone comes into these forums seeking advice on what to purchase, they have already fulfilled their humanitarian duties. How you balance the scale of justice/economics/humanitarianism is purely personal and not something many of us care to discuss publicly.

I'm rather disappointed that this topic was moved. It was intended to address advice given to camera purchasers in the EOS Digital Camera forum. It doesn't fit the description given for the "General Photography Talk" section. A good way to "kill" it, I guess.
That's cause this isn't about EOS cameras anymore, it's about photography in general.

[fly my pretties]

Yes, I miss the entire point of caring about the gear too much.

On the other hand some people miss the entire point of photography.

I agree with you.

I find special interest in cameras a bit strange. I don't see it as anything more than a consumer product, just like my microwave or my toaster.

I notice that quite a few people on here seem to be "camera fans" as opposed to "photographers".

[fly my pretties]

To illustrate my point, there was a recent thread about the 7D's 24p video mode.

People want it on the 5D2 as a firmware upgrade. It's nothing more than a software option, it's literally nothing more than enabling it. Less than a days work for a single programmer to recompile the code.

Someone suggested that instead of adding it to the 5D2 with a simple firmware update, they should instead create a NEW CAMERA with just that function added.

What's worse is a couple of people said "I'd buy that"

And they were serious..

That just boggles my mind.

[SOK]

I find special interest in cameras a bit strange. I don't see it as anything more than a consumer product, just like my microwave or my toaster.

I'm generally confused about most of the discussion here - I think people are arguing different things - but I agree with this. Like sjones said above, I particularly cringe when advice to buy new/better gear is offered to a newbie as a valid alternative to sitting down and learning the fundamentals.

I notice that quite a few people on here seem to be "camera fans" as opposed to "photographers".

Not quite sure about this. I make the same observation, but surely there's nothing wrong with this (providing you're not demanding others do the same)? POTN is big enough to cater for all types...the artists, the gear collectors, the business types etc...

I poke my head into the rumour forums occasionally but can never stand the ridiculous speculation, demands and threats to switch to Nikon for too long. That said, I don't criticize them for doing so. I just duck off quietly and join in the discussions that interest me.

[neilwood32]

What amazes me is folks that have these expensive camera bodies (older 1D’s for example) for long periods of time with only minimal clicks on it (ex. only 5,000) over the life of the equipment. Hell I may put more than that on my camera body in a couple months let alone over 5 years. I think to myself…what is the purpose for getting such equipment if you don’t use it? Can anyone explain this phenomenon to me?

And to the OP what I’ve learned in my life – if you ask 20 people’s opinion you get 20 opinions, but the only one that matters is mine. However, I do like to ask folks about equipment that they have used. If they have not used the equipment, I don't put much stock in their opinion(s).

Just One Man's Opinion

Conceivable that they practice a style of photography that is different from yours, and/or that they are financially successful amateurs with limited time to do their hobby. I doubt anyone would have criticized a landscape photographer who took a 36 exposure roll every two weeks (roughly 5000 pictures in 5 yrs), month in and month out.

I agree with Lungdoc here.

The point in having a very expensive camera might not be to fire off hundreds of shots, but to ensure that there were a very high % of high quality shots in the few that were taken.

I had a 400D and i reckon that as i got better my shooting decreased exponentialy. I started off shooting anything that moved but now i think long and hard about composition, light, settings before pressing the shutter hence i probably only shoot about 10% of the pictures i did before. Therefore my more expensive (new 50D) camera will have a fraction of the clicks my 400d had.

Methodical - your practise may be to fire away on burst or take shots from every conceiveable angle, hence a high shutter count, but others may choose to shoot differently. And to say that the best of equipment (1D or 1Ds) isnt the correct thing for them is just wrong.- that is a personal choice for the person concerned to decide. They may have decided that one of the many features of the 1D/1Ds series suited them ( CF/SD card, ROF AF, customisation, etc) or they may just have money to burn. Its their choice.

[Methodical]

I agree with Lungdoc here.

The point in having a very expensive camera might not be to fire off hundreds of shots, but to ensure that there were a very high % of high quality shots in the few that were taken.

I had a 400D and i reckon that as i got better my shooting decreased exponentialy. I started off shooting anything that moved but now i think long and hard about composition, light, settings before pressing the shutter hence i probably only shoot about 10% of the pictures i did before. Therefore my more expensive (new 50D) camera will have a fraction of the clicks my 400d had.

I agree. I have decreased the number of shots I take now because my criteria is more stringent and I've gotten a whole lot better in my photography skills. Point well taken. Hell even when shooting BIFs I don't, as been seen here before, "spray and pray" I am more calculating.

Methodical - your practise may be to fire away on burst or take shots from every conceiveable angle, hence a high shutter count, but others may choose to shoot differently.

Sometimes yes to ensure I don't miss anything.

And to say that the best of equipment (1D or 1Ds) isnt the correct thing for them is just wrong.- that is a personal choice for the person concerned to decide.

I never made a comment or statement that anyone piece of equipment is better than the other because I have limited experience...plus I kind of know when to keep my lips zipped. I too say whatever floats your boat.

They may have decided that one of the many features of the 1D/1Ds series suited them ( CF/SD card, ROF AF, customisation, etc) or they may just have money to burn. Its their choice.

Again I agree. I purchased the MkIII because of it's high ISO performance because my bird photography has me up very early in the morning and sometimes late in the day.



Take care

Al

[Lani Kai]

Have you seen my "past equipment" list? And to think I haven't even been shooting for 5 years yet...