Accelerated market contraction for DSLRs

I've taken with a grain of salt the skillful use of a cell camera relative to turning out a salable image. Some individuals can make some pretty nice results. I fall into a later class that I struggle. If I take 100 frames on a cell phone my ratio of acceptable is much lower compared to a dedicated camera. In that regard the control of exposure and DOF are easier for me with a camera that offers that. I'll be one of those buyers over a cell phone.

I was one of those back in the day using medium format when the smaller format digital capture became more accessible. The results were quite good. The technology brings changes so as users of the gear we'll adapt to best serve the needs and results required. Some of my older peers took digital as a sign to retire. Amusingly a few came back after liquidating (pun intended) their wet darkrooms for digital based processing.

The pathway of technological change is interesting so we take a ride and see where it leads to.

Canonuser123 wrote in post #18857334
Not anymore, the 150-600mm lenses are extremely good deals now.

Admittedly this is an old comment, but there's still a different look and keeper rate from a 400/2.8 or 600/4 than a slower zoom.

Croasdail wrote in post #18857338
You have to do that even with the best gear. The trick is knowing where to be. And the gear only helps mitigate that some....

If I'm shooting with a 70-200 or 100-400, I go to the action instead of hoping it hoping it happens within a 10' radius of me.

Croasdail wrote in post #18857338
You have to do that even with the best gear. The trick is knowing where to be. And the gear only helps mitigate that some....

Here is an example

https://www.si.com …plus-sneak-preview-photos


this was back in 2016. I'm not promoting cell phone use, just point out that skill trips camera almost 100% of the time.

Well, to be honest, in the example you posted, access trips both skill and equipment. There is nothing in that set that really requires any specific level of skill or camera gear. It's all in getting access. If you could put 50,000 people in the end zone feet away from the play, they too could get that shot.

gjl711 wrote in post #18857356
Well, to be honest, in the example you posted, access trips both skill and equipment. There is nothing in that set that really requires any specific level of skill or camera gear. It's all in getting access. If you could put 50,000 people in the end zone feet away from the play, they too could get that shot.

"Stories" like that are nothing but marketing for Apple. Funny, 3+ generations later, every time I watch a pro game, I see pros behind at least a couple of big white lenses. Why aren't they all using iPhones?

Depends on the action...

Sometime you cannot move around to a position that suits your style.

A 70-200 is nearly perfect for the length of a basketball court, and sometimes not wide enough.

mike_d wrote in post #18857358
3+ generations later, every time I watch a pro game, I see pros behind at least a couple of big white lenses. Why aren't they all using iPhones?

Because smartphones do not permit them to proclaim (non-verbally), "My lens is bigger than yours!..."

That, and the fact that Canon has equipment vans with equipment to address any pro photographers' feelings of lens inadequacy, while Samsung and Apple do not.

Croasdail wrote in post #18857162
I would respectfully disagree. You can give a decent photographer any gear, and say "go get some compelling images of x", and they could do that. May not be the standard shots. May take more work. May take more creativity. But they could do it. But they would not say "I can't get any shots because I don't have blank". That is a good photographer wouldn't say that.

Nothing wrong with having the right equipment. Not at all. But please, spending $10,000 on gear doesn't give you skills. It just means you don't have to have as many skills.

I would disagree.

A carpenter does not just buy tools and then make whatever he can make with the tools he happens to have bought, he buys tools to build the structure he has determined to build.

I procure specific photographic equipment as necessary to make the photographs I pre-visualize in my mind. Can I make a portrait of some sort with different equipment? Certainly.

But not the portrait I have in my mind.

Accelerated topic distraction from DSLRs.

Not that I really care, but you gotta admit it's pretty good.

mike_d wrote in post #18857358
"Stories" like that are nothing but marketing for Apple. Funny, 3+ generations later, every time I watch a pro game, I see pros behind at least a couple of big white lenses. Why aren't they all using iPhones?

I'm sorry.... did anyone anywhere say professional lenses were superior to iPhones? Of course a professional can justify purchasing professional tools to do their profession.

And yes, their "keeper" rate will be better than an iPhone - for that type of shooting. As to the SI example. Forget it is a pro game. A parent, or a student could obtain the same location at a high school game. And in the middle of the day, they "could" get the same type of shot. That sequence happens thousands of times on high school fields friday nights across the US. But the point is I don't see those shots from even people who have 3 to 5 thousand dollars worth of gear. Go to MaxPreps. There are some really good shooters on there. People who have spent a lot of money on gear. But you also see those shots far too infrequently. MaxPreps is filled with ordinary and forgettable photographs. Regardless of gear.

That person on the SI/Apple advertising site got those shots because they knew the capabilities and limitations of their gear, and they shot accordingly. Stuff like basics of shooting sports. My son plays on his local high school team. He's my last son at home, and next year will be his last year there. I will miss going to his games to shoot. But every time I go there I see parents out there that have spent thousands of dollars on gear, and they do two things. First, they seldom move. They might as well grow roots. Second, they stand there with their monopods fully extended, as tall as it get, and shoot. Then we compare shots, and they ask why mine look better. There are some basics... and many don't know them. I don't care what camera you have, unless you do the basics right, they will not look right either.

So yes, access is super duper important. But given access, it is amazing to see how many people would still not get compelling shots. Can't underestimate the value of access. Getting good sports shots is always some element of luck. But there is also an art to knowing where to be to increase your odds of being lucky.

To pretend my point was that pros should somehow start shooting games on an iPhone is beyond silly. My point is though that if a pro had their camera broken during a game, they could still "work" the game with their iPhone. Yes, they would get better shots with their regular gear, but they would still get shots they could turn in. Go to NFL galleries..... (example here http://www.nfl.com/pho​tos/0ap3000001011681) and notice how few of the shots are "peak" action....

Croasdail wrote in post #18857498
Go to NFL galleries..... (example here http://www.nfl.com/pho​tos/0ap3000001011681) and notice how few of the shots are "peak" action....

A month ago, my wife and I took an infant grandchild and a 3.5 year old to a local children's park for a half day (until the 3 yr old had burnout). I tried to shoot the 3 year old on a slow moving merry-go-round using a Canon P&S. If I waited for a great expression on him, he was gone past me before the camera would respond to the shutter press. I had to 'lead' him by a couple seconds, and press the shutter and hope for a good expression on this face when the shutter finally opened. 'Peak of action' was serendipity.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18857472
Accelerated topic distraction from DSLRs.

Not that I really care, but you gotta admit it's pretty good.

Yes.... seems someone decided to kick the hornets nest. But its a good discussion.

We haven't even brought up that new professional 8k cameras now shot frames large enough and detailed enough to grade frame of as stills... particularly for web. Being able to shoot 30 and 60 frames at 8K could be the demise of sports photographers. Four more frames per second, the A9 would be considered a movie camera that is capturing frames at 24 mpx. 10 years ago sports illustrated sports images being submitted at 8 mpx. Today you can grab an 8 mpx image from 4K video shot at 60 frames per second. Those frame grabs stand up reasonably well against the images published 10-15 years ago. Professional video captured at 8k is freaking amazing. And you know that technology is going to trickle down.

There are a lot of factors conspiring against the DSLR. Video being one of the bigger ones.

Croasdail wrote in post #18857517
Yes.... seems someone decided to kick the hornets nest. But its a good discussion.

We haven't even brought up that new professional 8k cameras now shot frames large enough and detailed enough to grade frame of as stills... particularly for web. Being able to shoot 30 and 60 frames at 8K could be the demise of sports photographers. Four more frames per second, the A9 would be considered a movie camera that is capturing frames at 24 mpx. 10 years ago sports illustrated sports images being submitted at 8 mpx. Today you can grab an 8 mpx image from 4K video shot at 60 frames per second. Those frame grabs stand up reasonably well against the images published 10-15 years ago. Professional video captured at 8k is freaking amazing. And you know that technology is going to trickle down.

There are a lot of factors conspiring against the DSLR. Video being one of the bigger ones.

OTOH looking at it positively, rather than hear the machine gun fire for continuous frame (folks who always press and hold the shutter release on their dSLR, even for non sports) we could be blessed by the silence of video capture. Imagine being able to hear what the speaker says during a press conference of some public official!

Wilt wrote in post #18857530
OTOH looking at it positively, rather than hear the machine gun fire for continuous frame (folks who always press and hold the shutter release on their dSLR, even for non sports) we could be blessed by the silence of video capture. Imagine being able to hear what the speaker says during a press conference of some public official!

Can't think of many public officials worth listening too, so that point is moot

mat vanella wrote in post #18857535
Can't think of many public officials worth listening too, so that point is moot

Valid, at least at the federal level. We do have some good local politicians.