Author Topic: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong  (Read 2164 times)

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong
« Reply #50 on: February 17, 2018, 01:14:32 pm »
My old 2006 D40 can still hack it:

From Ken Rockwell:

Quote
Make Huge Prints!  If you're good, you can blow up the images from the D40 without limit. I've made great 20x30" prints from my D40. More pixels doesn't help: holding the camera still does. Your skill as a photographer is more important than your choice of camera.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

T42

  • Old fool in a hurry
Re: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong
« Reply #51 on: February 17, 2018, 02:09:15 pm »
 A lot of folk disparage KR, but I've always enjoyed his stuff. If your quotation is from article I think it is, it was the reason I bought my D40.

Re holding the camera still, the stabilization in that Tamron 70-300 is so rock-steady you practically have to wrench it off-target.
I dare eat all that may become a man.

But hold the oysters.

Gattopardo

  • Lord of the sith
  • Overseaing the building of the death star
Re: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong
« Reply #52 on: March 09, 2018, 10:47:20 am »
Where do old camera chargers disappear too?

Re: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong
« Reply #53 on: March 09, 2018, 11:57:01 am »
Where do old camera chargers disappear too?

The cupboard our TV is sat on apparently. Its full of them.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong
« Reply #54 on: March 09, 2018, 12:25:26 pm »
A lot of folk disparage KR, but I've always enjoyed his stuff. If your quotation is from article I think it is, it was the reason I bought my D40.

Re holding the camera still, the stabilization in that Tamron 70-300 is so rock-steady you practically have to wrench it off-target.

Rockwell has a reputation for keeping the manufacturers "sweet" and never finding many flaws in the gear he reviews.

However I find that he speaks a lot of sense because, as we are discussing on this thread, most gear is bloody amazing, more amazing than the capabilities of the photographer in most cases.

I'm getting very tired of some of the other "famous" reviewers now, fawning over the latest and greatest cameras and making out that even cameras from the last 2 years are now redundant.

Yes the latest cameras as incredible pieces of technology, huge dynamic range, low noise at silly ISO values, and so on and so on.  But the differences can only be seen at the very extremes, and under very close scrutiny. 

All of this is fine for me because I still crave a good old Canon 5D Mk3 and they are getting cheaper on Ebay by the day.  A bomb-proof tank of a camera with image quality good enough for thousands of Pros over the last 6 years or so. 
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

Re: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong
« Reply #55 on: March 09, 2018, 02:59:10 pm »
I disparage Ken Rockwell because many of his 'reviews' really aren't (he just regurgitates press releases and other third-party info in his own template) and his pictures are technically proficient, tedious, over-saturated postcards. Often the case with photo geeks who review gear, unfortunately. There's definitely a reviewer aesthetic. When not photographing the sides of buildings (FFS) to prove some marginal unimportant talking point, it's long exposure scenics with garish colours never found in reality. Or gimmicky, Strobist-approved studio portraits carefully engineered to avoid revealing any hint of personality in the model.

And where are the reviewers who'll try to explain what its actually like to use a piece of kit in practice? If you're lucky they'll throw in a sentence (mis)using the word 'ergonomics' and pretend they've said something meaningful. There's a reason digital cameras are still awkward rectangular bricks.

Anyhow, if you like his stuff, then take KR's advice. I generally try to pay more attention to photographers whose work I admire . The problem with that is they tend to be too busy taking pictures to pontificate online about the latest kit.

And I'm really not sure this stuff is doing his credibility any good...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nm/aliens/index.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/analprobe/about.htm

(And I'll never forgive him for his obliviously daft 'review' of the Nikon 45mm AI-P. So there.)

</rant>

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Old Digital Cameras - Still going strong
« Reply #56 on: March 09, 2018, 06:15:22 pm »
I generally try to pay more attention to photographers whose work I admire . The problem with that is they tend to be too busy taking pictures to pontificate online about the latest kit.

It's a valid point and, by definition, they will be using "old" gear and not a Nikon D850.

I like my gear to have proved itself for a couple of years, it takes me ages before I commit to buying stuff (so long-term tests are what I gravitate to). 
This always means I own "old" gear and hence why I'm looking at a Canon 5D. I think it's fair to say it's established itself.

OK, my 13 year old 5D "classic" is a bit extreme but I bought that with a specific purpose, of going back to basics.

Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.