Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 14, 2008, 11:01 AM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1

I am 83 years old and have been an avid photo fan it seems forever. when i bought my first digital camera with 1mpix capacity i was astonded by this new way of taking pictures that was maybe five years ago.

Since that time we have seen an astonding thing happen. film went out the window along with several large producers of the same. now we are in the pixel race that looks like it will never end. more new cameras each day being introduced more features more and more and more. I suppose this is the way all new products are intended to develope. we saw that many times with copy machines computers etc.

i say give us all a chance to breath . let us try to stop this crazy wave that is out of control. stop it so we do not become camera junkies looking for the next fix. the next high the next wow. let it stop.

as long as we the consumer continue to trade up and trade up and trade up we are going to be caught in this crazy spin of must have must have. lets stop it by living happy with our current most able cameras.
ragman83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 14, 2008, 11:34 AM   #2
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,369


I've moved this thread down to our General Q&A Forum since it's more of discussion versus introduction topic.

You see improvements and changes in lots of different products. For example, do you really need a newer, faster, computer? Or, do you need a new mobile phone, or do you need a new car, stereo, television, clothes, etc.?

Are you happy with a 12" black and white television, or would you prefer a newer color, wide screen, high resolution model with a much larger screen? Or, would you prefer no TV at all? ;-) If photography is a serious hobby, then sometimes a user can outgrow their equipment when they see limitations it has for shooting in some conditions, versus a different model that's available. So, many users will upgrade to take advantage of advancements, allowing them to capture better images in more conditions.

Yes, in some cases, we are seeing some excess (i.e., the megapixel race in subcompact camera models can sometimes exceed the capabilities of the camera in other areas). Or, camera owners upgrading when their skill level is the limitation they're running into, versus the equipment they're using. Some people may want to upgrade because they want something new and different, just like you may want a different vehicle, suit, sofa, etc.

There are many reasons that camera buyers may want to upgrade. They may want to capture detail that's visible at much larger print sizes, or they may want the ability to shoot at higher ISO speeds for better photos in low light, or they may want better metering for a wider range of conditions, faster Autofocus Speed to help capture moving subjects, etc.

Equipment wears out and breaks, too (buttons, switches, dials, shutter mechanisms, lens gears, etc.). Many digital camera owners are taking a lot more photos now compared to when they were using film.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2008, 12:41 PM   #3
Senior Member
VTphotog's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Extreme Northeastern Vermont, USA
Posts: 4,164

Ah, good old Mad Ave, getting people to run salivating after the next, best thing. I do agree that people spend way too much time looking for techonological fixes for things they could correct with just a little more effort and education on their own part.

And planned obsolescence bothers me too. I used the same Minolta camera for 30 years, and still have it, but now I can't get a new battery for the meter, as it contains (gasp!) Mercury. There are modifications that can be done, but none are, for me, satisfactory.

I do have a dream digital camera, and it is almost here, as the Panasonic G1, but I will carry on with my 5-year old Pentax until I find one done just right.

JimC wrote:

Are you happy with a 12" black and white television, or would you prefer a newer color, wide screen, high resolution model with a much larger screen? Or, would you prefer no TV at all? ;-)

I won't have a choice. For me it will be not TV at all. I can receive poor to medium analog TV now from a few stations, but have tested a digital converter, and get nothing from it, even though I know at least a couple of the stations are already brodcasting digital. Don't even ask me to pay to watch commercially sponsored TV. If it was a matter of being allowed to just cruise along with what we have until it breaks down, or we want to change, it would be one thing, but to be forced into it is another matter entirely.

VTphotog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2008, 1:58 PM   #4
Senior Member
TCav's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,394

Computers get twice as powerful every 18 months. A computer that was state-of-the-art 3 years ago is now obsolescent. That doesn't happen because they can't do the same things they did three years ago; it happens because we want our computers to do more stuff faster than they did three years ago. Our expectations change.

The same is true of digicams. 'Face Recognition'. 'Smile Recognition'. Better, faster autofocus systems. Better, faster autoexposure systems. Better, faster image processing systems. Better, faster photo storage.

And, notice, I didn't mention 'Megapixels' even once.

You are certainly welcome to take some time out to catch your breath, but the world isn't going to stop spinning while you do it.

I still have a 5" B&W TV that's battery powered. I use it whenever the power goes out. On February 17, 2009, it won't work anymore, and no one makes a battery powered DTV that I can replace it with. That pisses me off. The fact that I have a 6MP dSLR andmy sons have12MP dSLRs, doesn't.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2008, 11:32 AM   #5
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 13

This is a great thread for many reasons. First off, you are correct. I believe it moves too fast. On the other hand I read a couple of articles that come to mind here. The first one was about some serious professional photographers that were given point and shoots and spent a day taking pictures with "inferior" equipment. The images they produced were amazing. I read this article shortly after purchasing my Cannon 40D. I also learned that the equipment does not make the photographer. Sure having a certain piece of equipment can make it easier, but you still have to have knowledge and luck on your side. Ansel Adams didn't have all the cool toys that we do and he produced amazing images, truly an artist in the field. I am sure that if he showed up to do a photoshoot, no one would laugh at his equipment. They would be honored, I know I would. I am using him as an example and mean no disrespect.

This brings me to a thread that I read on a forum concerning a wedding photographer. They shot the wedding with a Rebel and a Nikon(lower end model). People in the forum crushed the photographer for their choice of cameras and ISO speed, basically everything they did. The "professionals" stated that you should shoot weddings with this type of camera or this speed. In the end, the photog defended their choice and I believe it all ended well.

This leads me to a very troubled thought; are we trading artistic ability for tech-goodies. You can put the best camera in the world in my hands and I will shoot the same photo that I can with my 40D. Thia is because I am limited by my knowledge of photography. I believe I take decent shots and I learn something in the "lab" every time, but that is what makes me a better photographer, not buying a new camera. Likewise, you can put a obsolete P&S in the hands of a professional and they can get images that I could only dream of getting. This is because they have the knowledge.

That being said, it boils down to some very distinct points. First, some believe that you have to have the latest and greatest to be the best. Secondly, you should judge a photographer by their equipment rather than there work. I disagree with both of these views. We are not going to stop the tech race, but we can educate those around us so that they don't buy into it. In the end, if your camera and the images you shoot make you happy then who cares what anyone else thinks. If you are selling your work and your customers are happy, then it is all irrelevant. Besides, if the customer is happy with the work, then you have a good lab, but that is a another topic all together.

Happy Shooting
piratelife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2008, 9:03 AM   #6
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6

There was a line in an old song. 'Everything that you think, do and say is in the pill you took today.' Thats supposed to be the year 2525. I guess we're well on the way already. Manufacturers are out to make money. They tell us what to buy. We go along with it. There aim is to sell as many units as possible.The camera I want will never exist because not enough people will buy it.I agree with the poster. Why do we need all this 'stuff'. Look at all the features we never use on most of the electrical stuff that we buy. I probably use 40% of the options on my Olympus E410 but I don't even have a depth of field scale on the lens, crazy. I actually understood what I was doing with my old Nikon FE, now I've lost the plot and just say ###$$$ it and use auto most of the time.Oh well we can always fix it up in Photoshop, der.While we keep accepting what the manufacturers churn out there will be no change. They will produce whats easyist for them.
bondy100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2008, 9:55 AM   #7
Senior Member
TCav's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,394

Take a look at Need to find a GOOD camera for GF for birthday. This guy's girlfriend wants a digicam that is 'Pink' and 'Sleek'. To her, a camera is as much a fashion accessory as a tool; in fact, she probably doesn't recognize it as a tool at all. And when Vogue's definition of 'Sleek' changes, she'll want a new camera. (I think 'Pink' is safe, though.)

Is that the manufacturers telling us what to buy? Maybe. But it's also why Vogue's definition of 'Fashion' is clothing that keeps women from being able to run away from their attackers.

My parents are Irish, Dutch, German and Danish. My father's step-father was Italian, and my father loved Italian food. For Thanksgiving, we always had Veal Parmesan and Lasagna. I grew up in an Italian neighborhood. All my Italian classmates had Turkey for Thanksgiving. Why? Because that's what 'Good Housekeeping' magazine said a Thanksgiving dinner should be. I don't think Turkey Farmers had much to do with it, though they certainly reaped the benefits.

The manufacturers don't tell us what to buy. Some moron on a soap box tells us what to buy, and some of usfollow their instructions. The manufacturers just fill the orders. Some of us sit back and watch the ensuing idiocy, but the idiocy will continue as long as morons have soap boxes.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2008, 10:49 AM   #8
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,528

bondy100 wrote:
While we keep accepting what the manufacturers churn out there will be no change. They will produce whats easyist for them.
I disagree to an extent. Manufacturers dont just pull stuff out of the blue. They produce features based upon what their market research tells them will sell. Now, sadly you'll never get everyone to agree on what is important. While I don't require a pink camera - there's a big market segment that does. But don't scoff. At one point the argument could be made "eye glasses aren't about fashion they're a tool to make you see better". But I doubt too many people now would argue we should just go back to ugly glasses without regard to how they look.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"And, to an extent - if someone is more likely to carry a camera because it's small enough to go into a pocket or looks 'cool enough' then they're more likely to take photos with it. So, it does benfit the art of photography.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"Even for the non-fashion conscious though it would be difficult to peg down what are the truly important features. For instance, as a sports photographer, the advancements in high ISO performance have been phenomenally important. Usable ISO 3200 and even 6400 allows me to take photos I couldn't have dreamed of in film days. But other photographers could care less about that because their style of photography doesn't benefit from ISO 3200. To them, movies in DSLRs or live view are the greatest advancement. And, if it helps them make better photos they're not wrong.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"If your aim is photographic and not just gadgetry the key is to be discriminating about which gear upgrades will truly allow you to make better photos. The fact that some of those upgrades weren't 'needed' 20 years ago isn't relevant. People shot for years in B&W - does that mean color wasn't good? People manually focused, does that mean AF is a waste? To me what's great is that by pushing out generation upon generation and having a lot of competition the technology advances quickly. If you're a patient buyer who knows what they need instead of waiting 5 or 10 years for it you now may only have to wait 2 years.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2008, 2:44 AM   #9
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6

Why does the guys girlfriend want a pink sleek camera? Did she come to that conclusion by herself? I doubt it very much.

Much of the time we are told what we want.Time and time again I am totally frustrated in getting what I need because it doesn't fit in with the latest trend. I've been waiting for a phone that is truely minisule. The technology is there to give us James Bonds watch phone or a pen sizebut no. Phones are actually getting bigger as more and more stuff is crammed in so the price can be sustained. I just want a phone that I don'teven notice I'm carrying.

Car, I want a small car with rear wheel drive, can't afford a BMW. Why do I want rear wheel drive? Because the layout allows me to do things myself. I don't need to pay a mechanic $200 to do an oil change and put in a new fanbelt. Ludite I am, but I'm sure there are others like me around somewhere.Why can't I get a small rear wheel drive car? because it's much easier for manufacturers to make a FWD car. They tell us there's more room for you in a FWD car, so we all say wow good idea! Until the fanbelt breaks.

Why can't I buy a bicycle with a quill steerer? because aheadsets have no threads and manufacturers save a couple of cents. Then they tell everyone how aheadsets are much stronger/better and we follow like sheep. Hey, I want to raise my handelbars, sorry mate no can do.

Why all the crap about mega megapixels? Because it's all the average Joe looks at when he buys a camera.Even the guys girlfriend wantsa truckload of megapixels in her sleek, pink camera.Sorry, I want simple quality, not quantity.
bondy100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2008, 9:01 AM   #10
Senior Member
BillDrew's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512

I just want a tomato plant that will produce year-round here in Northern Wisconsin. I want to go out and dig a fresh tomato from under a snow bank. The only reason no one has produced such a tomato is the oil companies want to keep long distance trucks on the road shipping tomatoes up from Florida.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:17 AM.