Steve'sDigicams

manualfocus · Jan 28, 2005, 11:34 AM

Wildman,

Thanks for your prompt and interesting reply.

Your comment about glass keeping its value gave me long pause for thought. That really will be a good investment, and then it will just be a matter of updating camera bodies - if need be.

I must say though, I really like the diminutive size of the rangefinders - this as I really enjoy streetshooting of humans. Albeit, I like the small size of the new Pentax DSLR.

Most thought provoking for me, however, was a column by Mike Johnston (?) in his Sunday Morning Photographer archive where he spoke of the possibility of a Leica holding stead as a lifetime (!!!) camera. Where one could learn to use this as a precision instrument over a long period of time. Now that (!) I find intriguing.

BTW, I couldn't agree more concerning the hefty price of the Epson RD1.

I thought the A75 was larger than a pack of cigarettes, but I'm not a smoker, so my bad. I can't wait to get my hands on it - it's one week away.

Have a great day!

Wildman · Jan 28, 2005, 2:47 PM

The R-D1 is a very interesting camera. No auto focus. No RAW capability. It's a digital "retro" camera that even has a cocking lever to reset the lens. It would take a great photographer to get good results. Also, no sports (or very active kid) photography.

Most DSLRs are pretty big and the lenses are even bigger. Canon really rubs it in with some of their big WHITE lenses. Not inconspicuous at all. Once you commit to a camera, it's cost effective to stick with that manufacturer because lens mounts are specific to each brand. There are third party lenses (Sigma, et al) that are made for specific manufacturers' mounts. Haven't seen much lens choice for some of the less popular DSLRs yet. There are tons of lenses available for the EOS (Canon) mount and Nikon's mount. Haven't looked at Pentax mount lens availability.

Before heading down a rabbit trail based on reviews of a particular camera, pay a lot of attention to lens availability. In the long term, you'll pay a lot more for lenes than you will for the camera. If you make a jump to another brand later, you'll have to start your lens collection all over. $KA-CHING$. Good quality used lenses hold their value quite well, however. Cheap lenses don't.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Jan 28, 2005, 11:34 AM	#11
manualfocus Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 12	Wildman, Thanks for your prompt and interesting reply. Your comment about glass keeping its value gave me long pause for thought. That really will be a good investment, and then it will just be a matter of updating camera bodies - if need be. I must say though, I really like the diminutive size of the rangefinders - this as I really enjoy streetshooting of humans. Albeit, I like the small size of the new Pentax DSLR. Most thought provoking for me, however, was a column by Mike Johnston (?) in his Sunday Morning Photographer archive where he spoke of the possibility of a Leica holding stead as a lifetime (!!!) camera. Where one could learn to use this as a precision instrument over a long period of time. Now that (!) I find intriguing. BTW, I couldn't agree more concerning the hefty price of the Epson RD1. I thought the A75 was larger than a pack of cigarettes, but I'm not a smoker, so my bad. I can't wait to get my hands on it - it's one week away. Have a great day!

Jan 28, 2005, 2:47 PM	#12
Wildman Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 544	The R-D1 is a very interesting camera. No auto focus. No RAW capability. It's a digital "retro" camera that even has a cocking lever to reset the lens. It would take a great photographer to get good results. Also, no sports (or very active kid) photography. Most DSLRs are pretty big and the lenses are even bigger. Canon really rubs it in with some of their big WHITE lenses. Not inconspicuous at all. Once you commit to a camera, it's cost effective to stick with that manufacturer because lens mounts are specific to each brand. There are third party lenses (Sigma, et al) that are made for specific manufacturers' mounts. Haven't seen much lens choice for some of the less popular DSLRs yet. There are tons of lenses available for the EOS (Canon) mount and Nikon's mount. Haven't looked at Pentax mount lens availability. Before heading down a rabbit trail based on reviews of a particular camera, pay a lot of attention to lens availability. In the long term, you'll pay a lot more for lenes than you will for the camera. If you make a jump to another brand later, you'll have to start your lens collection all over. $KA-CHING$. Good quality used lenses hold their value quite well, however. Cheap lenses don't.