Is it time to UPGRADE?

[Manfred M]

For the most part, digital cameras have very quickly reached a state where the technology has moved from being quite new to being quite mature in a very short period of time. A mature product does not provide the overwhelming need to upgrade from the previous to the current model because the improvements have become evolutionary, rather than revolutionary.

Many of the "features" that we see really smack of being marketing driven, a tick box that can be checked off as an improvement, rather than actually being of value to most users. I never use the video capabilites of my camera, whereas there is a whole group of DLSR video shooter out there. The recent push to "retro" looks shows that the camera manufacturers are fighting for the buyer's attention and looking to increase profit margins on their products.

I'm hoping for three main improvements, as technology move forward:

1. Smaller, lighter camera bodies - modern "pro" and semi-pro DSLRs are monsterously huge. I hope that minaturization reduces the size and weight, while retaining the larger sensor size;

2. Adaptive optics - high end pro lenses are optically wonderful, but they are huge and heavy. I would love to see a combination of improved optical design and image processing come up with a hybrid approach that provides excellent image quality that is enhanced through signal processing. We can eliminate chromatic abberation and vignetting in PP - lets built that type of technology into the capture engine; adn

3. Simplification - better designed, intuitive menus and smarter design of camera controls to reduce the clutter and proliferation of buttons and knobs on the camera bodies.

Put those revolutionaly innovations into the next generation of camera equipment and I will be front and centre in upgrading. Incremental, evolutionary changes are not going to excite me too much.

[William W]

. . . I wouldn't write-off ISO 409600 just because it may (will!) look noisy - there may well be situations where noise doesn't matter . . .

Indeed.

ISO 4096000 would allow a shot to be made at: F/4 @ 1/200s @ ISO 4096000, which would be excellent for facial features and detailed capture at EV 0
- OR –
ISO 4096000 would allow a shot to be made at: F/4 @ 1/800s @ ISO4096000 in EV3
1/800s would arrest most action of a person running.
EV 3~4 can be described as a Subject under Bright Street Lamps
EV 0~1 can be described as a Subject under Dim Street Lamps or a Bright Moon.
Both these applications would be very useful for surveillance; law enforcement and similar applications

ALSO –

On the more ‘run of the mill’ applications EV 4~6 could be a school football field lit at night-time: if Mum and Dad has access to ISO ISO 4096000 (or the probably resultant improved ISO 2048000/1024000) these “OK ISO’s" would allow Mum and Dad to use their (less expensive) telephoto zoom lenses (F/5.6~6.3) at shutter speeds around 1/1600s for their kid’s night time sports.

An upgraded ISO camera would allow more flexibility in the whole cache of lenses any kit had, even if those lenses were only slower 'prosumer' or even 'kit lenses' - buying a newer body might be (very well could be) a most viable option for many people, than buying new, expensive replacement fast glass.

The development of better higher ISO’s will have a positive spin-off for some applications – even if the “highest” ISO is not often used, the lower ones seem to get better: and that of itself is useful.

WW

[AB26]

The following from the pen of Thorsten von Overgaard:
“ A camera is a means to an end. It is a tool conceived and constructed to do certain things and achieve certain goals, mainly recording of light; ideally with an exactness in timing and definition of light rays, reflections, colors - and without adding to or removing from what is. That is what a camera is and it's role.”

Finding the right “means to an end” is easier today than it was ten years ago.

[NorthernFocus]

...An upgraded ISO camera would allow more flexibility in the whole cache of lenses any kit had, even if those lenses were only slower 'prosumer' or even 'kit lenses' - buying a newer body might be (very well could be) a most viable option for many people, than buying new, expensive replacement fast glass....

Now you've done it. Likely before I finish typing this someone else is going to jump in with the "there's no substitute for good glass" argument.

[AB26]

Now you've done it. Likely before I finish typing this someone else is going to jump in with the "there's no substitute for good glass" argument.

Dan, there is no substitute for a good eye! Best glass, best body, bad eye = crappy shot!

[Manfred M]

The following from the pen of Thorsten von Overgaard:
“ A camera is a means to an end. It is a tool conceived and constructed to do certain things and achieve certain goals, mainly recording of light; ideally with an exactness in timing and definition of light rays, reflections, colors - and without adding to or removing from what is. That is what a camera is and it's role.”

Finding the right “means to an end” is easier today than it was ten years ago.

That's a pretty long winded way to say that cameras take pictures....

[AB26]

That's a pretty long winded way to say that cameras take pictures....

I think that is a long winded way to say the one behind the camera takes the picture and the camera captures the image in a manner the one behind it operates it.

[NorthernFocus]

Dan, there is no substitute for a good eye! Best glass, best body, bad eye = crappy shot!

We may finally agree on something, Andre. That's also the hardest thing to upgrade....

[Manfred M]

Hmm...

Bad eye = crappy shot
Bad technique = crappy shot
Bad PP work = crappy shot
Bad gear = crappy shot
Having a bad day = crappy shot

Small wonder there are so many crappy shots out there; things just seems things are stacked against the photographer trying to get a good shot.

[chauncey]

It is without question that I will upgrade whenever Canon takes it upon themselves to increase the MP and ISO abilities of their professional gear. I say "professional gear" simply because if I cough out a less than satisfactory image, I want it to be 100% caused by user error and not gear induced.
My difficulty in creating that image often represents more difficulty than I can handle..."learning to use" that gear is not something that I want to introduce into the equation.
My decision will be based, not what I want to shoot, but what I might want to shoot with that new gear.

[JR1]

Ok I have just gone against what I have said earlier, I went into London Camera Exchange (my fave shop, Plymouth Devon) to get a couple of things, GoPro black edition for the surf and a Lowepro X300 roller when I tried the D4s, nice, I will get one in April / May, but also had a feel of the D7100, quite liked it so I bought it, it also ha a new £100 cashback offer.

Ordered the grip coming next week and a SB910 flash.

I have to say that I am very happy with my D7000s but the D7100 will do me well for summer, however to make the most of the camera and large files you do need a decent card, I use Lexar Pro600x SDHC I, anything less slows it down a lot.

But no matter how good the camera if the photographer is crap the end product will be, give a pro a box brownie and a bad photographer a D4s and I will bank on the best from the pro

[JR1]

Hmm...

Bad eye = crappy shot
Bad technique = crappy shot
Bad PP work = crappy shot
Bad gear = crappy shot
Having a bad day = crappy shot

Small wonder there are so many crappy shots out there; things just seems things are stacked against the photographer trying to get a good shot.

+1

[NorthernFocus]

Hmm...

Bad eye = crappy shot
Bad technique = crappy shot
Bad PP work = crappy shot
Bad gear = crappy shot
Having a bad day = crappy shot

Small wonder there are so many crappy shots out there; things just seems things are stacked against the photographer trying to get a good shot.

Well that cheered me right up

[rpcrowe]

"640K is more memory than anyone will ever need on a computer"

My fist computer with a hard-drive had 30K and I thought that was wonderful. No more having to slip in 5 1/4 inch program disks (remember them?) whenever I wanted to run any program....

[inkista]

"640K is more memory than anyone will ever need on a computer"

"We'll never need more than 32 bits for IP addresses!"

[FootLoose]

In answer to title of this thread: Is it time to upgrade?

Does your vision exceed the technical capabilities of your camera?

[NorthernFocus]

In answer to title of this thread: Is it time to upgrade?

Does your vision exceed the technical capabilities of your camera?

Depends on whether you are referring to vision as in one of the five primary senses or as in artistic vision Oh, no wait. The camera is better than me in both regards

[Bill Yeung]

7D serve me well too.
the secret I learned in using more of what I got and buy less is: Go less to the B&H, Canon site, web review site.........!!!
the latest buying of Canon 600 flash, and 100mm Marco is more of the above result!!!
Christmas, rebate (Canon gave out $220 rebate on the 100mm Marco ), new flash, !!!!!!!!!
By the way, if I am not a professional photographer, why I need to equipped as latest as them?
well!!

[AB26]

Please people don’t get me wrong. I am not saying technology is not advancing and you should not upgrade to the newest. Yes, of cause, if you can afford to stay on top of the newest technology there is an advantage in doing so – if you can utilize the technology to your best advantage.

What I am saying is that your four year old “outdated” camera is no longer so outdated that you are lagging years behind. You may still be able to utilize your “outdated” camera for many years. With the narrowing of the gap between a two year old camera and the newest on the market, you might be able to pick up a very good used camera with more advanced features than you can handle.

What made me ask questions is the “want to need an upgrade”. The technology in the new D4s is amazing and I am sure Canon will hit back with something to top the D4s. If I were a Professional sport photographer I would jump at the opportunity to add a D4s to my arsenal. If I were a portrait professional I would probably try to save up to get my hands on a Leica S2. (By the way: Leica is still not in the “ISO race”.)

I saw a D700 advertised: “brand new, still in box, 836 shutter actuations, R 10 400.00.” (Divide it by 11 and you have a US$ price) Very tempting. The D700 can do so much more than my D200, but can I do more with a D700 than I can do with a D200?
Do I NEED a D700? No! Do I WANT a D4s – YES!

[Colin Southern]

It is without question that I will upgrade whenever Canon takes it upon themselves to increase the MP and ISO abilities of their professional gear.

I'd have to say that pretty much the last thing we need is more MP - we already throw away over 95% of what we have now in a typical internet image. ISO is closely related to dynamic range - and dynamic range is inversely related to MP count, so the two very much work against each other for a given generation of technology.