Photographer
SayCheeZ!
Posts: 20621
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one!
-The XYZ 5000 is now in stores, but I'm going to wait a few months until I know they've worked the bugs out.
-The bugs are fixed but now I'm going to wait until the price drops a bit.
-Black Friday is coming soon. That's when I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000
-I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000 right before Christmas because it will be super cheap,
-I'm waiting until after Christmas, they'll surely be on sale then!
-I just heard that the XYZ 5000 is being discontinued!. I'm going to buy one when it goes on clearance sale!
-Wow, the XYZ 6000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one!
Photographer
fsp
Posts: 3656
New York, New York, US
hahahahahaha
I'll never chase the technology train. I've seen so many upgrades in my lifetime, i have learned it's a waste of time and money.
soooo true! no sooner does the XYZ5000 hits the streets, the XYZ6000 will be right behind it in a few months.
Photographer
BTHPhoto
Posts: 6985
Fairbanks, Alaska, US
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced.
Buuuuuut .... after doing some research, it doesn't look like any of its bells and whistles address any of the things I'd like to see improved in my still-perfectly-functioning XYZ 2000. I think I'll just spend my money on a lens and a model instead.
Photographer
fsp
Posts: 3656
New York, New York, US
oooooh hold on there.... the XYZ5000 is not software compatable with the XYZ2000 accessories n lenses.
Photographer
DOUGLASFOTOS
Posts: 10604
Los Angeles, California, US
The F-Stop wrote:
hahahahahaha
I'll never chase the technology train. I've seen so many upgrades in my lifetime, i have learned it's a waste of time and money.
soooo true! no sooner does the XYZ5000 hits the streets, the XYZ6000 will be right behind it in a few months. If you rent...you can have the newest tech at all times.
Photographer
Thomas Van Dyke
Posts: 3233
Washington, District of Columbia, US
Tyler Durden wrote:
The things you own end up owning you...
Photographer
Mark Salo
Posts: 11726
Olney, Maryland, US
SayCheeZ! wrote:
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one!
-The XYZ 5000 is now in stores, but I'm going to wait a few months until I know they've worked the bugs out.
-The bugs are fixed but now I'm going to wait until the price drops a bit.
. . . The price dropped down but not to my target.
Then the price went up a bit!
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
I waited about a year after my camera was introduced to buy it. The price dropped. I bought my previous camera 5 years before.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
-I just heard that the XYZ 5000 is being discontinued!. I'm going to buy one when it goes on clearance sale! The reason I have over 15 cameras. (I think 15 but there might be more!) is Ebay & Craigslist. Approx. 10 are film cameras (OM1's & OM2's) with a few non working bodies for parts. Then I have at least 5 Olympus digital cameras that have interchangeable lens capability. I have adopters so that I can use the classic Olympus glass with the digital as well. Also two PC's with 2 scanners & 1 decent printer. I'm a bargain hunter! 
Model
CharlieMW
Posts: 93
Dallas, Texas, US
This explains why I still have a Kodak Brownie.
Photographer
TomFRohwer
Posts: 1601
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
SayCheeZ! wrote:
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one! The XYZ 5000 was just announced. I need a new camera body. I will buy a XYZ 4000. Either new for a reduced price or used for a even more reduced price.
Photographer
Light and Lens Studio
Posts: 3450
Sisters, Oregon, US
BTHPhoto wrote:
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced.
Buuuuuut .... after doing some research, it doesn't look like any of its bells and whistles address any of the things I'd like to see improved in my still-perfectly-functioning XYZ 2000. I think I'll just spend my money on a lens and a model instead. +1
A camera (or lens) isn't made obsolete or outdated just because a newer version is released. If the current model or version still does what you need it to do or want it to do, then it doesn't need to be replaced. Sort of a version of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Photographer
Vindictive Images
Posts: 584
Houston, Texas, US
Light and Lens Studio wrote:
+1
A camera (or lens) isn't made obsolete or outdated just because a newer version is released. If the current model or version still does what you need it to do or want it to do, then it doesn't need to be replaced. Sort of a version of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Yep, similar to this. My camera is just fine until it breaks. The advances in technology shock me every time I replace a camera when I need to rather than fix it. I'm not even talking about what's the latest and greatest either.
Photographer
phantom of the light
Posts: 114
Albuquerque, New Mexico, US
The day my D7000 was delivered was the day they announced the D7100. I still have, use and like the 7000, and see no reason to change.
Photographer
Zack Zoll
Posts: 6895
Glens Falls, New York, US
I would propose a second version:
- xyz5000 is announced.
- poster says it would be the best camera ever if only they included features ABC.
- xyz6000 is announced, with features ABC. Poster claims camera still falls short, as it lacks features DEF.
- xyz130 is announced with features ABC and DEF. Poster claims new version abandons roots, and ignores userbase.
For what it's worth, I recently talked myself out of an upgrade. At the last minute I decided that I didn't really need it, so much as I wanted it.
I'm looking forward to what will be out there when I do need it though. There will always be a new sexy camera, and passing on today's sexy camera just makes it easier to buy tomorrow's.
Photographer
Giacomo Cirrincioni
Posts: 22232
Stamford, Connecticut, US
The camera I'm currently on the fence about is $30K+.... I figure it makes sense to think it over a bit.
Photographer
JimMendrinos
Posts: 29
New York, New York, US
Did the people I shoot put you up to this. I swear this Holga 120 camera is a keeper!
Photographer
RonColeman
Posts: 246
Windsor, California, US
Why buy it? Your phone will do more than the camera will!
Photographer
Photos by DeanR
Posts: 696
Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Who cares? I'm not an XYZ guy.
I'm tied to ABC, and I'm waiting for the new ABC SuperAwesome-Matic.
Photographer
Natural Light on Location
Posts: 252
Fort Worth, Texas, US
CharlieMW wrote:
This explains why I still have a Kodak Brownie. Mine got stolen
Photographer
Clippix
Posts: 58
Luton, England, United Kingdom
Photographer
Michelle-Martin
Posts: 49
Gaithersburg, Maryland, US
CharlieMW wrote:
This explains why I still have a Kodak Brownie. This was so much simpler back when film was king. A functioning body was good for as long as you were happy with the glass that fit it.
I'm using what I've got until it breaks. Or I'll use my Brownies.
Photographer
Zack Zoll
Posts: 6895
Glens Falls, New York, US
Michelle-Martin wrote:
This was so much simpler back when film was king. A functioning body was good for as long as you were happy with the glass that fit it.
I'm using what I've got until it breaks. Or I'll use my Brownies. I think it's a little different than that, since the same can be said about digital cameras.
With the possible exception of lens coatings and design, there hasn't been a single improvement in picture quality in film cameras since about 1975. Sure the meters are better, you get autofocus, brighter focusing screens, etc. But if you put a Nikon F2 and an F6 on the exact same settings with the exact same film and the exact same lenses, you will get two identical images.
By this mid 70s, pretty much every major company was using electromagnetic shutters(which are more accurate and less prone to losing calibration than spring shutters), and the cameras were generally engineered to hold the film perfectly flat and in alignment; unlike older models, where Brand X took sharper photos than Brand Y because Brand Y held the film all loosey-goosey.
And I say lens design MAY have played a part, because Leica had the same 50mm Summilux design for about thirty years. And until the aspheric version, it was single coated. There were several different coatings on the different lens elements, but it was still single coated. And even today that's still one of the best lenses out there, despite being designed in the late 60s.
The biggest difference was that with film cameras, the improvements in image quality were almost all from the film, which was 100% backwards compatible. New Tri-X is better than the original formula in every single measurable way. And if you put new Tri-X in an old camera, your negatives will look exactly the same as if you had used a new camera.
There are cameras like the Red and Phase One's backs that can swap a sensor and processor out, but keep the body the same. I think it will be several years before we see this in consumer gear, and we may never.
If anyone does it, I suspect it will be Nikon, Canon, or Pentax. At this point those are the only major brands where camera size isn't a selling point(those interchangeable sensor cameras are MUCH bigger), they have had longer than other brands to work on a more-or-less permanent UI, and those buyers seem less interested in getting all the latest features like Wi-Fi and a tilting LCD than with other brands.
It would also help them re-establish their reputations as professional workhorse cameras, which has slipped a little in recent years. The difference between a 1D and a consumer camera has been shrinking for a while now, and it's harder to sell a nw body every three years than it was when the time span was thirteen years.
Ricoh flirted with the idea a while back, but had all sorts of other issues with it.
That said, people that want a digital back for their F3 or Spotmatic will probably never get it. Not until technology moves on to something cooler, anyway. There are just way too many variables to cram into a tiny space.
But if you want a digital back for your 501c, and you're willing to pay the equivalent in 1970s dollars, that's been an option for a long time. Ten to forty grand seems like a lot for a digital MF camera ... But if you work out what the gear used to cost decades ago, it's actually not a whole lot more.
Photographer
Sablesword
Posts: 383
Gurnee, Illinois, US
XYX 5000? I'm holding out for the XYZ 200, the long-awaited successor to the higher-end XYZ 100.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Michelle-Martin wrote:
This was so much simpler back when film was king. A functioning body was good for as long as you were happy with the glass that fit it.
I'm using what I've got until it breaks. Or I'll use my Brownies. 
Like I said, I've still got my first OM-1 bought in 1979.
Photographer
martin b
Posts: 2770
Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines
phantom of the light wrote:
The day my D7000 was delivered was the day they announced the D7100. I still have, use and like the 7000, and see no reason to change. I still have mine too.
Photographer
Al Green XM
Posts: 383
Townsville, Queensland, Australia
it's a good thing - with bodies I stay a gen behind picking up the superseded or lightly used awesome cameras for a song as the herd rumbles on. Just got a Fuji X100s for about half its original cost and still a great camera.
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Patrick Walberg wrote:
Like I said, I've still got my first OM-1 bought in 1979. I have a working Nikon F2 but I don't use it.
Model
Michelle Genevieve
Posts: 1140
Gaithersburg, Maryland, US
Jerry Nemeth wrote:
I have a working Nikon F2 but I don't use it. Oh, that was a sweet camera!
[gettin' all nostalgic up in here]
Photographer
Natural Light on Location
Posts: 252
Fort Worth, Texas, US
If you don't have a Speed Graphic, you're not really here from the Newspaper.
Model
Model MoRina
Posts: 6639
MacMurdo - permanent station of the US, Sector claimed by New Zealand, Antarctica
SayCheeZ! wrote:
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one!
-The XYZ 5000 is now in stores, but I'm going to wait a few months until I know they've worked the bugs out.
-The bugs are fixed but now I'm going to wait until the price drops a bit.
-Black Friday is coming soon. That's when I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000
-I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000 right before Christmas because it will be super cheap,
-I'm waiting until after Christmas, they'll surely be on sale then!
-I just heard that the XYZ 5000 is being discontinued!. I'm going to buy one when it goes on clearance sale!
-Wow, the XYZ 6000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one! I sold cars for many years. We heard this same thing from a small number of "regulars" who would visit the dealership. They knew everything about the brand and the competition. I mostly considered them... lonely.
Photographer
DeanLautermilch
Posts: 321
Sebring, Florida, US
I always hate being around street photographer 'gearheads' that are waiting for Nikon to introduce the Z500TX and as soon as that camera hits the market then they will start taking images. I used to hang out with group and they would use waiting for a new body/lens as an excuse of why they were not shooting. I think camera should die from being overworked and not from collecting dust. I just wore out my third Nikon body as the shutter is dying.
Photographer
martin b
Posts: 2770
Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines
DeanLautermilch wrote:
I always hate being around street photographer 'gearheads' that are waiting for Nikon to introduce the Z500TX and as soon as that camera hits the market then they will start taking images. I used to hang out with group and they would use waiting for a new body/lens as an excuse of why they were not shooting. I think camera should die from being overworked and not from collecting dust. I just wore out my third Nikon body as the shutter is dying. At one of our Christmas party photo shoots the other day a guest at the party called out my photographer for not knowing the specs of her camera. He knew all the specs but my photographer, a young lady, didn't. I am the one who buys all the equipment for my photography business and my poor photographer doesn't know she is shooting with the older 24-70mm lens and that there is a new one she should not buy because the guest kept telling her about equipment. I am sure he was just trying to be friendly but it comes off badly. My photographer is a cute 18 year old lady and is a good photographer but she really never cared what the megapixel count was or what was the brand of the lens we use.
This is a pretty regular occurrence I'm sure it has to her being a pretty girl.
Photographer
Mikel M Louder Photog
Posts: 305
West Pasco, Washington, US
SayCheeZ! wrote:
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one!
-The XYZ 5000 is now in stores, but I'm going to wait a few months until I know they've worked the bugs out.
-The bugs are fixed but now I'm going to wait until the price drops a bit.
-Black Friday is coming soon. That's when I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000
-I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000 right before Christmas because it will be super cheap,
-I'm waiting until after Christmas, they'll surely be on sale then!
-I just heard that the XYZ 5000 is being discontinued!. I'm going to buy one when it goes on clearance sale!
-Wow, the XYZ 6000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one! I find it amusing that the posts I read, contradict what I know about most photographers (I've done this 15 years, I do know my colleagues and their habits). I can only conclude that those who "chase the next big thing" are offended by this post and won't out themselves! haha.
BTW, those of us who stick around, we don't chase our tails....or the next big thing.
Fun post. Thanks for the laugh. :-)
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Jerry Nemeth wrote:
I have a working Nikon F2 but I don't use it. I have used the Nikon F3 ... loved that camera, but it was provided to me by my employer. My collection of Olympus glass is extensive, and I could never afford to replace it with Nikon. Olympus = The poor mans camera, but it does the job!
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Patrick Walberg wrote:
I have used the Nikon F3 ... loved that camera, but it was provided to me by my employer. My collection of Olympus glass is extensive, and I could never afford to replace it with Nikon. Olympus = The poor mans camera, but it does the job! I use my Nikkor film lenses on my Canon with an adapter. I have a lot of them. Even a 500mm mirror lens. 
Photographer
toesup
Posts: 1240
Grand Junction, Colorado, US
SayCheeZ! wrote:
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one!
-The XYZ 5000 is now in stores, but I'm going to wait a few months until I know they've worked the bugs out.
-The bugs are fixed but now I'm going to wait until the price drops a bit.
-Black Friday is coming soon. That's when I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000
-I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000 right before Christmas because it will be super cheap,
-I'm waiting until after Christmas, they'll surely be on sale then!
-I just heard that the XYZ 5000 is being discontinued!. I'm going to buy one when it goes on clearance sale!
-Wow, the XYZ 6000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one! So what happened to the fabled XYZ 5000s?
Photographer
Love the Arts
Posts: 1040
Malibu, California, US
SayCheeZ! wrote:
-Wow, the XYZ 5000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one!
-The XYZ 5000 is now in stores, but I'm going to wait a few months until I know they've worked the bugs out.
-The bugs are fixed but now I'm going to wait until the price drops a bit.
-Black Friday is coming soon. That's when I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000
-I'm going to buy the XYZ 5000 right before Christmas because it will be super cheap,
-I'm waiting until after Christmas, they'll surely be on sale then!
-I just heard that the XYZ 5000 is being discontinued!. I'm going to buy one when it goes on clearance sale!
-Wow, the XYZ 6000 was just announced. I'm going to buy one! Just wait for the XYZ 7000's they will be better. LOL!
Photographer
Zack Zoll
Posts: 6895
Glens Falls, New York, US
martin b wrote:
At one of our Christmas party photo shoots the other day a guest at the party called out my photographer for not knowing the specs of her camera. He knew all the specs but my photographer, a young lady, didn't. I am the one who buys all the equipment for my photography business and my poor photographer doesn't know she is shooting with the older 24-70mm lens and that there is a new one she should not buy because the guest kept telling her about equipment. I am sure he was just trying to be friendly but it comes off badly. My photographer is a cute 18 year old lady and is a good photographer but she really never cared what the megapixel count was or what was the brand of the lens we use.
This is a pretty regular occurrence I'm sure it has to her being a pretty girl. This is a common occurrence.
If you read/watch Annie Leibowitz interviews, it is painfully obvious that she doesn't know shit about the technical aspects of her gear, or often her job in general.
And then a bunch of commenters complain about how unfair and shitty it is that she's famous and they aren't, when they know so much more than her.
Meanwhile, the lesson they ought to take away is that more often than not, the specs are immaterial - and you can always hire someone else to do your post work. It's not like Avadon, Newton, or anybody else that gets named did their own printing either. They at least could, but they didn't.
I don't like Leibowitz's images - I think they are too overwrought and artificial. Bit those are the same complaints I use for people that use too damn much Photoshop, or 'correctively pose' so much that the subject looks unnatural. If my complaint about Leibowitz is the same one I trot out when I think a photographer is too technical, clearly her lack of technical knowledge isn't affecting her work in the slightest.
Photographer
martin b
Posts: 2770
Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines
Zack Zoll wrote:
This is a common occurrence.
If you read/watch Annie Leibowitz interviews, it is painfully obvious that she doesn't know shit about the technical aspects of her gear, or often her job in general.
And then a bunch of commenters complain about how unfair and shitty it is that she's famous and they aren't, when they know so much more than her.
Meanwhile, the lesson they ought to take away is that more often than not, the specs are immaterial - and you can always hire someone else to do your post work. It's not like Avadon, Newton, or anybody else that gets named did their own printing either. They at least could, but they didn't.
I don't like Leibowitz's images - I think they are too overwrought and artificial. Bit those are the same complaints I use for people that use too damn much Photoshop, or 'correctively pose' so much that the subject looks unnatural. If my complaint about Leibowitz is the same one I trot out when I think a photographer is too technical, clearly her lack of technical knowledge isn't affecting her work in the slightest. Thanks for the post. I enjoyed reading that. My photographer also enjoyed hearing that the technical specs aren't important. She just needs to focus on learning what she is interested in, that is making people look great.
me on the other hand am looking forward to the next great camera which I hope i can sell my soul to buy.
|
