Some Thoughts on Digital Camera Lifespan

PETAPIXEL ^ | July 06, 2021 | Ming Thein

[SWAMPSNIPER]

This small mountain of gear leads to two very frightening thoughts. Firstly, there’s no ending in sight; one keeps accumulating more and more equipment in order to keep pushing the edge of what’s possible both from a compositional and artistic standpoint, as well as from an image quality standpoint. You’ve either got to have a great day job and very deep pockets, or some good recurring clients.

The second thought is around obsolescence. In the film days, the camera body and lenses lasted a long time; you invested in glass, got a decent body – one that fulfilled your personal needs as a photographer – and then picked the right film for the job. In that sense, image quality differences between brands were down to the lenses and the photographer. This is to say that if you put the same film in every camera, the difference in sharpness or acuity or color or whatever would be down to the lens only. If you wanted more image quality, you went for a bigger format – and thus a larger sensor. The digital equivalent to this would be having only one photo site design of a fixed pixel pitch; say around 4.9 microns, which would get you 16MP at APS-C, 36MP at FX, about 60MP on 645, and something silly on large format. For an equivalent size print, the larger format would definitely outdo the smaller format by an amount proportional to the difference in resolution.

[ctdonath2]

You don’t understand. The CAMERA was HUGE. Not the lens, that was normal; the body was very big. Manageable, but around one square foot.

[KC Burke]

I am dreaming about a Fuji X Pro1 with all three lens. I’ve tried to convince myself I’m too much an amateur to really justify it but I still want it and an A5 convertible.

[Erasmus]

I had Canon F series SLRS from 67-82, when I switched to Olympus OMs. Those were stolen in 1987.

Coincidentally, that same year I was in a meeting with the chief designer of Canon's then-new EOS line. He brought a sample EOS (the 650), a speedlite, and the components of the ultrasonic focus motor for us to fatfinger.

So I finally got around to getting another SLR, an EOS Rebel G, in 1997, before an extended assignment in Germany. Then a couple years later an EOS 3--a big step up--and additional lenses along the way.

In 2005 I went EOS digital, the same year as you. I suspect your camera was the same model as mine, a Digital Rebel ("Drebel") G.

Since then, an EOS 50D, and as of last week the credit card-busting EOS 5D MK III.

These cameras complement my Ansco Readyflash and my Argus C3. ≤}B^)

[SWAMPSNIPER]

This is my current work camera.

I don't use the fast 50 much, it usually has a long lens mounted.

I use the 50mm f1.4 for shots like this for the most part. These are fossil shark teeth.

The camera is usually cleaner but it spends a lot of time in swamps.

[ReignOfError]

Here’s the thing: sure, you’ll get more detail from a larger resolution camera. But, when you print a picture at say, 20 inches or greater, do you look at it from 10 inches away? Most often, pictures that are larger are viewed from longer distances, and the extra detail is lost anyway. If all you’re doing is making 4x6 prints, you don’t often need more than 3 megapixels. If you’re viewing the pictures on a computer, you don’t need much more than the best resolution most computers can handle. A 2560 x 1600 display is only 4.1 megapixels.

One word: Crop.

Higher resolution gives you more options. At 3MP you can print a 4x6 photo of the full frame; at 18MP you can print a 4x6 photo of one face in the crowd. Resolution is certainly overblown in camera marketing, but it counts for something.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

You can buy a digital camera with a viewfinder, I won’t buy one without it. The screen is useless in the field unless you’re in the shade..

[Erasmus]

Polarized sunglasses wreak havoc on the appearance of both the LCD screen and the SLR viewfinder. I have to take mine off whenever I compose a shot.

[Erasmus]

Your Sony looks like it was designed by M. C. Escher.

[listenhillary]

A hundred and fifty years from now, will they have a clue what to do with a compact flash card/memory stick micro-sd card that might have images left on it?

Always amazed at them finding boxes of glass negatives that are a hundred years old and the images are still salvageable.

[insideguy]

It’s not bad on the cinema side:

Auto focus (even now) is no good for DSLR video —that means the super old 100% manual lenses are GREAT for video.

I shot this on a GH2 with a **50-year-old lens***:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFnUt2K-NW4

[Aliska]

Woo Hoo! You got a ff. My 10-22 which is a very versatile lens will not fit on a ff.

I have the EOS 20D. You've changed more than me but maybe your learning curve is a little higher.

I'm really happy with my gear. The 20D; all my lenses are Canon I got with rebates (I shop carefully), the 10-22 which is a lot more versatile than I initially realized, does have bad CA which is easy to fix, the 24-70L which is my all-purpose lens, the 70-200 2.8 L I don't use too much, and the 100-400L, don't use that too much either. I had a Sigma 105 but the DOF was terrible so the other day I was wondering if I ought to spring for a Canon 100mm prime or get the 85mm.

I've got a tripod, monopod, a neat, quality-built car window pod, and the Speedlite which I only know how to use on one setting and right now use paper for a diffuser. I adjust the WhBal manually and don't know how to batch process very well.

So have fun. When I do birds, I guess I won't bother with the 1.4?X extender because you have to tape pins and can't afford nor handle the 600mm which would be a dream.

I haven't taken too many photos lately. Yeah putting that MKIII on your card, that's not in my future until I know how I'm going to make other things work.

I don't know what the advantage is to have the ff other than my vf is 90%; you wouldn't think it would be such a bother but my eyes have a little peripheral difficulties and it's hard to frame my subjects nicely. So I compose by cropping lol. I guess the burst is faster and probably a lot more that's better it's best I don't know lol.

Have fun and post some photos when you get some good ones out of your MK III. If you do any pro work, you will need backup gear.

I want to do more birds and night photos. For the latter, I would need an upgrade to get the best out of those. I've seen so many gorgeous photos, I get burned out on them after awhile. Amazing what talented people can do and the things they've taught me. Free.

Luckily the lenses hold their value, and mine are in mint condition. I've had some scratch scares. I haven't cleaned the sensor for ages and see my hurricane blower got too hot or something and crumpled up like it melted. I do need that. Your sensor will be self cleaning which is a huge plus but may still need a little extra swipe or two.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

My Sony is early, 2nd model they made, lot’s of Minolta influence. It’s been in the shop once but still going strong. The 50mm f1.4 lens on it dates from 1985, it’s a keeper.

[Aliska]

Those are nice. Did the lens flare in the first one come out of the camera like that or did you use a filter in Photoshop for it?

Just about any camera will give you good photos if you know how to work the settings and not use P or Auto.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

There was a guy on one of the DPreview forums who was worried because the screen blacked out every time he turned his new camera vertical. He was all upset, going to send the camera back.

Then someone on the forum told him to take off his polarized sunglasses! Fixed that camera instantly!

[SkyDancer]

Wonder if there is an add-on you could attach. Will have to research that.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

I'm on a budget, I shoot them until they won't shoot any more and can't be repaired.

There are a lot of improvements but I manage to live without them.

[Aliska]

That's pretty much where I am. I bought a 40D for my grandddaughter when she graduated, she took photography and learned how to shoot full manual, and what does she use now? Her iphone. She does get some sharp photos with it. Most people don't know their limitations and shoot in too low light with them, good light essential with those.

I feel like I am extremely fortunate to have what I have. When I started, I never imagined I would work up to nice lenses. That Lens Baby looks like fun. I saw a war photo I'm sure was done with it or comparable. The effect could have been done in PS though.

I've had to learn to live without a lot of things and my car is getting very old but until it's like you say, I keep it maintained and still drive it because it's so economical. Seriously, if it goes, I don't know if I could afford a decent car like people drive now, cost more than my house. My son showed up with a hybrid something (big and white) because what he had was only getting 6 mpg.

[Darth Reardon]

Some years back I did some IT work for some old school media companies. One outfit did the opening credits for Gone With the Wind. The “3d” effect for the title was done with layers of paint on a sheet of glass.

That piece of glass would probably be worth one heck of a lot of money today, except that back then flat, clear glass was pretty valuable so they shaved off the paint so they could reuse the glass.

[afraidfortherepublic]

Show off! (Just kidding. Those pix are great!)

[US_MilitaryRules]

A new world for the government agencies also. There will be no privacy anywhere pretty soon.