?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile ABMann.net Previous Previous Next Next
D400 - Portrait of a Young Man as The Artist — LiveJournal
abmann
abmann
D400
Dear Nikon,
STOP PRODUCING CAMERAS SO QUICKLY! Now I must reconsider purchases as this will likely have the D90's better low-light performance plus better specs overall.

Fuckers.
-ABM

Current Mood: bitchy bitchy

14 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
zesty_pinto From: zesty_pinto Date: December 11th, 2008 05:42 pm (UTC) (Link)
That's the problem with the overall DSLR market, I've been noticing. Some people dig it, but there's a reason why certain cameras are considered classics.
abmann From: abmann Date: December 11th, 2008 06:05 pm (UTC) (Link)
I have plenty of classic film cameras. :)

I've just seen the fantastic performance of new DSLRs and covet them. They are all far better at capturing the photos I tend to take - low light, burst, brackets - than my D70s is. But with every iteration, it gets better. I suppose I'm just frustrated that it is impossible to stay ahead of the curve. I guess i should just suck it up and go for the d90 - unless the 300 drops in price with a 400 release.

ARGH. SEE? That's what I'm talking about. Bastards.
zesty_pinto From: zesty_pinto Date: December 11th, 2008 06:15 pm (UTC) (Link)
But see, that's the problem! When you're buying a camera, you shouldn't be worried about keeping up with the joneses every other year. I mean, hell, the Pentax K100 outlasted its lifespan by over ten years and still gets good use because it was built with the photographer in mind rather than the pocketbook.

If anything should be coming out with particular ferocity, it should be developing/perfecting new lenses. That's the problem with a new medium, I suppose.

I mean, it's like the computer market now, except the only difference is that if you don't like the computer, you can change something that costs 1/10th of the whole machine, not replace half the entire components in the process. It seems so ridiculous. At least Nikon was good in making the D40 a fairly staple standard they're sticking to though and through, so I'll give them credit for not getting as bad as Canon with the Rebels, but still; geez.
abmann From: abmann Date: December 11th, 2008 06:41 pm (UTC) (Link)
I'm not trying to keep up with the Joneses. I want to get the camera best capable of doing the photography I do. Each camera has better and better low-light capability. I don't foresee buying cameras regularly after my next purchase until, as currently, the next buy would be significantly advantageous. For example, any camera I get now will have double the MP count of my current camera, twice the ISO settings and two to three times the burst rate.
zesty_pinto From: zesty_pinto Date: December 11th, 2008 06:53 pm (UTC) (Link)
But are you sure that the next one after that won't push that level even further? I'm still perplexed towards how "throwaway" they try to make these dslrs feel at times.
abmann From: abmann Date: December 11th, 2008 06:55 pm (UTC) (Link)
I can guarantee the next one will, I expect it to do so.

There's a point where the gains outweigh the price. I have reached that point with my d70. I quote my previous comment:

"I don't foresee buying cameras regularly after my next purchase until, as currently, the next buy would be significantly advantageous. For example, any camera I get now will have double the MP count of my current camera, twice the ISO settings and two to three times the burst rate."


The next camera they produce won't suddenly double any of these capabilities. It took them three years to get where they are from my current rig.
zesty_pinto From: zesty_pinto Date: December 11th, 2008 07:03 pm (UTC) (Link)
True, still is it normal to replace a camera in three years? I always thought of them as more permanent pieces of equipment.
abmann From: abmann Date: December 11th, 2008 07:06 pm (UTC) (Link)
For most users, probably not. I sell prints and am getting into wedding photography. Regularly upgrading is a good thing - better quality photos for all involved.

A wedding photographer will shoot 2 to 5 thousand images per wedding. With just two weddings a week for a pro wedding photographer, that's about 300,000 photos a year where most camera shutters are rated at 200,000 photos before they start to degrade.
zesty_pinto From: zesty_pinto Date: December 11th, 2008 07:14 pm (UTC) (Link)
200k, eh? Well that's good to know for my own sake since that means I've got a long while to go with my current setup.
tyskkvinna From: tyskkvinna Date: December 11th, 2008 05:58 pm (UTC) (Link)
I think in another 3-5 years everything will have settled down and we'll have classic DSLRs. But we're not quite there yet.
abmann From: abmann Date: December 11th, 2008 06:01 pm (UTC) (Link)
Boo! Either I'm lucky I'm slow to buy a new camera or too informed. The week after I bought my d70, Nikon released the D80 for the same price. I fear the same happenstance when next I upgrade.
fliege_wasser From: fliege_wasser Date: December 11th, 2008 07:49 pm (UTC) (Link)
God, I love Nikon. I just have NO IDEA which one to get. I'm looking at spending around a thousand bucks on one (maybe 1400 with a lense) but... I just... don't know >_<


help mr. camera genius man?
abmann From: abmann Date: December 11th, 2008 07:54 pm (UTC) (Link)
sweetcorrosion From: sweetcorrosion Date: December 11th, 2008 09:55 pm (UTC) (Link)
hahahhahhah.
14 comments or Leave a comment