Nikon retires most of its film camera lineup

Paul Rubin wrote:
"Siddhartha Jain" writes:
The D70 will be obsolete in a few years if full frame sensors become
economical, and the "D700" can use the full coverage of your WA lenses.

IMHO, a camera is obsolete when your needs outgrow what it can offer.

That's the point: what the D70 offers is an affordable price level
(compared to a full frame camera) at the cost of not fully using WA
lenses. It makes you cramp your style for economic reasons. Once
full frame cameras become affordable, the D70 no longer offers that
economic benefit, so it's obsolete even if your needs haven't changed.

I think this way. Does the image from my 300D look good to me? Yes, it
does. Ofcourse, ones from the 5D look better but then its not the same
price as my 300D. Sure, in a few years a FF 36MP dSLR might land at my
doorstep for the same $600 that I paid for the 300D. Even then, if the
6MP images of the 300D make me happy, its 100% not obsolete for me.

- Siddhartha

"Siddhartha Jain" writes:
I think this way. Does the image from my 300D look good to me? Yes, it
does. Ofcourse, ones from the 5D look better but then its not the same
price as my 300D. Sure, in a few years a FF 36MP dSLR might land at my
doorstep for the same $600 that I paid for the 300D.

Are you understanding what I'm saying? It's not about pixels. It's
about wideangle lens coverage, which exists for a full range of WA
lenseson the 5D but is much more limited on the 300D.

Paul Rubin wrote:
"Siddhartha Jain" writes:
I think this way. Does the image from my 300D look good to me? Yes, it
does. Ofcourse, ones from the 5D look better but then its not the same
price as my 300D. Sure, in a few years a FF 36MP dSLR might land at my
doorstep for the same $600 that I paid for the 300D.

Are you understanding what I'm saying?

I do.

It's not about pixels. It's
about wideangle lens coverage, which exists for a full range of WA
lenseson the 5D but is much more limited on the 300D.

What I am saying is that I am happy with the end product of a 300D. So,
if I am happy with the end product even ten year down the line,
whatever lenses I shoot with, then the camera stays non-obsolete for
me. And if WA lenses or APS-C sensor size are an issue then any 35mm
(film or digital) is obsolete since MF and LF exist.

Btw, I have a Sigma 10-20mm ;-)

- Siddhartha

In article ,
Lawrence Glickman wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:49:34 GMT, "Dennis Pogson"
wrote:

I thought that the digital age had come to stay. Until I looked at the price
of old Leicas, Rolleis and Hasselblads on Ebay!

The market for really good stuff is still buoyant, and even old Leicas sell
for the same or more than a good digital SLR, so what is happening?

Dennis.

Part of the population isn't going to make the transition to digital.
That's the implication.

Don't be so sure of that. There are lots of us who like the old manual film
stuff and enjoy using it for the satisfaction of taking a good piece of
mechanical engineering and using it to produce good results, as a break from
our rather more utilitarian digital cameras.

Yesterday I was shooting with a 5D, but in a couple of days it might be with
a Rolleiflex TLR, or my wooden 4x5 view camera. Depends on what mood I'm in.

Tom Hise writes ...

Maybe I missed this while traveling but just in case:
http://www.bytesector.com/data/news_...sp?newsID=4075
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/con...id=7-7890-8161

Wow, not just most of their 35 mm film bodies but also their large
format lenses and enlarging lenses ... wow.

If a camera still takes pictures, it isn't obsolete. If the pictures
are acceptable today, why wouldn't they be in a few years?

Clyde

"Clyde" writes:
If a camera still takes pictures, it isn't obsolete. If the pictures
are acceptable today, why wouldn't they be in a few years?

Even if the pictures you take are all terrific, you may have also
missed a lot of good ones. If a newer camera lets you miss fewer of
them, by handling faster so you can get the decisive shot, or maybe
just by being smaller so you don't leave it at home most of the time,
then your old one may be obsolete. It doesn't matter if the new one
is no better in terms of f-stops or megapixels.

"GTO" wrote in message
...
Still using and FM and F3. These things just last for ever. Something, I
definitely cannot say of DSLRs. A DSLR is outdated the moment it shows up
at my doorstep.

Considering the fact how long LPs are lasting and how short-lived CDs are,
it was a loss to switch from LPs to CDs. There are still people treasuring
their turntables. I am sure I will be one of the few still treasuring my
film camera even when buying a pack of film for $$$$.

Gregor

"Sheldon" wrote in message
...

"Tom Hise" wrote in message
...
Maybe I missed this while traveling but just in case:

http://www.bytesector.com/data/news_...sp?newsID=4075
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/con...id=7-7890-8161

--
Tom Hise - NCØO

Well, this is a bit like the demise of the LP. Just assume if you are in
the market for a film camera this may be the last one you buy, so make it
a good one.






Treasure your film cameras and lenses, too. If they are stolen, lost or
damaged, you will not be able to replace them with new items. And there
will be no new models or new features. You have just entered a time warp.

It is the same with my Pentax M42 bodies and lenses--everything stopped
advancing in 1975. What was out there was all that there would ever be.
The adapter to K-mount was a band-aid approach, as the lenses could be used
only in stop-down mode. Better than obsolescence, like Canon's breech
mount, but a bummer nonetheless.

"Siddhartha Jain" wrote in message
oups.com...

Paul Rubin wrote:
"Sheldon" writes:
Why does everybody say this? I still use my old Nikon F's, and I
assume I will be using my D70 for many years. Yeah, someday I may
want a DSLR with 20 megapixels, but right now this camera is a long
way from obsolete for me.

The D70 will be obsolete in a few years if full frame sensors become
economical, and the "D700" can use the full coverage of your WA lenses.

IMHO, a camera is obsolete when your needs outgrow what it can offer.
If you are happy with 6MP then doesn't matter if the latest on the
shelves is a 100MP camera. Other than the sensor/film, I don't see how
a old spotomatic is very different from my Canon 300D. I still have to
chose shutter and aperture and do my framing.

- Siddhartha


The point of contention is that there are no more NEW Spotmatics. As a
fellow Spotmatic user, I am acutely aware of the need to take darned good
care of my bodies and lenses, because I can't just walk into a camera store
and buy new ones. When you have a big investment in bodies (6) and lenses
(17) it isn't so easy to just decide to go with another system.

We are the last generation of photographers that will have had hands-on
experience with those fine metal, mechanical bodies and those lenses made
with metal barrels. A lot of photographers today have used nothing but
plastic. I treasure the tactile sense of gratification derived from using
fine older manual equipment. My images may not be any better for it, but I
would miss it if I had to switch to those lightweight "polycarbonate"
bodies.

Maybe I should just buy a Rollei TLR that will outlast me, and be done with
it.

On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:50:11 GMT, "Jeremy" wrote:


The point of contention is that there are no more NEW Spotmatics. As a
fellow Spotmatic user, I am acutely aware of the need to take darned good
care of my bodies and lenses, because I can't just walk into a camera store
and buy new ones. When you have a big investment in bodies (6) and lenses
(17) it isn't so easy to just decide to go with another system.

We are the last generation of photographers that will have had hands-on
experience with those fine metal, mechanical bodies and those lenses made
with metal barrels. A lot of photographers today have used nothing but
plastic. I treasure the tactile sense of gratification derived from using
fine older manual equipment. My images may not be any better for it, but I
would miss it if I had to switch to those lightweight "polycarbonate"
bodies.

Like many people here, I used SLR for many years and gradually
acquired a camera-bag full of bodies and lenses. Yeah, I got some
great pictures, but at the expense of sore shoulders and too much time
guarding my camera bag.

I almost feel like I've been freed when I now go off somewhere with
just a light-weight "polycarbonate" camera in my pocket. I love the
idea that I can crop, enhance, clone out distractions, and manipulate
my shots with Photoshop 7. I've never done the home dark room bit
with 35mm, but I have a dark room on my desk now. I love the instant
gratification of downloading the minute I get home.

The only thing I miss is that "clunk" of the shutter.




--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL