[ffking]

To me new equipment is interesting if it opens up new possibilities.

I definitely agree with that in practice, but in a reverse way - I've never had the money to just get anything I want, so I've mostly successfully made it a rule not to buy anything unless I am sure - and I mean that as objectively as it's possible for me to be about my on desires - that it's equipment not incompetence that's stopping me getting what I'm wanting image wise.

[Sir Nameless]

I definitely agree with that in practice, but in a reverse way - I've never had the money to just get anything I want, so I've mostly successfully made it a rule not to buy anything unless I am sure - and I mean that as objectively as it's possible for me to be about my on desires - that it's equipment not incompetence that's stopping me getting what I'm wanting image wise.

I'd agree with this. My gear list is fairly short because everybody in the quiver has to contribute something significant in order to have a place. I'd rather learn and get competent with a few lenses that do most of what I want than to try to manage dozens. That's my philosophy, but we're in hobby territory here, so in the end it's about what makes it an enjoyable experience for each of us.

[BigMackCam]

It all depends on what you'er trying to achieve. Working within the limitations of your equipment will yield good results.

I never approached things like this, but understand why some might. To me new equipment is interesting if it opens up new possibilities.

You have a healthy view on equipment, I'd say - but I'm not sure everyone does.

I'm banging a well-worn drum here, but some folks buy new gear thinking (or being encouraged into thinking) it will improve their photography, when improvements in technique or a little ingenuity in working with and around limitations will often do the trick... for example, bracketing shots and using HDR merge for greater dynamic range; pre-focusing and stopping down for better (perceptual) focus accuracy on moving subjects; multi-frame stitching for wider-angle, high resolution shots; etc.

I'm not suggesting those folks shouldn't buy new cameras with better dynamic range, higher resolution sensors, wider angle lenses, better AF performance and other improvements. Some may genuinely need them, others may simply enjoy owning them, and either way it's good for the companies making them. But I do think a subset of folks buy gear unnecessarily. Working within limitations is good, but so is pushing them and working around them

[bdery]

I definitely agree with that in practice, but in a reverse way - I've never had the money to just get anything I want, so I've mostly successfully made it a rule not to buy anything unless I am sure - and I mean that as objectively as it's possible for me to be about my on desires - that it's equipment not incompetence that's stopping me getting what I'm wanting image wise.

This makes sense. As for me, I can afford some stuff, not everything, but I make sure the benefit will be real.

[bdery]

You have a healthy view on equipment, I'd say - but I'm not sure everyone does.

Some may genuinely need them, others may simply enjoy owning them

Also, sometimes it's more enjoyable to USE new equipment. For instance, the LCD on the K-1 makes many parts of photography immensely more enjoyable. Anything on a tripod for instance.

[jarlaxle2k5]

I have my canon 1100d with the 50mm 1.8 in my car just in case.

I started taking photographs with it and I had a lot of fun.

Although I love my K1 sometime I am tempted to do a crazy thing and challenge my self with that little canon 😁 but my K1 doesn't let me do it 😁😁😁

[Pontoneer]

I was throwing together a car kit I will probably never use but since I had the gear I figured might as well put it to use. Build the kit and leave it the car most of the time in case I forget my regular gear. (Yes, I know thats not the greatest thing especially on hot days.. but we get relatively few of these)

Kit has various older 3rd party lens that can sometimes take great images under great conditions. Then the camera ? which one ? I have k20ds and *ist ds that see very little use.. 6.1 mp verses 14.6 mp.
I really put alot of thought in which camera..I use the K20d still from time to time.I like using it with m42 glass mostly.The *ist not much at all. ..its not that I dont like it..I have taken some really nice images with it and I like the way the ccd sensor renders colors if that makes sense. Its just that against the k3, the *ist ds is out gunned in so many ways. .. even against the k20d the *ist ds is "old". But is it obsolete?

I gave that alot of thought . What would be the point of using it in my kit when I need it if the images were subpar compared todays standards. I even went back to look at some of the pics I have captured with it and others here with old 6.1 mp cameras and have concluded they aren't "obsolete" at all. Sure you won't be able to blow up as huge a print as you can with the newer higher tech cameras but from what I have gathered here and elsewhere, most people are using digital displays for their images, posting to web, smart phones, tablets ,watching on monitors. etc. 6mp cameras images show well enough on most of these viewing outputs....except maybe some of the super high end monitors I probably will not afford until my kids are through college(basically a long time!)

So I guess when I ask "How did we ever survive with early dslrs and their limitations"My answer has to be we survived just fine then, and for most images could do so now with the same old gear. The pics we took back then were great images by standards back then. Today those images are still great images depending on what you are viewing your images on.

Long story short.. I chose the *ist ds for the kit not because its obsolete and I could afford for something bad to happen to it but because its still a darn good camera capable of taking great images...depending on how they will be viewed.

As our cameras move towards larger and larger sensors, bells and whistles, sometimes too much is too much, depending on how you will use it. Sometimes less is just fine if it meets your needs. Camera's are just tools really and a tool used for a certain job needs to fit the job... thats all.

Al

Back in the film days , I kept a Rollei 35S in the glove box of my car , along with a couple of rolls of film , just so there was always a camera on hand . It served a useful purpose , especially the one time a van driver ran into the back of my car and then tried to argue the toss .

My first toe in the water with digital was a cheap Vivitar branded point and shoot - I can't remember what happened , but I must have given it away . After some 30 or so years of shooting Pentax film cameras , latterly having two LX bodies and a good collection of SMC-M glass , I was more than interested when the *istD was announced , but initially put off by the £1300 price tag ; about a year later , I picked up a used one ( body only ) for around £500 and that was me started with DSLRs , initially just using it with my SMC-M glass , over the next couple of years I picked up a couple of AF lenses , but mainly used it with my existing collection .

That camera took very nice pictures , although I continued to shoot film alongside . My daughter turned 21 just about the time the K-10D came out and I bought her one for her birthday ; she still uses it today . I stuck with my *istD for almost 10 years , picking up a second one along the way , and only replaced it in 2014 with a K-3 and K-01 , bought at the same time when an unexpected tax rebate came through ...

I kept one *istD and one LX body in my Photo Trekker back pack ( not something I'd want to trek far with ) , then found myself shooting less and less film , eventually selling off all of my film bodies except for my well worn LX ( sold the 'good' one ) and my very first SLR , my KM from circa 1975 .

Since getting my K-1 in January of last year , I gave one *istD to my daughter , and the other one to my 11 year old son ( he had a little Canon p&s ) ; while Gillian is quite into photography ( I had given her one of my MX bodies and a few lenses when she was just into her teens ) and uses both the K-10D and the *istD regularly still , and always shows me her latest shots when I visit ; Harris , being a young boy , and a different generation , seems to use his iPhone more than anything else , always sharing pictures with his pals - who's to say there's anything wrong .

Just out of curiosity , I picked up that *istD back in the summer , with its 18-55mm kit lens , and was pleasantly surprised at just how good the pictures are , taken under favourable conditions , although really I'd only need to look back through my hard drives to see some of the shots I took with it before , and the fact that I was content to keep using it for nearly a decade before changing it . Part of that , though , was the constant rumour that digital FF was just around the corner , and I always held off for it , until the advent of the K-3 was such an advance that I couldn't ignore it any longer .

If I'm honest , my current collection of cameras is more than 'good enough' , although I hanker to pick up the 3 FA Limiteds , just as I bought all five DA Limited primes when I was shooting the K-3 and K-01 . I always thought that one of the hallmarks of Pentax , besides excellent image quality , was the build quality and compactness , compared to other brands , and that rather than joining in the race for fastest ( and bulkiest ) lenses in the bag , they'd do well to keep to the philosophy of the Limited lenses , and bring out more FA Limiteds , expanding the focal lengths both up and down the way , with maybe 20mm , 24mm , 135mm and 200mm Limiteds in compact packages with the same all metal construction - I'm sure they'd sell .

I know there are more modern and faster lenses out there , but for what I do these days , I don't really need any more .

Oh , and coming back on topic , my 'car kit ' is a little Canon Powershot G12 , which lives in my glovebox nowadays in place of the Rollei ; nowhere near as compact as the Rollei was , but it does the job . I do still have that Rollei somewhere too ...

---

Last edited by Pontoneer; 10-27-2019 at 10:29 AM.

[jokers10]

When I bought my K30, I did it for the intention of investing in decent glass over time, and then eventually upgrading the body. I still have my K30 because while the updates have been good compared to what I have, they don't justify the price yet, but I feel I am on the last life for what I find acceptable in functionality. It still does great in regular raw shooting and processing helps as much as it can.

All of our gear doesn't fit in the same ecosystem our computers and phones fall victim to. I am 3 or 4 computers removed from when I bought my K30, and slightly less for phones. If the tool produces the results, there is no need to buy a newer shinier one, unless it works better for your needs.

[Pontoneer]

When I bought my K30, I did it for the intention of investing in decent glass over time, and then eventually upgrading the body. I still have my K30 because while the updates have been good compared to what I have, they don't justify the price yet, but I feel I am on the last life for what I find acceptable in functionality. It still does great in regular raw shooting and processing helps as much as it can.

All of our gear doesn't fit in the same ecosystem our computers and phones fall victim to. I am 3 or 4 computers removed from when I bought my K30, and slightly less for phones. If the tool produces the results, there is no need to buy a newer shinier one, unless it works better for your needs.

I've managed with three computers over the last 20 years : after a few years of using Amigas for adding titles to videos , I got my first Mac - an AGP graphics PowerMac G4 , on Christmas Eve 1999 ( I was actually going to buy an iMac DV , but the customer in front of me bought the last one ) that computer did me well for a while ; about 5 years later , the Powermac G5's had been out for a while and I picked up a used DP 2.5GHz G5 for a good price , still have it , but back in 2014 , after I got the K-3 , and had moved onto HD video , I picked up a 2009 8core 2.8GHz MacPro , which I am using today . I've similarly been through a few laptops , from a G3 PowerBook Pismo , then a 17" Powerbook G4 1.7GHz , to a 2009 MacBookPro 17" machine .

The old machines have been handed down around the family and still going well . My current machines still do everything I need them to .

Computers can last a surprisingly long time if you buy well .

[jokers10]

I've managed with three computers over the last 20 years : after a few years of using Amigas for adding titles to videos , I got my first Mac - an AGP graphics PowerMac G4 , on Christmas Eve 1999 ( I was actually going to buy an iMac DV , but the customer in front of me bought the last one ) that computer did me well for a while ; about 5 years later , the Powermac G5's had been out for a while and I picked up a used DP 2.5GHz G5 for a good price , still have it , but back in 2014 , after I got the K-3 , and had moved onto HD video , I picked up a 2009 8core 2.8GHz MacPro , which I am using today . I've similarly been through a few laptops , from a G3 PowerBook Pismo , then a 17" Powerbook G4 1.7GHz , to a 2009 MacBookPro 17" machine .

The old machines have been handed down around the family and still going well . My current machines still do everything I need them to .

Computers can last a surprisingly long time if you buy well .

Wow, First off, that is amazing. 3 computers over 20 years is absolutely incredible. Those last two lines are a key component though. Buying a good computer that takes longer to stop doing what you need it to do, and only upgrading when it no longer does what you need it to do. For a long while I was into computer gaming....on a budget. That last part is key. Because I was on a budget, my gear was only capable of lasting 2-3 years before new games became unplayable. As I don't play as many games, I am certain my current computers will last quite a bit longer as I don't need the latest and greatest. But how ironic that when I can actually afford the latest and greatest, I don't need it.

[clickclick]

I find it amusing how our processing power goes up but time to achieve certain tasks remains about the same. Go load DOS 5 and fire up Word Perfect 4 on modern hardware, and hold on for a blindingly fast ride.

[bdery]

I find it amusing how our processing power goes up but time to achieve certain tasks remains about the same. Go load DOS 5 and fire up Word Perfect 4 on modern hardware, and hold on for a blindingly fast ride.

Except when you want to do fancy stuff like build a table. Then the software slows you down.

I wouldn't claim that what I did with WordPerfect 25 years ago is the same as what I am doing right now with Word.