[PDL]

I too am some what disturbed about the rush to upgrade. Three of my 35mm cameras are 30+ years old and they work just fine - once you replace the foam light seals.

I am somewhat tired of hearing about the lack of lenses - I have 4 (not including my telescope and a off brand POS that is in my drawer. I can cover 18-200 mm with jumps to 300mm and 2,100mm (telescope). I have great coverage from 28-70 mm (three lenses plus or minus a little on each end). I don't think my lenses will ever get too old, unless the plastic breaks really bad.

I do know that with most electronic commodities, that the average life is about 18months. That is how about how long it took me to buy the K10D (I still have the *ist Ds), but the bug to replace things is not all that hot with me. I have a 3 year old computer (on my second motherboard) with a display that is 10 years old. My car just turned over 147,000 miles and I just upgraded my MP3 player because my wife wanted to use my old one (bought it in 2001) after the identical one she had was fed to the lawn mower by my son (he "borrowed" it and a 1 GB card when his iPod's hard drive failed).

The reason I upgraded to the K10D was for the greater level of control - dials, SR, white balance control and lower ISO. Will I jump ship - not until they blow smoke, am I enamored by high fps - not on your life - using a machine gun is not excuse for not knowing when to push the shutter to catch the moment. Do I like the extra pixels - yes --- yes I do. Do I like the greater control? yes - yes I do.

Do I give a cr*p what camera/lens a prize winning image was taken with --- no == no I do not. It is all about the image - be that a 4x5, 35mm, 126, brownie or Holga.

Get what you need to make great images - If you need to spend thousands of dollars to get a brand new setup -- go for it. But I bet a majority of your images are still going to be Cr*p - just like they are now with your wimply little Pentax.

As for a fully manual DSLR with a waist finder - the price of such a beast would be very high. Perhaps a small set of one-off machines - and just try to get one fixed. That said - I would like to have a pure B&W K10D - just to see what I could do with it --- probably make the same old Cr*p I do now - but in B&W.

PDL

---

Last edited by PDL; 08-28-2007 at 01:28 AM. Reason: spelling - gets me every time

[Mike Cash]

I love my K100D for the simple reason that it is digital and frees me from the costs associated with film. And that is the entire extent of my love affair with modern equipment.

We all come from different backgrounds and are in various circumstances. That means some of us have more financial wherewithal than others. Since that means that some of us must be worse off than others, I feel no shame in admitting it; I'm poor.

Fortunately, being in what was once euphemistically referred to as "reduced circumstances" doesn't mean I have to miss out on our shared love of photography. It only means I can't branch out toward the new-n-pricy. There are lots of "obsolete" cameras, lenses, and other equipment out there which are within my grasp. Happily, it is in my nature to be drawn to such things anyway and I'd probably gravitate toward the obsolete even if I hit the lottery.

I love using my good old Takumar lenses with the K100D. And I love going out with one of my assortment of 30~80 year old film cameras. Old rangefinders, TLRs, even an old box Brownie. I got just as much joy out of coming across an early '70s Yashica Electro 35 GTN in perfect operating condition for about eight bucks as some others would at the FedEx man delivering the latest $1000+ piece of modern glass from Pentax.

Often if I go out walking around to take photos and take with me one of my rangfinders or a TLR, I end up wondering why on earth I lugged along a bag with the K100D and a couple or three lenses, since it is the modern digital that ends up getting used little or not at all.

The old cameras work just fine, take some very nice photos, and have the added benefit of being unbeatable conversation pieces. People in Japan tend to operate on the assumption that foreigners can't speak Japanese at all. Add to that a general reluctance to talk much to strangers anyway. But on a recent day trip an old Yashica D TLR caused quite a few people to cast caution to the wind and engage me in conversation....conversations that never would have happened had I had the K100D in my hand instead.

So long as the K100D remains mechanically functional, I see no need to "upgrade" it to another digital body. There's no feature about it unique to modern digital cameras that was a factor in choosing it to begin with. Some simple center-weighted metering system and either shutter speed or aperture priority exposure would have been sufficient for my needs.

Since I bought my K100D last year, I've found that with the digital camera I've lost some of the creative thought that goes into the taking of good photographs. Without having to worry about the cost of film and processing, I find myself firing off 5, 10 or even 15 shots in hopes of getting one good one. This is not a good thing.

Over the last few months, I've picked up a couple of good manual cameras (a K1000 and a couple of MX's) and have been using them to help me restore the creativity and skill that I seem to have cast to the wind with my K100D.

Don't mis-understand here. I love my K100D and do not plan to cast it aside and go completely backwards in technology, but I sure am having a lot of fun with the manual cameras, and collection of manual lens, that I have acquired.

As far as 6MP is concerned. I see no need to upgrade to anything more as the largest print I plan is an 8 x 10 and the 6MP resolution is plenty good enough for that.

Ciao`

Ed

[roentarre]

A better camera and lens combination wont make me a better photographer, but it will make it easier for me to be a better photographer.

Ditto!

Cheers

[TaoMaas]

Since I bought my K100D last year, I've found that with the digital camera I've lost some of the creative thought that goes into the taking of good photographs. Without having to worry about the cost of film and processing, I find myself firing off 5, 10 or even 15 shots in hopes of getting one good one. This is not a good thing.

A few months ago, I shot an interview with a best-selling author who continues to write her books on a manual typewriter. She prefers doing things this way because it's harder to make changes to her work, and therefore she puts more thought into her writing before committing it to paper.

[MShawn63]

This is an interesting thread.

I struggled with the shift from film to digital for a long time before I invested in my first digital body. One of the reasons I had put it off was that everything I was seeing in magazines and online seemed to be "photoshoped" in one way or another and called photography. When my father taught me photography I used (and still have) a K1000 we hand rolled all of our own B&W film and processed it in our own darkroom. I admit that about 99% of my shots sucked (and still do) but the thrill of getting the one shot out of a 100 keeps me shooting. I finally made the switch with the *iSTD but stuck to the basics when processing, such as cropping and a little dodging/burning. My thought is I don't want to do on a computer what I can't do in a darkroom, which helps keep my focus on how to compose and take the picture in the first place.

I still have my film cameras, the K1000, MX and my Mamyia C333 which all still get used, but due to the lack of decent processing facilities just not as much.

For me photography is not about the equipment, even though I upgraded to the K10D for paid work, it's about capturing the moment and creating images that others can enjoy. Like others I don't have the pocket book for all the high end glass, so I have to learn to make the most of the equipment I have. I won't buy a new body until what I have wears out, which should not be for a long while yet.

Just my 2 cents

[and]

Yes, this is the end indeed. I guess the only way out now is to hope that Pentax will never release any more new dSLR's. Unless of course that is a model to replace the current models and the new model does not have SDM, in fact, no AF, no lightmeeter, no bracketing, no continuous shooting, only manual flash with use-once flash bulbs, only 1 choice of iso: iso 100. no raw, only jpeg that has been locked so it cannot be processed further. only 1 preset white balance. no lcd screen on the back. no lcd screen on the top. oh, and with a max 2mpix sensor. Then we can finally all be happy with our new cameras and the pictures we take will be exactly the same, since the equipment doesnt matter and we are still the same levels of photographers with our new all-manual low res cameras.

[pshphoto]

I pretty much agree, although I did get caught up in the "gotta have the latest" when I bought the K10 after having the DS for less than a year. My DS, as well as a K1000, ME SE, and ZX-60 all do great, but I really wanted the K10. I use all of them, but mostly the digitals, now.

What I can't understand, but did see though, and one thing you'd mentioned, was people asking what the next camera is going to be like, almost before the previous one was on the shelves. I literally saw, on another forum, questions being asked about what the next body would be, 5 days after the introduction of the K10D! 5 Days! Most people asking the question hadn't even gotten the K10 into their hands before asking the question. Why?

We live in such a throw-away society now. Cell phones that work perfectly well get thrown away because the newest model has an extra button that turns the other buttons purple. Never mind that's the ONLY thing it does, it just does it. By the way, I'm only one of two people on the planet who does not have a cell phone and has dial-up internet at home.

My point is that I don't understand why we have to know what the next upgrade is before we've even had a chance to get to learn the last upgrade. I plan on using the DS and K10 for at least 5 years, maybe more, before I upgrade. Mostly because of money, but also because I haven't used half the features of the ones I have now. Of course, I'm an old curmudgeon who drives a 15 year old pickup, too.

[raz-0]

What I can't understand is why does everyone dwell on what is coming out new, and if they should jump ship to Nikon cause of some new product, or if they should have the newest * lens....

Jumping ship because of product cycle is kind of stupid. If every other major manufacturer is touting similar specs for stuff you can't buy yet, then odds are decent that your current system will announce something reasonably competitive. Especially with regards to bodies.

Jumping ship because of deficiencies in a system I can definitely see. You want a fast zoom longer than the 50-135, or a good choice of flashes, then pentax is deficient and at the mercy of 3rd party manufacturers.

But a lot of people are into photography because they like gear. They don't use it all that much and buying stuff and fiddling with it is what they do. There's also folks who buy gear because they think that is what the difference is between their pictures and good pictures. Then there's the wackadoos i REALLY don't get who's whole goal is to own "the best" product by whatever definition soothes their OCD or whatever it is.

Myself, I shot with my P&S until lack of features was holding me back from what i wanted to do. Then I waited some more until features I wanted came down into a price range I could afford. Which was fortunate because the in body SR on the k10d and the price of it made it an extremely good fit for me. On occasion I lust after other cool gear, and get annoyed by the lens situation with pentax, but realisticly, the k10d isn't holding me back yet, and glass I'd like isn't taking longer to show up than my bank account is prepared for.

[rhermans]

What I can't understand is why does everyone dwell on what is coming out new, and if they should jump ship to Nikon cause of some new product, or if they should have the newest * lens....

I just don't see it....sorry.

Can't disagree with you, upgrading only has use when the new camera has some functionality you really want to have.

or - when you need a new camera because the other one is getting old

only for some people old seems to be 6months, propably it's because it's digital that people expect a much shorter lifecycle. A pc has to be upgraded to support the ever larger and more complex programs (that nobody really need).

Got myself the k10d when it appeared in the stores and am not planning to upgrade it for at least 3 years, unless someone gives me a new one.

[AVANT]

I love my K100D for the simple reason that it is digital and frees me from the costs associated with film. And that is the entire extent of my love affair with modern equipment.

We all come from different backgrounds and are in various circumstances. That means some of us have more financial wherewithal than others. Since that means that some of us must be worse off than others, I feel no shame in admitting it; I'm poor.

Fortunately, being in what was once euphemistically referred to as "reduced circumstances" doesn't mean I have to miss out on our shared love of photography. It only means I can't branch out toward the new-n-pricy. There are lots of "obsolete" cameras, lenses, and other equipment out there which are within my grasp. Happily, it is in my nature to be drawn to such things anyway and I'd probably gravitate toward the obsolete even if I hit the lottery.

I love using my good old Takumar lenses with the K100D. And I love going out with one of my assortment of 30~80 year old film cameras. Old rangefinders, TLRs, even an old box Brownie. I got just as much joy out of coming across an early '70s Yashica Electro 35 GTN in perfect operating condition for about eight bucks as some others would at the FedEx man delivering the latest $1000+ piece of modern glass from Pentax.

Often if I go out walking around to take photos and take with me one of my rangfinders or a TLR, I end up wondering why on earth I lugged along a bag with the K100D and a couple or three lenses, since it is the modern digital that ends up getting used little or not at all.

The old cameras work just fine, take some very nice photos, and have the added benefit of being unbeatable conversation pieces. People in Japan tend to operate on the assumption that foreigners can't speak Japanese at all. Add to that a general reluctance to talk much to strangers anyway. But on a recent day trip an old Yashica D TLR caused quite a few people to cast caution to the wind and engage me in conversation....conversations that never would have happened had I had the K100D in my hand instead.

So long as the K100D remains mechanically functional, I see no need to "upgrade" it to another digital body. There's no feature about it unique to modern digital cameras that was a factor in choosing it to begin with. Some simple center-weighted metering system and either shutter speed or aperture priority exposure would have been sufficient for my needs.

But you're still shooting film, so the cost benefits are out the window... I personally don't think film cost should be the sole reason for one to switch to digital. There are many other more worth while benefits imo. If one wants to mimic the "think before you shoot" experience and still save on film cost tho, get a small card and turn off the post preview.

My old camera took 13Mb RAW files and I only owned one 512Mb card. I had less than 40 shots available to me per outing, and my shot-to-shot RAW was 3-5s, so I was plenty careful with what I was shooting...

[ChrisA]

I love my K100D for the simple reason that it is digital and frees me from the costs associated with film. And that is the entire extent of my love affair with modern equipment.

Ah, so seeing what you took straight away is no help? I learn more quickly from my frequent mistakes with digital than I ever did with film, since the picture is there straight away, rather than having to wait days or weeks for the processing.

And having the EXIF included with the picture is entirely redundant? Maybe you're one of these people with notebook and pencil, who laboriously record the film, lens, exposure and aperture details for every shot, and cross-reference it later with the negatives. Sadly I never had the patience for that.

And being able to publish a photograph in seconds is no use either?

Not having to scan a print or a negative to get it into the computer? Not having to suffer dust and scratches not a benefit? Puh-leeese...

Nor being able to do the equivalent of hours in the darkroom in minutes on the computer, and save every step along the way in case of mistakes?

Come on, people - there is a middle ground, between insane gear-freakery and a Puritan insistence on simplicity.

This isn't a competition, either on the one hand, for the most expensive, gadget-ridden digital pen1s-substitute, nor on the other hand for the most you can achieve with a cardboard box with a pinhole in the side.

Of course a super duper digital camera doesn't make you into Ansel Adams, but neither does intelligently learning to get the best out of the new technology make you a moron.

In seven short months, I have learned more about how to create a decent picture, than in the preceding 20 years of film photography. Maybe I wasn't committed enough to the cause in those days, but I know that it's the digital SLR that has restored my mojo.

[Chako]

Exactly ChrisA.

I love technology. One of the reasons why I bought an SF10 back in 89 was the technology found therein.

We are at the point where you can live with a digital camera for a while without needing to upgrade. It is the same in the computer industry. I build my own computers (another hobby), and there was a time when the technology was progressing so swiftly, that it did push upgrading at an accelerated pace. Now we are out of that, and a good computer can last a few years without needing to upgrade just to do the basics. Digital cameras are like that now.

However, every new camera that does come out, only improves on a good product, and the prices come down. This is a win win situation for everyone.

I liked my film cameras, even had a darkroom in my basement for 6 years. However, with digital, it has improved my photography. If your going out to shoot wildlife, every advantage is great in my books. Simply because you can take a thousand photos in an outing does not mean that you have to shoot unthinkingly. It does mean that you can go out for a day without reloading film. And that is a massive advantage.

Frankly, if people feel the need to get the latest and greatest...fine by me. It improves the camera in the long run, and also improves the prices. If some decide to clutch their film cameras and eschew any complexity in their gear, then so be it. This is what makes photography a fantastic hobby, and yes, for some, a living. It is open to a wide spectrum of habits, idiosyncrasies, and needs. Lucky for us, there is gear out there to fit everyone’s personal needs and budget.

[Nando]

ChrisA,

I'm happy that were able to learn more and improve your photography more quickly with a digital body. However, please be aware that people have different learning styles. Personally, I learned more about photography through the use of all-manual cameras. Just because you experienced photography a certain way doesn't mean that the same experience will apply to everybody else.

Using all-manual cameras means I have to use film. There are disadvantages of using film and there are many great advantages too.

Personally, the medium is not the cause for my current dislike of digital SLR's. It has to do with usability. For me, the current crop of all-automatic, do-everything-for-me, film SLR's are just as bad and perhaps even worse. If there was an all-manual digital camera at about the same price of a K10D body, I'd probably go for it because of the potential costs and time savings. A digital camera with ISO and shutter speed dials on the top, focus and aperture rings on the lens - that's it. Sounds like a digital Pentax MX, doesn't it? Right now, there are only two digital bodies that come close to what I would want that is the $3000 Seiko-Epson RD1 and the $5000 Leica M8, both of which are priced way above what I would be willing to pay for a non-mechanical camera and especially a digital camera with limited life-span. If I was a pro and/or was in the position to continuously upgrade then it would be a different story. No need to currently upgrade my mechanical cameras and given the proper maintenance, they will last much longer than me.

All that matters to me is that photography brings joy and fullfillment to me and to other people. Why should it matter to anybody what equipment or medium is used? If Mike Cash prefers older film cameras, why should you care?

The subject of this thread is the notion of upgrading to newer equipmentment making somebody a better photographer, not film vs. digital.

[vinzer]

But a lot of people are into photography because they like gear. They don't use it all that much and buying stuff and fiddling with it is what they do. There's also folks who buy gear because they think that is what the difference is between their pictures and good pictures. Then there's the wackadoos i REALLY don't get who's whole goal is to own "the best" product by whatever definition soothes their OCD or whatever it is.

I like gear as much as other gearheads, but I also make it a point to actually use the equipment, and not replace it a month later just because some other manufacturer has a newer model.

I agree with other posters said about having a proper balance between appreciating technology, and using whatever it is you acquire.

What bothers me is the thought that some people buy the latest, posts tests shots, then moves on to the next piece of equipment. Much worse are those who bash products without even having any practical experience with them. I'm not only referring to a certain loud poser (yes, poser, not poster) who used to entice people here to his blog to generate hits for his own ego, as there are a LOT of people like him all over the internet.

Then again, it's a boon for us since all these movers and switchers would mean that the second-hand market will forever be inundated with their old equipment, don't you think?