Your bodies will be obsolete
Jan 31, 2013 15:51:44 #
"IBM and others are playing around with something called
phase change memory
(PCM). Unlike flash memory cards that reside in todays
phones, laptop computers and other places, PCM takes
technology to another level. You see, flash memory writes to a group of cells by erasing nearby cells first. That process takes time and it is one reason why PCM devices are reportedly 100 times faster than flash and
last as much as 50,000 times longer. If PCM works as expected, it could be showing up in products as soon as 3Ys from now..."
(clipped from banking newsletter)
see also: http://www.economist.com/node/21560981
p.s. I don't understand any of this, other than my title.
phase change memory
(PCM). Unlike flash memory cards that reside in todays
phones, laptop computers and other places, PCM takes
technology to another level. You see, flash memory writes to a group of cells by erasing nearby cells first. That process takes time and it is one reason why PCM devices are reportedly 100 times faster than flash and
last as much as 50,000 times longer. If PCM works as expected, it could be showing up in products as soon as 3Ys from now..."
(clipped from banking newsletter)
see also: http://www.economist.com/node/21560981
p.s. I don't understand any of this, other than my title.
Jan 31, 2013 16:05:32 #
Well, my camera is not bad but my body is already obsolete ;=)
I'm sure that there will be all sorts of reasons for us to upgrade long before this makes it into camera bodies. Also, many of them will make a much more significant impact on out ability to image than how fast the buffer is (at this point, I already don't care if it gets faster although I might buy faster cards (presently using Lexar CF 1000x which are quite good IMHO)
I'm sure that there will be all sorts of reasons for us to upgrade long before this makes it into camera bodies. Also, many of them will make a much more significant impact on out ability to image than how fast the buffer is (at this point, I already don't care if it gets faster although I might buy faster cards (presently using Lexar CF 1000x which are quite good IMHO)
Jan 31, 2013 19:43:50 #
Wife 2.0 been telling me that
Sooooooooooooooo what I uderstand you to be saying is my Minolta SRT201 is OBSOLETE???Say it isnt so, it's only 40 years old!
Sooooooooooooooo what I uderstand you to be saying is my Minolta SRT201 is OBSOLETE???Say it isnt so, it's only 40 years old!
Jan 31, 2013 20:30:06 #
Bruce with a Canon wrote:
Wife 2.0 been telling me that
Sooooooooooooooo what I uderstand you to be saying is my Minolta SRT201 is OBSOLETE???Say it isnt so, it's only 40 years old!
Sooooooooooooooo what I uderstand you to be saying is my Minolta SRT201 is OBSOLETE???Say it isnt so, it's only 40 years old!
Know exactly what you mean Wife 2.0 also saying, why do you need a new camera, yours still works and only 9 years old. The 201 was a great camera. When I bought my first SLR it was one of two I was considering. Went with the Canon FTb - eventually sold it to a friend and a couple of years ago was told it was still working great. Wonder what todays entry level cameras will be like in 40 years.
Feb 1, 2013 10:44:47 #
cameras don't become obselete,our expectations just out grow them.to someone else that older camera is just what the doctor ordered.
Feb 1, 2013 13:21:06 #
mikemilton wrote:
Well, my camera is not bad but my body is already obsolete ;=)
I heard that, Mike!
My camera bodies will be obsolete when they no longer do the job I want them to do. Until then, I don't care if open field cameras finally make it to the market. New equipment just means more crap to learn. One either knows how to take good pictures, or one doesn't, in which case they need to work on technique, not depend on equipment upgrades.
Feb 1, 2013 13:25:10 #
I saw the same phenomenon when I used to be a competitive shooter. Guys who hadn't begun to master the fundamentals spent thousands of dollars on guns they couldn't begin to use to their potential, instead of sticking with basics and using their money to buy ammo and practice time. In that case there may have been a slight advantage by increasing the shooter's confidence, but in a highly technical field such as photography, that's not the case. Technique, technique, technique. Practice, practice, practice. And a few art classes don't hurt, either.
Feb 1, 2013 16:36:29 #
Well said. I also was a competitive shooter and your words just echo from past instruction. 1. You can't beat a natural 2.practice 3. Practice 4.and more practice.
It has to be a muscle memory, not mental memory.
Dave
It has to be a muscle memory, not mental memory.
Dave
Feb 1, 2013 19:23:31 #
digitalzen wrote:
I saw the same phenomenon when I used to be a comp... (show quote)
Ain't it the truth! "Beware the man with just one gun. He probably knows how to shoot it!"
Feb 1, 2013 20:01:42 #
It's only obsolete if you cannot control your lust for newer technology.
If you can let your brain rule your heart you will realize that somewhere between 10 and 16 megapixels may be all you need for most photography.
On the other hand, I just got a very nice Rolleiflex 2.8F for about $1,700 that take better pictures than most digital cameras and it's 40 years old. My 30 year old Hasselblads do just as well. Obsolescence is not an issue there.
If you can let your brain rule your heart you will realize that somewhere between 10 and 16 megapixels may be all you need for most photography.
On the other hand, I just got a very nice Rolleiflex 2.8F for about $1,700 that take better pictures than most digital cameras and it's 40 years old. My 30 year old Hasselblads do just as well. Obsolescence is not an issue there.
Feb 2, 2013 14:13:02 #
selmslie wrote:
It's only obsolete if you cannot control your lust for newer technology.
If you can let your brain rule your heart you will realize that somewhere between 10 and 16 megapixels may be all you need for most photography.
On the other hand, I just got a very nice Rolleiflex 2.8F for about $1,700 that take better pictures than most digital cameras and it's 40 years old. My 30 year old Hasselblads do just as well. Obsolescence is not an issue there.
If you can let your brain rule your heart you will realize that somewhere between 10 and 16 megapixels may be all you need for most photography.
On the other hand, I just got a very nice Rolleiflex 2.8F for about $1,700 that take better pictures than most digital cameras and it's 40 years old. My 30 year old Hasselblads do just as well. Obsolescence is not an issue there.
As long as you can get the film.
Feb 3, 2013 01:41:08 #
Feb 3, 2013 08:15:13 #
digitalzen wrote:
I saw the same phenomenon when I used to be a comp... (show quote)
in the early 70's my wife and i bought 2 ruger 22's for $67.00 each,because they had won national championships and were the best we could afford.we never got that good but we had a lot of fun with them.she's gone now but i still enjoy shooting them.
Feb 3, 2013 09:06:42 #
Feb 3, 2013 09:07:24 #
Photogdog wrote:
quote=selmslie It's only obsolete if you cannot c... (show quote)
Yes, which is readily available
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.