jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

We all are, but he was quoting a line from "Animal House," the movie with the stupid guys.

Shakey Loc: Traveling again to Norway and other places.

There were stupid guys in that movie? I don't remember that. Then again I don't remember much these days.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Some of us didn't realize that they were stupid guys, and our friends had to explain it to us after the movie. Then we understood why everyone was laughing. :D

Bubu Loc: Out of this solar system

I own a 16 MP and I have to resize all the photos to be workable. Everything slows down unless I upgrade soon to 8 'MB on my computer. opening a 16 MB photo and doing anything on PS takes some time. If you are only going to display these photos on an electronic device, we prosumers don't have a need for this kind of MP... Unless we print. That s where the advantage begins. For now. I downsize everything to 1200 pixels on the long size with little compression so the final file retains some quality. I don't need the extra bulk on my pc. When I get so good I want to print, maybe I will buy that 100 MP camera. But on the other side I am selling my old D70 because it is "only" 6.1 MP. I am beginning to feel outdated! Technology advancements make you fell this way

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

:thumbup: Then again, come on Canon! When it comes out I might be able to afford a used second best.

I don't think this war will ever stop. It keeps helping the economy. Lets see, I will need a 10TB hard drive to display and store a few of the photos so a new computer and new software, a 20 TB external drive for back-up (no, make that 2 of them) and a new 60 inch monitor to display them on. Oh, don’t forget the printer and an addition on the house to hold it.

What did I miss? Oh, a helper to carry my lens for the new camera. I guess I am going to have to come out of retirement. I just got a 2003 camper that has a rear receiver on it that will hold a basket to transport the 200-pound camera and lens. Whoops, forgot the new tri-pod, mine will not handle that weight.

Jim D

deepdiverv Loc: arizona

I took one photo with a 8 megapixel point and shoot camera and the other with a 5.2 megapixel camera. I could have said it was a 36 megapixel camera and most people wouldn't have a clue."The best camera is the one you have with you."

8 mega pixel Olympus Stylus 800


5.2 megapixel Olympus 50-50

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

That pink thing in the bottom photo is an animal, not a plant, right?

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

I wasn't even a gleam in my daddy's eye when Pearl Harbor was bombed, so reports the Japanese did it are hearsay in my book!

I worked 4 blocks from the Frat House where they filmed "Animal House". A good friend of mine owned the Harley Davidson dealership near the U of O campus and was the stunt rider who rode the Harley Davidson up the stairway to the second floor during a party in the movie.

The Frat house was completely renovated after the movie as part of the deal, but the guys who lived there ongoing were still "Animals". And real Animals... not actors, but most of the extras were Frat Boys.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

Gee, how did you ever manage back in the olden days? Lol.

Georgia Peddler Loc: Brunswick, GA

Isn't it amazing??? I wonder how many people are waiting for the introduction of a fantastic new zillion MP camera by some supplier so that they can finally become the ultimate photographer they know they should be recognized as???
Go figure?????

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I've got a bettter idea. Post an image taken with a 5MP camera and one taken at 20MP or more. See if anyone can the difference.

There was a demo done on TV earlier this year. I think it was David Pogue on a street in Manhattan. He asked people to tell which camera took which picture - a total strike out. Apparently, MP makes very little difference.

Jamers Loc: Michigan

You are just a bit confused Brooklyn, it all happened a long time ago before I was born. The Japanese bombed the Alamo under the command of General Jos'e Tojoski. :lol:

jimberton Loc: Michigan's Upper Peninsula

technology keeps moving forward.....i bet most of you said digital photography will never replace film.

sometimes it's for the best and sometimes not.

a lot of the high end stuff that comes out is targeted for the pros.

the hobby users are happy with what they have and they have that right.

if the hobbyist photographer could get a similar or equal photo with a 5mb point and shoot than what a pro gets.......there would be no reason for the pro to embrace the new, more powerful equipment.

a pro has to make sure that his or her photos look many tiers above uncle harrys shots with his point and shoot or his new $700 dslr...or he is not going to be in business.

i haven't seen any pros shooting with point and shoots, bridge cameras or the entry level dslrs.

even the old film pro that shot my wedding 30 years ago had a pretty elaborate film camera set up for the time.

if there was no advantage for canon or nikon or sony to upgrade their stuff....they wouldn't do it if it wouldn't sell.

look at the d800...how many people got on a waiting list for that camera?
most were not your average hobby shooter. some were, but most were not. they didn't buy the d800 because they had an extra $3000 in their pocket. how many people had 5dmk2...and jumped on the mk3 when it was released?

people that are happy with their stuff (no matter what the level)...or cannot afford or undercover from their spouse...should not knock the stuff they cannot buy or be allowed to buy.

stuff keeps getting better and of course, more expensive.

we need to buy what we can afford and stop reviewing the stuff we have never used or can never have.

when i look at camera prices..i don't think they are bad...plus you can re-sell them for a very high percentage of what you paid for them.
look at the price of a car.......a camera is a much better deal. the 5dmk2 was around $2300.........most could re-sell that camera for $1800.

buy a $20k car...drive it for 4 or 5 years and look what it's worth....way less than half of what you paid.

i think even a 1dx or a d4 is a great deal at over $6000..........you coulod buy that camera, use it for 5 years and still get probably $4500 to $5000 for it if you keep it in good condition. so figure it out.....it basically cost you about $200 per year to have the best. not bad. good investment.

this photo stuff is a way better investment than an automobile.

$200 a year....most spend more than that at starbucks for coffee or way more than that on cigarrettes and beer. (you are talking about $17 per month.

of course the original cash layout is a bunch.....but the same when you buy a car.

i have a buddy that just sold his rebel xt digital locally here for $300. he has used that camera since it came out. he's had it a long time. look how much that cost him per year.......

cameras and lenses are great investments.

you will never take the human element out of taking photos......but the better the stuff gets....you know the rest.

i don't think we have seen nothing yet.....i think the interal light metering will get better and better....i also thin the day will come when you can shoot in low light at 500,000 ISO and get a great photo

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

If you want to make detail images in very large size you need more pixels.
For my purposes, if it (and it won't)can't give me a high iso then I can't use it. Also, what lens are you going to use. It may exceed the resolution of even the "L" series lens.
As for Animal House, if you haven't seen it you have to. It's a comedy classic.
The background info about the frat house was great. Of course, they used a stuntman for the motorcycle scene (another classic moment). Also, be sure to see Blues Brothers. Another classic.

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

My Olympus OM2 and Zuiko lenses were, if I remember correctly, capable (at best) of around 130 lpm resolution. On a full frame that equates to 14.6mp. A 20mp full frame job will do me fine, and that's 18mp more than I need to display on an HDTV.