I still shoot plenty with my D7100, and my wife uses hers exclusively. They do everything we need them to do, and we have a relatively full range of glass now, from 10mm to 300mm in DX format, and with fast macro and prime lenses. Could we improve our IQ by going full frame or buying more expensive lenses? Of course. But we'd rather spend the money on travel, printing, and other stuff.

I will say that I've enjoyed picking up the old film gear and actually shooting with it. I wouldn't try to use my Hasselblad to catch my quarterback grandson in action, but the pleasure of shooting a couple of rolls of film hasn't gone away after all these years.

Andy

In the two and a half years that I have been a member of this forum, there have been countless discussions around the importance of equipment, the relative importance of equipment, the non-importance of equipment, the serviceability of pinhole cameras, and other similar questions. There is currently an active discussion of this subject which is rapidly approaching 300 posts, has completely disrupted the dispositions of some of our normally calmest members, and has driven some of the rest of our number completely (or at least mostly) off the rails.

It is clear that a consensus on this topic is almost certainly unattainable, but the idea for an at least somewhat objective experiment to quantify (or at least qualify) a smidgeon of objectivity around this subject has come to mind.

The premise is really quite simple. It involves making the commitment to put away your latest, greatest, most favorite camera for three weeks. Instead, pull out your oldest operational camera (in my case a Fuji X3 Pro), and commit to using only that camera for the next three weeks. NO MATTER WHAT! At the end of the three weeks, you will be allowed to make an informed comment on the topic.

A couple of important notes here:

1. If you have sold or otherwise gotten rid of your older cameras, you have already voted.

2. If you refuse to try, or if you don't make it through all three weeks, your vote is automatically cast.

Of course, this works as well as a thought exercise as it does as an actual challenge. Have fun if you are willing. For the curious, I surrender right now.

In the two and a half years that I have been a member of this forum, there have been countless discussions around the importance of equipment, the relative importance of equipment, the non-importance of equipment, the serviceability of pinhole cameras, and other similar questions. There is currently an active discussion of this subject which is rapidly approaching 300 posts, has completely disrupted the dispositions of some of our normally calmest members, and has driven some of the rest of our number completely (or at least mostly) off the rails.

It is clear that a consensus on this topic is almost certainly unattainable, but the idea for an at least somewhat objective experiment to quantify (or at least qualify) a smidgeon of objectivity around this subject has come to mind.

The premise is really quite simple. It involves making the commitment to put away your latest, greatest, most favorite camera for three weeks. Instead, pull out your oldest operational camera (in my case a Fuji X3 Pro), and commit to using only that camera for the next three weeks. NO MATTER WHAT! At the end of the three weeks, you will be allowed to make an informed comment on the topic.

A couple of important notes here:

1. If you have sold or otherwise gotten rid of your older cameras, you have already voted.

2. If you refuse to try, or if you don't make it through all three weeks, your vote is automatically cast.

Of course, this works as well as a thought exercise as it does as an actual challenge. Have fun if you are willing. For the curious, I surrender right now.

Hi Mac. I don't think I can agree that this is a silly exercise, but it is offered with a light heart and absolutely no malice at all. My point is to hopefully remind us that progress is meaningful, and that we can and do benefit greatly from advances in design and execution.

My Fuji took beautiful 6 MP portraits and pretty decent landscapes. But it was no good at the railroad photography that was my primary interest, because it was almost completely incapable of capturing diagonal lines. And the four AA NiCad cells that powered it were good for slightly over 100 exposures on a good day. The rear display was just over an inch, and there were a total of three displays that required attention. It was a plastic camera that required almost half a minute to power up after the firmware update that allowed 4 GB CF cards. And the 18-70mm variable aperture Nikkor zoom was poorly constructed and incapable of delivering edge to edge sharpness because it could not hold all lens elements parallel.

I think sometimes it's easy to forget where we have come from and even maybe to be a little bit arrogant about our perceived abilities to overcome mechanical shortcomings. And oh, by the way, I think that the Fuji's highest available sensitivity was ISO 400. Not sure what the fastest shutter speed was (the camera is currently on loan and not immediately available to me). It captured beautiful images within its capabilities, but there's no way I would try to rely on it today. Way too much it just can't do.

In the two and a half years that I have been a member of this forum, there have been countless discussions around the importance of equipment, the relative importance of equipment, the non-importance of equipment, the serviceability of pinhole cameras, and other similar questions. There is currently an active discussion of this subject which is rapidly approaching 300 posts, has completely disrupted the dispositions of some of our normally calmest members, and has driven some of the rest of our number completely (or at least mostly) off the rails.

It is clear that a consensus on this topic is almost certainly unattainable, but the idea for an at least somewhat objective experiment to quantify (or at least qualify) a smidgeon of objectivity around this subject has come to mind.

The premise is really quite simple. It involves making the commitment to put away your latest, greatest, most favorite camera for three weeks. Instead, pull out your oldest operational camera (in my case a Fuji X3 Pro), and commit to using only that camera for the next three weeks. NO MATTER WHAT! At the end of the three weeks, you will be allowed to make an informed comment on the topic.

A couple of important notes here:

1. If you have sold or otherwise gotten rid of your older cameras, you have already voted.

2. If you refuse to try, or if you don't make it through all three weeks, your vote is automatically cast.

Of course, this works as well as a thought exercise as it does as an actual challenge. Have fun if you are willing. For the curious, I surrender right now.

In the two and a half years that I have been a member of this forum, there have been countless discussions around the importance of equipment, the relative importance of equipment, the non-importance of equipment, the serviceability of pinhole cameras, and other similar questions. There is currently an active discussion of this subject which is rapidly approaching 300 posts, has completely disrupted the dispositions of some of our normally calmest members, and has driven some of the rest of our number completely (or at least mostly) off the rails.

It is clear that a consensus on this topic is almost certainly unattainable, but the idea for an at least somewhat objective experiment to quantify (or at least qualify) a smidgeon of objectivity around this subject has come to mind.

The premise is really quite simple. It involves making the commitment to put away your latest, greatest, most favorite camera for three weeks. Instead, pull out your oldest operational camera (in my case a Fuji X3 Pro), and commit to using only that camera for the next three weeks. NO MATTER WHAT! At the end of the three weeks, you will be allowed to make an informed comment on the topic.

A couple of important notes here:

1. If you have sold or otherwise gotten rid of your older cameras, you have already voted.

2. If you refuse to try, or if you don't make it through all three weeks, your vote is automatically cast.

Of course, this works as well as a thought exercise as it does as an actual challenge. Have fun if you are willing. For the curious, I surrender right now.

In the two and a half Iyears that I have been a member of this forum, there have been countless discussions around the importance of equipment, the relative importance of equipment, the non-importance of equipment, the serviceability of pinhole cameras, and other similar questions. There is currently an active discussion of this subject which is rapidly approaching 300 posts, has completely disrupted the dispositions of some of our normally calmest members, and has driven some of the rest of our number completely (or at least mostly) off the rails.

It is clear that a consensus on this topic is almost certainly unattainable, but the idea for an at least somewhat objective experiment to quantify (or at least qualify) a smidgeon of objectivity around this subject has come to mind.

The premise is really quite simple. It involves making the commitment to put away your latest, greatest, most favorite camera for three weeks. Instead, pull out your oldest operational camera (in my case a Fuji X3 Pro), and commit to using only that camera for the next three weeks. NO MATTER WHAT! At the end of the three weeks, you will be allowed to make an informed comment on the topic.

A couple of important notes here:

1. If you have sold or otherwise gotten rid of your older cameras, you have already voted.

2. If you refuse to try, or if you don't make it through all three weeks, your vote is automatically cast.

Of course, this works as well as a thought exercise as it does as an actual challenge. Have fun if you are willing. For the curious, I surrender right now.

My vote is already cast, preemptively, cuz
all my cameras are somewhat similar ....
all in the 12 to 24MP range, all in a 1 to 7
years age range, and none are state of the
art, mostly midrange. And MOST important
of all, I use them all interchangeably, as if
differences don't matter ... cuz differences
barely matter except in "special purposes".
IOW, shelving the newer ones for a while
is not much different from my normal use
patterns anywho.

And so, here's a snap with basic model of
a 24MP camera using a 50 year old normal
lens, and 2 more using an old Sony 16MP
Nex-6 with its kit lens ... IOW, whatever I
grabbed on my way out the door: