Old Veteran Loc: Georgia

I am a former film user with a Minolta srt 202 and two zoom lenses. I use to read up on the latest news on new film emulsions. I would read about the latest lenses or the new model slr's. I would read how to articles, how to look for the right light conditions. How to get the "eye" to be able to see those great shots. I treated each slide like a blank canvas and strived to put on the slide the best image. The "magic moment" could be so fleeting and I learned to arrive early, and wait for that moment. I really miss that part. I am asking why is their a constant change in DSLR's that to have bought one and two or three years later it is old hat and the newer model is better? I don't look forward to getting into digital and invest money on technology that could be outdated in a few months. Will there be an acme to this? I am un-decided which amount of pixel would be best for my use. I can't settle on any brand of camera and the costs for the glass is the one reason I am hesitant. I will not be "printing" large photos, maybe 14x11 max. I just want to "go back" to how I use to shoot, but with a digital camera that will fit my hobby.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I find that bodies come and go, but good glass, assuming you stick with the same camera format, will work even better with new bodies. As advances in technology take place, difficult shots become easier. That may be due to technology advances or just gaining more experience by taking more images. For me bodies have a life span around 2-4 years...sort of like computers.

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

The cameras that are out there now, are all pretty good. If you see one in a store and it feels good in your hand, then you can buy it and hang on to it until it breaks. You can't blame the manufacturers for upgrading their products; but you, as a consumer don't have to play the game. If the camera you are using takes the kind of pictures you want to take, it is not obsolete.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

If your limit is 11x14, almost any DSLR today from 10 MP to 16 MP can meet your requirements. You don't need to go full-frame, but it helps. Ignore the pressure to continually upgrade.

On the other hand, if your habits are still honestly film oriented, there are still plenty of 35mm films available that can also do what you want. And there are plenty of very high quality used film cameras available at bargain prices.

tramsey Loc: Texas

I made a post on this thread. Why was it deleted?

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Only ADMIN can delete posts to a core thread, such as Main Photography Discussion.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

If You were shooting Minolta look at Sony their cameras will accept some if not all of you old lenses. (Alpha range will take M and P lenses but not exclusively one or the other) I wrote a reply to your kind comments in my old thread about shooting mist - please go and read it as I expanded on your second bit (this subject)

Cameras don't get superseded users do - some think its the camera that makes the shot...god love em (somebody has to)

If you know what you are doing then a "2nd user" camera might be as good a buy as this year's model and it will probably surpass what you used before. BUT - there is little trade in value in anything nowadays so getting it right first time is important. Take your time and find a shop so that you can handle the camera (sadly knowledgeable shop assistants are as rare as hens teeth)

Hint hint there is a very knowledgeably camera shop owner who does mail order. He's on the forum....so your tech questions should get an honest discussion.

Good luck

George

OnDSnap Loc: NE New Jersey

Check your PM....the Admin usually tells you why it was deleted if in fact they did.

amehta Loc: Boston

To the fundamental question of "Why?", a big part is that when you buy a digital camera, you're also buying all the film you will ever use with it. If you bought a film camera in 1988, in 1989 you could use Kodacolor Gold 1600 and in 1990 you could start using Fuji Velvia. If you bought a digital camera in 2006, you didn't get the improvements made in 2007 or 2008 until you bought a new camera (2007: 6400 ISO, 21mp; 2008: 24mp)

I think the improvements which you would appreciate have slowed down significantly. If you were to shoot with a Nikon D7000 (2010) or Canon 7D (2009), you'd be very happy with the results. If someone then handed you a D7100, you might easily hand it back after a week and say you're quite satisfied with the D7000.

Many of the features being added today are completely unrelated to film shooting: video quality, WiFi, and GPS. Some people want that, so they get the new toys. Other people don't, so they stick with what they have.

If you bought a new DSLR today, like one of the Sony models, it could easily satisfy your needs or 5 years or longer.

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

don't worry about upgrading.it's about the photographs not the equipment.if you like the photos that's all that matters.

Papa Joe Loc: Midwest U.S.

Are you still enjoying an 8" Black and White Television set? Changed? How come? I guess it's just something we can't really control... the urge to improve, and since DSLR is comparatively new, we're still seeing it 'blossom'. Pick one and enjoy it to the fullest! Merry Christmas.

Kuzano

If you purchased your Minolta SRT 202 when new, you've been packing it around and using it for about 45-50 years.

Simply inconceivable in digital. Heck, you can probably shoot that camera manual and without metering for the image and come out on the mark. Not many in digital photography can even comprehend doing that without relying somewhat on the automation.

You have a leg up in that you can probably shoot digital manual focus and manual exposure starting out.

With that as a starting point, opt for the best manual control camera you can muster pricewise, but don't spend a ton of money, in case you can't abide the transition.

In the meantime, film is still available in many emulsions, processing is still available. The idea that film costs more than digital is entirely bogus when you factor in the cost of adequate computers and upgrading the computer often, cost of software, and the learning curve on such, ad infinitum. Digital is simply NOT less expensive than film, to get outfitted and to stay current.

Your camera has been paid for four or more decades, as have your lenses.

One option may be to continue to shoot film and scan it to digital, or to continue with "wet" processing and enlargement, even if you do it yourself.

I'm having a bunch of fun using the Caffenol process. Shooting film and developing both the film and prints in instant coffee, Vitamin C, and Washing Soda. It's a very active process for many right now. You can produce results equal to the best chemistry used on film to date.

Sound interesting.... just google or yahoo

processing file caffenol

Much information on this technique... some great blogs and sites established.

I shoot Medium Format and 35mm. In fact I just bought two new Large Format camera's.... $100 each, and the freezer is full of "paid for" 4X5 film.

No digital camera so far can touch that format in IQ. At least not straight from the camera, without significant editing.

Why on earth would you want to go digital, and slowly join the "spray and pray" society. I do admit you can go just as introspective, slow and thorough with digital, but where's the challenge in that when you can rattle off hundreds of images a day in digital, and sort the keepers out... say 10% if lucky.

Not a direct answer to your question, .... just food for thought.

Photogdog Loc: New Kensington, PA

One of the main reasons for the constant stream of new body models is that DSLRs are so steeped in electronics which are constantly changing and being upgraded. That said, just because a manufacturer comes out with a new model that may supersede an older one doesn't mean that the earlier model is obsolete. The camera business is like any other. To stay competitive, manufacturers add new features; bigger sensors, better processors, WiFi, NFC, GPS, etc. When you stand still, your competitors pass you by.

However, I have a Canon 5D MKII that is no longer sold by Canon (the 5D MKIII replaced it.). That by no means indicates that the 5D MKII doesn't still suit my needs. It fills the bill very nicely & I expect that it will for years to come.

As others have stated here, lenses are the main consideration. Bodies will come & go but good glass is where the real investment lies. Among my Canon lenses I have the 24-70mm f2.8L Zoom, 8-15mm f4.0L, 24mm f3.5L Tilt/Shift, 70-20mm f4.0 Zoom, 100mm f2.8 Macro, 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM Zoom & the 10-22mm f3.5-5.6 Zoom (for my 7D). I will hold on to these lenses for keeps & hand them down to my sons when I'm too old to carry all that gear around. Then I'll just carry my Sony EVILs.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Film cameras too have always been replaced with newer (and "better") models, maybe not as fast as the digital counterparts these days, but the technology at that time did not change that much and that fast either. Again, there is that smiley face again, I don't know why that keeps happening to me.

amehta Loc: Boston

The ") happens when there is a " and ) next to each other. I've stared leaving a space ("like this" ) to avoid the problem.