--- On Sat, 10/11/08, Lea Murphy <lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Lea Murphy <lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Ok so everyone seems to want lively debate (not flame wars)
> To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Saturday, October 11, 2008, 5:57 PM
> On Oct 11, 2008, at 1:33 AM, Laurenz Bobke wrote:
>
> > I somewhat doubt that there ever will be a time when
> it will become
> > as "mature" as analogue.
>
> I disagree. I think what will happen is people will get
> honest about
> how much tool their work really needs.
>
> For example, I do studio work using a Canon 5D. Until last
> week I had
> a 5D as a back up. I sold one in order to make a deposit on
> the new
> Canon 5D Mark II.
>
> My studio work doesn't NEED the 21 megapixels of the
> Mark II but my
> personal work does need some of the features of that
> camera....low
> light capabilities without flash being notable among them.
> The HD
> video capability will allow me to explore something
> I've been
> interested in for a long time. Hence, the upgrade.
>
> So, rather than selling both 5Ds and upgrading both cameras
> to Mark
> IIs, I'm only upgrading one.
>
> What I capture with my 5D in the studio is more than
> sufficient for my
> clients' needs. When my clients require more and better
> images than
> what my 5D can produce, I'll upgrade my studio camera
> as well.
>
> Make sense?
>
> Lea
>
>
>
>
> babies. they're what i do.
> www.leamurphy.com
Lea It makes perfect sense, but I disagree from another perspective. At some point technology will reach a point that the next year won't add mega pixels. You might get a few extra features, the software may improve a bit, but as some point technology will not be able to add another 10 mp to its top end camera without coming up with a totally new way to capture light. We will also reach a point that the extra information would be unless anyway. It would be sort of like using a 4x5 view camera for a photo to be put on the web.
When I buy used its long term values. I use Canon gear and still use the 28 80 2.8-4.0L and the 80 200 2.8L Is there newer out there? Sure. Would I like to have IS? Sure but if I get it I might get a separate Ken Labs unit that would provide image stabilization for any camera, not just ones that I could use that lens on. Do I get light fall off on the 80 200 2.8L wide open? Yes but I know that and for my work I can work around it.
I also have a few primes, but they are mostly old Ziess lenses for my Kiev and I have an adapter that lets me use them on my Canon gear. Ackward in many ways, but because they are made for medium format I am using the sweet spot of the lenses. It works.
I hardly think film is a thing of the past. If you want to work in some areas it might cause some issues, but frankly I haven't seen anyone able to get the true blacks of a black and white wet print using any digital system. If they do, I have time to prove the prints will a wet black and white print can last a very very long time. We still see prints taken in the US Civil war, and somehow I just bet that no digital photographer can produce a digital print made from that time. Maybe they will last that long, but until 150 years or so have passed you can't really know for sure.
I want one last film body. Who doesn't want an EOS 1v, but I need a new digital body. Now the question becauses. Can I live with the 40D should I spend a great deal more to get the 50D, get a used 5D that's slower used. The 5DmarkII is out of the budget for now.
I also want a new enlarger or should I say another used one. When moving the wife plugged in my less than conventional switches without asking (my switches are power strips) and ran the vacuum. That unfortunately turned on the lamp without the fan and cooked the internal filters. Replacing them is likely more trouble than its worth, but again which comes first and how much.
