DSLRUsers.com

Do we really need new models released ad infinitum.

'm amazed by all the hype around new models..and the seeming need to have every feature possible packed into the latest body.
Yes I own a digital SLR, now probably 3 models old...and still love what I can make it do (note...not "what it does").

I also own a camera that has...no meter...no battery...no program modes...no electronics...no auto focus...no post shoot viewing screen....and I use it regularly....but lacking all those features I guess I probably couldn't even give it away..........if it wasn't spelt Hasselblad.

Of course we need them
My Digital body is 6 models old now, but last week I ordered a new body to take me from 6 megapixels to 10. This wont improve my photos, but it will improve my quality and give me back some features I missed from my film camera.
When you take a photo, dont you want to improve and make it better than the last?
Why would this not be different to someone designing a camera?
Is there any difference in a F1 team trying to shave .001 of a second off there lap time, or a Merc trying to improve car safety etc ... etc
I started as an apprentice fixing things like manual typewriters, and trueth be known, I really dont need many more features than they had. Now Ive got a word processor which I dont use a miniscule of its power. Not everyone will use the power and features of the new bodies, but they will use which ever they choose to because they can.

I shoot Pentax, and sometimes, like what happened with the K1000, there is an outcry when something good is taken off the market and replaced with something so called "better". After roughly 27 years of producing the k1000 there was so much outcry when they removed it from there range, they had to bring it back for another 6/7 years. But it didnt stop them from bringing out the bodies with more features either.

I dont need the latest and greatest camera to take photos, I just need 1 good enough for me, but I see no reason that others might not want one.
just my 2 cents + GST

Yes you can give it away, and I'm putting my hand up before everyone else

Seriously though, I am with you in one respect, that there is no need for such frequent model releases, but on the other hand, it's the profits that determine how much R&D is done and if they didn't tempt us to spend with new products it would take an eternity to get to where we are now.

mikephotog wrote:Do we really need new models released ad infinitum.

I don't know how Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad, et al would stay in business otherwise.

'm amazed by all the hype around new models..and the seeming need to have every feature possible packed into the latest body.

Where else would you have them?

There are improvements and there are new features - for some people, one or both may be an important issue for their shooting style - just thinking of the high ISO qualities of the new Nikon cameras - these would be tremendous for wedding, band, and other available light shooters. The new AF system - for sports, nature photographers, etc.

I also own a camera that has...no meter...no battery...no program modes...no electronics...no auto focus...no post shoot viewing screen....and I use it regularly....but lacking all those features I guess I probably couldn't even give it away..........if it wasn't spelt Hasselblad.

I am not sure what you are saying here. Would you look down on me because I bought a metered viewfinder for my Bronica? Or would you look down on me because I can't guess what EV is appropriate without a meter telling me?

I am not shooting you down in flames, but your post sounded a bit trollish.

Yes, we need new models. It helps folks like me pick up the previous model at a more realistic price.

I do agree that bringing out say the D70, followed by the D70s, or the D200, followed by the D200s. I can't figure that out, but suspect it revolves around marketing. MAybe they fix minor issues, but I liken it to Windows, where they release updates etc to something that shouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

But, I still think that new models are great. Now, how to find my moolah for 2x D3 bodies.....

I can't work out why anyone would be unhappy with manufacturers regularly releasing new models. If you are happy with the camera you have, ignore it. Of course, each new model lowers the resale value of a previous model but if you are happy with the camera you have, it's not a problem.

Should car manufacturers stop bringing out new models? Computer manufacturers? Phones? TVs? DVD players? Need I go on?

mikephotog wrote:Do we really need new models released ad infinitum.

You may not. That's fine.

Others may find that feature x is an improvement that for them, will help them produce a better image under certain conditions. So they might upgrade.

When I bought my first FE there was also on the market the FM, the EM, and the F2 or the F3. I can't remember which.

There was also a range of film: Kodachrome 64 and 100, Ektachrome 64, 100 and 400, Kodacolor 100 and 400, Fujichrome 100 and 400, Fujicolor 100 and 400, VPN, AP 100 and 400, VP 100 and 400, FP4 and HP4, to but name a few. Each of those films had different characteristics and features, which enabled me to choose from amongst them based upon my needs for any given shooting requirement, and their manufacturers were constantly working and researching to improve their products too.

And many of the features of those films have been now included in the cameras ...

And of course all the car manufacturers are bringing out new models every year, and sometimes more frequently. Do you buy a new car every time that Honda brings something new to the market?

I'm not sure that I see any differences, all told.

And rational thinking aside there is the thrill and excitement of owning the latest technology that can be quite invigorating. Nothing wrong with that
And if 'me tooism' worked for Kevin 07 then who am I to be different
cheers
marco

Hey mikephotog, what car do you drive, or is it as push bike?

gstark wrote:When I bought my first FE there was also on the market the FM, the EM, and the F2 or the F3. I can't remember which.

Brings back memories... The FE did not directly replace the FM, they were just different:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/co ... lr7779.htm

broadbean wrote:The FE did not directly replace the FM, they were just different:

Yep!

As I said, they were both on the market concurrently, and they were complementary models, with the FE being the automatic version of the FM.

No different to buying a Holden of the time: you could buy the manual model, or you could pay a little more to buy the auto. The bodies were basically the same, but the FE provided aperture preferred auto exposure. I had both.

Accessories were interchangeable between the two bodies - motor drives (was it the MD-12?), film backs, and focus screens were the main ones one might buy.

gstark wrote:

broadbean wrote:The FE did not directly replace the FM, they were just different:

Yep!

As I said, they were both on the market concurrently, and they were complementary models, with the FE being the automatic version of the FM.

No different to buying a Holden of the time: you could buy the manual model, or you could pay a little more to buy the auto. The bodies were basically the same, but the FE provided aperture preferred auto exposure. I had both.

Accessories were interchangeable between the two bodies - motor drives (was it the MD-12?), film backs, and focus screens were the main ones one might buy.

Although I do seem to remember that the FM had a fully mechanical shutter whereas the FE had an electronic one.

phillipb wrote:Although I do seem to remember that the FM had a fully mechanical shutter whereas the FE had an electronic one.

Maybe later, but no, I don't believe so. The FM and FE both had an "M" setting on the shutter dial, which was a mechanical 1/125.

I think (maybe I should just grab the camera and check? ) the FE2 had the titanium shutter (the FM2 would have been the same) and thus the M setting (and flash sync) would have become 1/250.

Both cameras would work sans batteries, but only on the M setting.

Gary, I had an FM2 and I am sure that it was operational at all speeds without the battery, which was only used for the light meter.

Edit: Yep, just confirmed it http://nikonimaging.com/global/products ... df/fm2.pdf

phillipb wrote:Gary, I had an FM2 and I am sure that it was operational at all speeds without the battery, which was only used for the light meter.

FM2, perhaps. I'd never had one, just the FM.

As well as the FE (concurrently with the FM), and an FE2, which is in my bedroom along with my other film Nikons.

gstark wrote:As well as the FE (concurrently with the FM), and an FE2, which is in my bedroom along with my other film Nikons.

Ahh... happy days...

Just noticed you also have an F-801 in your sig. Had one of those too. Looking back, prosumer cameras have come such a long way, and much more affordable now.

That's probably another good thing about so many models - ultimately more are purchased, and the prices get cheaper for everyone.

As much as I agree it's the photography rather than the camera, where I get a chance now I much prefer an SLR over my various P&S cameras.

Oh fond memories!

Both the FM and FM2 have purely mechanically controlled shutters, i.e. they work without battery at all shutter speeds. The FE and FE2 needed a battery to operate the shutter at all but one speed. From memory that was M90 on the FE (as opposed to 1/125 flash sync speed) and I don't remember what on the FE2. I can't check anymore because I sold both my FE and FE2 in separate fits of insanity...

The two things that made the FE2 the ultimate MF camera for me was the 1/250 flash sync speed and - most importantly - TTL flash metering.

The F-801 was a fine body (esp the F-801s) with all the bells and whistles one could wish for. However, in comparison with the FE/FM style cameras it felt a bit like a Tupperware lunchbox (though not nearly as bad as all - even the most expensive - Canon bodies of the time). The big differentiator at the time was AF speed and accuracy, not build quality or ergonomics. The FE/FM just couldn't compete anymore.

Well, if anyone has got a spare FE2 and MD12, I could just get weak and forgo that D3 for a little longer ;D

Cheers
Steffen.

Steffen,

Steffen wrote:From memory that was M90 on the FE (as opposed to 1/125 flash sync speed) and I don't remember what on the FE2. I can't check anymore because I sold both my FE and FE2 in separate fits of insanity...

FE2 was M250s - or should I say IS as I still have mine.

Steffen wrote:The two things that made the FE2 the ultimate MF camera for me was the 1/250 flash sync speed and - most importantly - TTL flash metering.

That is the exact reason I bought mine back in 1985. I loved that camera and I still have a soft spot for it which is why I won't sell it.

Steffen wrote:The F-801 was a fine body (esp the F-801s) with all the bells and whistles one could wish for. However, in comparison with the FE/FM style cameras it felt a bit like a Tupperware lunchbox (though not nearly as bad as all - even the most expensive - Canon bodies of the time). The big differentiator at the time was AF speed and accuracy, not build quality or ergonomics. The FE/FM just couldn't compete anymore.

I also have a F-801s which I bought in 1991 when I figured it was time to get onto the AF bandwagon. Even after buying the F-801s, the FE2 still got a lot of use.

Steffen wrote:
Well, if anyone has got a spare FE2 and MD12, I could just get weak and forgo that D3 for a little longer ;D

Cheers
Steffen.

I still have the FE2 and MD12 still - served me well with 7 yrs of wedding photography. Now it sits in the cupboard most of the time. I busted the light meter in it though - tough camera but it didn't like the small cliff drop.


Cheers,
Craig

I use my FE (I think mechanical shutter speed is 1/90?) as my P&S given it's diminutive size compared to the other cameras.

It's a real beauty, although the needle meter is hard to read in poor light. Works well with the Metz, too.

Growing up, I lusted after the Nikon F2A/F2AS. Realistically, the FM/FE twins were closer to what I could afford. In the end, skipped the lot and had the F-801 instead.

As for film cameras, they really don't offer the instant gratification of knowing how a shot turned out and the ease of transfering to a computer as the digital age does. But if a good FE/FM sample cropped up on eBay for a song...

Nudging ever so slightly back to the original topic, not every camera would suit everyone, so I'd say bring on all the new models. If you didn't need an upgrade, others may appreciate the extra features, or lower price, or whatever. Hundreds of different cars available too (not even counting the variation within each model), but I'd only need two, maybe three.

mikephotog wrote:Do we really need new models released ad infinitum.

'm amazed by all the hype around new models..and the seeming need to have every feature possible packed into the latest body.
Yes I own a digital SLR, now probably 3 models old...and still love what I can make it do (note...not "what it does").

I also own a camera that has...no meter...no battery...no program modes...no electronics...no auto focus...no post shoot viewing screen....and I use it regularly....but lacking all those features I guess I probably couldn't even give it away..........if it wasn't spelt Hasselblad.

If I'm on a shoot I want a camera that makes me as productive as possible, and helps cut down on errors. So newer ones tend to work better.

Mike, I hope no-one does shoot you down in flames because that's not supposed to happen in this forum (but don't go & invite it! )

If you're happy with the camera you have, stay with it. You'll always come across some people who just want "the newest & best" (so they think).

I have recently met a guy who proudly announced to the group I was in that he had just ordered a D300 and then told us all that the shop told him he would probably get the first D300 in Australia because they were getting the 1st shipment (which the rest of us were sceptical about). Well, this week he turned up with his new D300 and was very put out that he had met a guy 1/2 hour after he picked his up who also had one and had bought it from another shop at the same time. The interesting thing is that this guy seems to know very little about photography (which is fair enough, we're all travellers on the same journey) and yet is very disparaging about anyone else's photography in our little group. He is still using his little Point & Shoot but has just paid thousands for this camera but hardly used it and yet boasts to everyone that he's got it. The theme seems to be "I've got this so it's going to make me a better photographer." I personally really liked your comment "Yes I own a digital SLR....and still love what I can make it do..."

Surely it's as much the skill of the tradesman as the technology that counts? Consider what the likes of Ansell Adams et al achieved so many years ago. They didn't have the technology that we have today and, as has been attested herein already, there have been some damn fine cameras in the past already used by some members here.

My 2 cents worth (and sometimes that's about what the skill of this tradesman is worth! )

I'm all for people jumping in the curve early and paying big bucks to be the first off the block. Had there not been people like that with the early mobile phones, we wouldn't have got cheaper and better featured versions trickling down the line.

Pioneers get the arrows, settlers get the land...

Borrowing that from a good mate of mine.

Simple fact is there are people who lust after the newest technology. A quick read of dpreview will confirm this. And manufacturers just take advantage of it. Good luck to them.

I haven't looked, but I'll bet there are already threads about the Canon 40D replacement where they infer the feature list from the microexpressions on a Canon rep's face.

In the meantime, on with the photography!

mikephotog wrote:Do we really need new models released ad infinitum.

You can say the same thing about pretty much any consumer product these days - cars for example. You can still drive a car that's 60 years old and it will get you from A to B. Or you can buy the latest BMW, Holden etc and have features like satnav, ABS, etc etc which make for a smoother, safer and more fuel economical ride.

The camera technology, like the computer technology, moves fast these days and manufacturers try and pack the latest and greatest features into the cameras in order to stay ahead of the competition. The consumer can only benefit from this - in the end it is your choice to make.

Is the photo quality from my F90x comparable to the D200? Of course. But for me to actually GET that photo, it's easier and cheaper with the D200. I don't fancy wasting 20+ rolls of film on a single event. The latest focusing and exposure tech also means the percentage of great shots increases, especially in my case doing action photography.

If you benefit from new features of a new model, you have the choice to upgrade. If not, stick with what you have. Choice is good.