Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?

[Jan-Petter Midtgård]

At the moment I have only my old D300S, after my D810 had a fatal accident involving seawater. The insurance money will go towards a D850 in the near future.

[Hugh_3170]

Maybe a D700 or a D800/D800E would be a good & economical place to start.

This thread is fun to look through!  I really enjoyed the quote about a camera's performance not worsening due to the release of a newer model. 

I had two cameras die this fall: a D70 and a Panasonic Lumix TZ5.  I replaced the D70 with a D750.  After reading through this thread, I just replaced the little Lumix with...     a D200.   

I know it's a magnitude larger and heavier but I hope its rugged build will make it a good "bang around" camera that i'll be more apt to take out in the boat, etc.  And at $100 USD, it was cheaper than a new point-and-shoot.  I thought about how happy I had been with my D70 (my reluctant and tentative entry into digital) and decided that I could certainly be happy with images from a D200.

Long live the obsolete camera! (My "obsolete" F2S, F3HP and F4s are ready to try some new Ektachrome.)  If my purchase experience is good with the D200, I'm thinking that I'll likely start looking for the next obsolete bargain to add to the camera shelf.

Stay sharp,
Bob

[Seapy]

I really enjoyed the quote about a camera's performance not worsening due to the release of a newer model.

That's a fair point, especially when considering lenses but equally for those who can afford the newer cameras and can make good use of the features they bring, it makes sense for them to upgrade.  Market forces dictate  the price point of their 'discarded' cameras.  In practice they can go for a song, enabling many, like myself to step further up the ladder and enjoy better sensors and improved features.

My D200's can still take superb images, my D3 is wonderful but I just acquired a D800 which is in a different league, an amazing camera for a very good price, they are out there, just need to get lucky occasionally, or scour the internet.

[desmobob]

That's a fair point, especially when considering lenses but equally for those who can afford the newer cameras and can make good use of the features they bring, it makes sense for them to upgrade.  Market forces dictate  the price point of their 'discarded' cameras.  In practice they can go for a song, enabling many, like myself to step further up the ladder and enjoy better sensors and improved features.

My D200's can still take superb images, my D3 is wonderful but I just acquired a D800 which is in a different league, an amazing camera for a very good price, they are out there, just need to get lucky occasionally, or scour the internet.

I am amazed by the capabilities my D750 brings.  On the other hand, I'm just a hobbyist taking photos for fun and never really felt a need for anything past my F3HP.  I moved to digital grudgingly and that first digital I bought, the D70, seemed satisfactory to me except for the DX sensor's crop factor effect on the lenses I had.  The D750 was a real eye-opener and its capabilities will no doubt help improve my photography but I still love my "obsolete" cameras just as much.  As I get older, I get more nostalgic, and that probably has a lot to do with it.

But for those more pragmatic than nostalgic, the current rush of technology allows those willing -or required by budget- to stay back a step or two access to some amazing technology at amazing prices.  I guess rapid obsolescence can be a good thing!

Feeling a little obsolete myself,
Bob

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?

What makes a camera "obsolete"?

[ArthurJS]

This is the most ridiculous question I've ever heard, no offense. A camera that takes photographs is not obsolete. No offense, but, think about it. 

[Seapy]

This is the most ridiculous question I've ever heard, no offense. A camera that takes photographs is not obsolete. No offense, but, think about it.

Arthur, the word 'obsolete' is subjective, what might not be obsolete to you may well be obsolete to others, especially if the supplies to use in it (film or batteries) are no longer readily available.  I have a Kodak TLR which I understand film is no longer available for, except by rewinding 120 film onto other reels, to me that's obsolete, but my D200's are by no means obsolete to me, they are a vital component of my photographic inventory.

[ArthurJS]

You just contradicted yourself. but, ok.

[MFloyd]

You just contradicted yourself. but, ok.

Quite agressive for a newbie. You might be on the wrong forum.

[Seapy]

Very.

[golunvolo]

My last entry in February topic was taken with a d700. Has a mirror and doesn´t do video. It must be obsolete. I can be bought nowadays in the second hand market in Spain for 300-400 euros. With grip 

[Kenneth Rich]

Second hand market in Spain. . . memories . . . , but do not remember cameras
Moderator edited for off topic content  By Erik Lund

[Ian R]

I use the D70s quite a bit. The files are so easy to work with - especially as I sometimes use Picasa for photo editing as its fast and easy - and that is stuck in the past too with no RAW support for newer cameras. With the D70s the results remain refreshing and beg to be printed.

[Kenneth Rich]

Thank you, Eric, you are correct, I did get off topic, and had/ have no desire to do that.  This forum is photography, nothing else, and i'd hate to see it change/suffer.
Ian, does  Picasa support RAW with  Df, or is the  Df still considered to be one of the "newer" cameras?  Digital cameras become old long before their time, unfortunately. I don't mind my Df being classed as old, but hopefully not seriously termed "obsolete." Which evokes the thought: if film were to make some miraculous comeback, would the obsolete cameras no longer be obsolete?  I am slowly becoming comfortable with the digital world of my Df, and I do not think I would take my F2SB out of mothballs.

[Ian R]

Unfortunately no is the answer Kenneth - Df is too new. But Picasa is also obsolete - yet I see so many people still using it. The tools it offers are decent and easy to use - which I important. I also have Adobe Photoshop, but its not as easy or fun.

I too use the Df, and I absolutely love what it does. I have large prints on my wall now which when I look at them bring the moment back to me, such as the airiness of a sheltered coastal path or the expressiveness of a boxer dogs face - like he is there now. Maybe the classic manual lenses have something to do with this, but the Df works so well with them that is another plus. It is the Nikon that really fired up my enthusiasm.