Author Topic: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?  (Read 117431 times)

Bjørn Rørslett

  • Fierce Bear of the North
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 8252
  • Oslo, Norway
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #225 on: April 21, 2017, 18:54:14 »
First and foremost, we are trying to help not "sell on" anything here. All there is to say about the V1 is one should not overlook its potential for making photographs. It also does video if you so wish too. The 1 Nikon series is in general looked down on from people apparently never having tried to use them as cameras.

If you don't understand the concept of "crop factor", then don't waste more energy trying to come to grips with it. The "crop factor"  is to put it mildly,  a brain-dead concept. Focal length is focal length. End of story.

Perspective has nothing to do with format per se, only on the distance from camera to subject. Misunderstanding perspective is very common and when a term such as "wide-angle perspective" is mentioned, you can be sure whoever put that forward didn't understand the meaning of perspective.

What in the end is important is angle of view. Each format has its own range of focal lengths useful for that specific format to give the required variation of captured angle of view. A wide-angle lens on one format can act as a very narrow-angled optic on another.


KenP

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #226 on: April 21, 2017, 19:32:51 »
Sorry Bjorn….poor choice of words I guess. I did not mean to imply you were trying to sell me anything. Without a lens to mess with on the V1, it is hard to make an evaluation. That said, I will pass on the D2h and ignore crop factors as well. Not much interest in video but perhaps I would use it at times.

David; Thank you for your response. Speaking of ISO or the last time I used a camera, it was ASA in the film days. I never did take pictures in the dark or very low light. It never worked well with film for me. I understand digital ISO can indeed make this process easier. Is there a significant difference in the rendering of "noise" or grain between the V1 and the D2xs?

Thanks for the replies and the help. Sorry again for the misunderstanding.

Ken


Jack Dahlgren

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1528
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #227 on: April 21, 2017, 21:41:24 »
One thing that you may want to consider is size. Smaller cameras are easier to carry and therefore you are more likely to have them when needed. This can not be overstated.

I've used everything from tiny point and shoot cameras up to 4x5" and I think it is best to start small and get larger only when it is clear to you that you need/want to.

With older cameras the purchase price and sale price are nearly the same, so unless you break it, you can consider the camera to be free and the money you spent to just be a security deposit. Both cameras you are looking at are widely available in used condition for rather small amounts of money anyway.

Either of those cameras will have vastly better low light performance than film ever was capable of.

KenP

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #228 on: April 21, 2017, 23:12:24 »
I purchased the D2xs and the two Tokina DX F2.8 lens. The size does not bother me at all. The V1 is still an option down the road. This will at least get me started in digital photography. Thank you very much for your help.

Ken

Bjørn Rørslett

  • Fierce Bear of the North
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 8252
  • Oslo, Norway
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #229 on: April 21, 2017, 23:14:47 »
Now, we are as eager as yourself to see results !!

David H. Hartman

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2778
  • I Doctor Photographs... :)
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #230 on: April 22, 2017, 04:00:47 »
I purchased the D2xs and the two Tokina DX F2.8 lens. The size does not bother me at all. The V1 is still an option down the road. This will at least get me started in digital photography. Thank you very much for your help.

Ken

I bought my D2H on close out for $2,000.00 (USD). A D2X would have been served me better but I could not afford it. I think the price of the D2X and D2XS was $5,000.00 or a little more. I think you will like the D2XS.

Best,

Dave Hartman
Beatniks are out to make it rich
Oh no, must be the season of the witch!

Thieery

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • You ARE NikonGear
    • Between Corsica and England
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #231 on: June 10, 2017, 13:59:52 »
I already exclusively use two obsolete digital cameras (Nikon D3 and D800) but worse I'm waiting for the Nikon F with it's FTN Photomic from 1968 I've just bought on ebay....
and I've a question for  Bjørn ...even if I own eleven AI/AIS lenses do I really need a 1968 lens like a 50mm f/2.0 ... to match with the F chromed body...

Bjørn Rørslett

  • Fierce Bear of the North
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 8252
  • Oslo, Norway
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #232 on: June 10, 2017, 15:52:49 »
Yes, you do.

On any Nikon F, having the proper period lenses makes all the difference. Or so I'm told :D

By the way, the earlier versions of the 50/2 are still quite capable performers. I have a couple of them of various vintage. The AI version sees use on a Df after being CPU-upgraded. Th pre-AI etc. is used with mirrorless systems via an adapter.

bonnmiller

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #233 on: June 10, 2017, 18:36:53 »
I still use film mainly because of its proven archival qualities. The choices of film have decreased and finding a place that will pull or push when developing the negatives is almost Zero. I have a Nikon Cool Scan so I am able to convert my film images to digital ones. I am looking for new software since the original software from Nikon only runs with Windows XP at this point. As for digital archiving, there will be few photographs taken today that will survive 150 years in digital form.   So - digital is obsolete before the pictures are taken.

Thieery

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • You ARE NikonGear
    • Between Corsica and England
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #234 on: June 10, 2017, 18:39:01 »
Yes, you do.

On any Nikon F, having the proper period lenses makes all the difference. Or so I'm told :D

By the way, the earlier versions of the 50/2 are still quite capable performers. I have a couple of them of various vintage. The AI version sees use on a Df after being CPU-upgraded. Th pre-AI etc. is used with mirrorless systems via an adapter.

Thanks for your advice Bjørn, finding a 50mm H will be my next quest... :D

Jack Dahlgren

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1528
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #235 on: June 10, 2017, 20:48:24 »
As for digital archiving, there will be few photographs taken today that will survive 150 years in digital form.   So - digital is obsolete before the pictures are taken.

As for humanity, there will be few people born today that will survive 150 years in physical form. So - people are obsolete before they are born.

I also have many digital photographs which have outlasted the objects, places, people and times they documented, so while permanence is not guaranteed, digital photos are holding up pretty well. So much easier to share as well.

This is just an idle comment, not a rebuttal or debate about which form of image storage is best. I actually like film a large amount.

CS

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1240
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #236 on: June 10, 2017, 21:02:40 »
I still use film mainly because of its proven archival qualities. The choices of film have decreased and finding a place that will pull or push when developing the negatives is almost Zero. I have a Nikon Cool Scan so I am able to convert my film images to digital ones. I am looking for new software since the original software from Nikon only runs with Windows XP at this point. As for digital archiving, there will be few photographs taken today that will survive 150 years in digital form.   So - digital is obsolete before the pictures are taken.

If the people holding those old pics simply convert them to whatever medium is current at that 150 year from now time, then your statement is obviously not so. We've already seen many digital storage forms become obsolete, but they've been replaced with more modern digital methods, and I don't see that changing in the future. Those old pics aren't going anywhere with proper care, unless you think the world is coming to an end, in which case there will be a decrease in demand for the pics anyway.
Carl

Per Inge Oestmoen

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • Long Live NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #237 on: June 11, 2017, 00:43:26 »
Fons: a digital camera is much more dependent on the availability of spare parts and electronics than the old cameras of say the '60s. A simple thing as lack of suitable batteries can stop its use even though the camera might be fully functional. If the software support for the camera ceases or what software one uses at present no longer can be installed under new operating systems, you are out no matter what state the camera is in (or you are limited to jpgs, not RAW).

That being said, having old film cameras serviced demands a supply of spare parts that only can be met by skilled repair techs and scavenged and cannibalised cameras. Old camera maintenance won't be cheap.


Luckily, my Nikon D750 has a battery grip that allows the use of AA-size batteries - part of the reason why I chose that model instead of a used D3s which functionally would be top notch. The other part of the reason was supposed higher IQ from the D750 files.

Regarding the software support for the different RAW formats: There I feel rather safe and secure. I refuse to use activation crippled software or subscription based software - both of which would make the user's RAW conversion impossible when the software company ceases to support one's RAW format or activation/subscription is no longer available.

It is beyond me how people can accept such improper behavior as forcing us into dependency on activations or subscriptions in order to access our own data and images. My solution is the best - IMO - the use of Open Source software under Linux. I use UFRAW, RawTherapee and Darktable extensively under Linux.

- In my opinion, we should all respond to activation schemes and subscription schemes by migrating to Open Source software and tell others about this possibility and the advantages that go with Open Source and free software.
"Noise reduction is just another word for image destruction"

Per Inge Oestmoen

CS

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1240
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #238 on: June 11, 2017, 01:05:02 »


Luckily, my Nikon D750 has a battery grip that allows the use of AA-size batteries - part of the reason why I chose that model instead of a used D3s which functionally would be top notch. The other part of the reason was supposed higher IQ from the D750 files.

Regarding the software support for the different RAW formats: There I feel rather safe and secure. I refuse to use activation crippled software or subscription based software - both of which would make the user's RAW conversion impossible when the software company ceases to support one's RAW format or activation/subscription is no longer available.

It is beyond me how people can accept such improper behavior as forcing us into dependency on activations or subscriptions in order to access our own data and images. My solution is the best - IMO - the use of Open Source software under Linux. I use UFRAW, RawTherapee and Darktable extensively under Linux.

- In my opinion, we should all respond to activation schemes and subscription schemes by migrating to Open Source software and tell others about this possibility and the advantages that go with Open Source and free software.

Nobody is putting a gun to your head to "force" you to use any particular software, but I don't accept your definition that the solution you use is "the best", or that everyone should do as you do. Perhaps it's "the best" for you, but that is no indicator that it's the best for the next guy. Indeed, many folks regard the "free" versions to be worth everything you pay for them. I hope that you can accept that I like what I use, and that I chose out of my own free will, just as you did.
Carl

JJChan

  • JJ Chan
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 298
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Do you still use an "obsolete" camera?
« Reply #239 on: June 11, 2017, 01:47:42 »
I still use film mainly because of its proven archival qualities. The choices of film have decreased and finding a place that will pull or push when developing the negatives is almost Zero. I have a Nikon Cool Scan so I am able to convert my film images to digital ones. I am looking for new software since the original software from Nikon only runs with Windows XP at this point. As for digital archiving, there will be few photographs taken today that will survive 150 years in digital form.   So - digital is obsolete before the pictures are taken.

BM
I bought Vuescan which is a very useful and powerful software. It loads modern Coolscan Drivers which magically enables the Nikonscan software to work. I used Windows 7 Pro and now use clean install Windows 10 Pro.

Nikonscan still has the easiest DigitalICE implementation but I admit more and more I'm using Vuescan. It's a little hard to get used to but ends up being more powerful in the long run. I save files as dng raw and they can be used and manipulated any time including DigitalICE. The Coolscan is a bazillion times better in my hands than the mucking about with Epson flat scanners and focus issues.

JJ