lets be fair to 1DX

Started Oct 24, 2011 | Discussions thread
Regular MemberPosts: 320
I think you're right
In reply to kolas, Nov 9, 2011

kolas wrote:

I think it was the 5D2 that killed the 1Ds line. Similar IQ at 1/2 the cost. I have seen quite some pros - both commercial product and wedding photographers - with 5D2 but not one with 1Ds. I wonder how much the 1Ds sales dropped after release of 5D2.

Who needs a body that is rugged enough to last for decades when the electronics inside will be obsolete (not top-notch, surpassed by next generation - assuming 1Ds buyers were after the resolution it offered above 1D) in 5 years or less?

I definitely think this is true. The professionals that I know have always been pretty conscious of equipment costs. It's tough to make a good living in that business. God knows I'd rather smash my fingers with a hammer than do that for a living. For large portions of the time their studio cameras are dedicated to portraits (school, senior, engagement, wedding, family, brochure), which isn't particularly hard on a camera, except maybe for the shutter, which gets a real workout.

I know one who got the initial 1Ds and liked it a lot, but it was the only one he ever got because it was so expensive. He now has a couple of 5Ds and at least one of the sports cameras (for the fast focusing when he does team sports).

I know others who have never used anything beyond a 50D in digital and make their living just fine.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow