can't believe my 5R has lost almost half value in 7 months

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
Lance B
Forum ProPosts: 26,944Gear list
Like?
Re: Digital cameras these days are basically disposable items, not investments.
In reply to Ed B, 11 months ago

Ed B wrote:

Lance B wrote:

You need to think of modern digital cameras as the film of yesteryear and are therefore basically disposable. Advancements in technology of digital cameras (and most other devices) sees to it that things become worthless in time and the quicker the advancements, the quicker they become worthless.

Some here may be too young to remember paying for a roll of 36 shot film and then having to pay to have it developed as well.

Back in the 80's, it used to cost me about $5-7 for a 36 roll of film and then another $8-10 to get it developed and printed.

Let's say you shoot about 2,000 images a year, which is not unrealistic for many. This equates to about 55 rolls of film and at say $10 (allowing for modest inflation) for the 36 shot film and another say $15 for devloping and printing, that is $25 x 55 = $1,375 per year!

So, you spent $700 on your Sony 5R, if you keep your camera for two years and then even if you sell it for a 1/3 of it's original cost, it has only really cost you about $470 which is about 1/6 of what you would have spent on film! Equation = Film for 2 years at 2,000 images = about $2700 (as above), the camera after 2 years and selling it for a 1/3rd it's original cost is a cost of $470 to you, means that it is about a 1/6 the cost of film.

I'll wager that many of you shoot way more than 2,000 images a year and so the cost of your cam pales into insignificance when you consider what you may have spent on film "in the old days".

Not to mention the fact that you can happily snap away on your digital cam and hone technique and get your composition right etc, where on film every time you snappped it cost you money and therefore you were loathe to do it and your learning curve was much steeper, if you actually learnt at all! The thing is, you had to wait until you got your shots back and you'd forget what you did to get a good or bad shot unless you wrote it all down. We now have instant confirmation of your technique, instant gratification, and EXIF data!l

Forget about the cost of your computer and memory etc, as you'd have that anyway these days.

2000 shots a year???

Some of these snap happy people use the machine gun approach and take 2000 pictures in a couple of days.

They get a few keepers, then post their pictures to shows their expertise

I will admit to being guilty as charged. I have shot about 20,000 this past year, including 4,100 on a 4 week trip to Europe and the UK. However, in my defence, I have very few bad shots, just some better than others.

They have to have the latest and greatest camera because the one they have is either worn out or doesn't have the most recent "newbie" feature they need.

If an older model doesn't have the latest gimmick then it's not worth having and if you don't upgrade you're simply using an outdated camera that's worth almost nothing. How are you going to get decent pictures if your camera is more than a year old? Technology advances so fast that my new camera, with it's latest processor and higher resolution, will make my dog and cat pictures much better than yours and just look at the background blur on this flower picture.

Yes you can buy that older, top rated camera, for less than the price of a new point & shoot camera but you'd be a fool to waste your money on old technology when you can get this new entry level model for just a few more dollars; and the new model has smile detection.

This is the kind of advice you get on these forums and this is one of the reasons an older model camera looses its value so quickly.

Older models lose value because they are just that, an older model. No one is going to pay near the price of an older model if the new model, with better more advanced features, is not much dearer. What you have to do is alter the mindset of the manufacturer, not the consumer, as it is them that keep updating models. It's just a fact of life. At the end of the day, a second hand camera is only worth what someone will pay for it, not what the seller wants it to be worth.

As I said in my original post, we really need to think of a digital camera as being like film and not an investement and after 2 years, or whenever, we move on to a new more advanced model and have saved money in comparison to what we would have spent on film. If you use an exchangeable lens camera, it is the lenses that can be thought of as an investment, especially the pro spec DSLR lenses.

I'm not criticizing any single individual but there are very, very few photography experts on these forums and most people are more interested in consumer related gadget features than anything else. On top of that, if they read a blog or review written by anyone, they consider it an expert opinion and will spread that information throughout these forums. It doesn't seem to matter to them that anyone with a computer can create a blog and be a self-proclaimed expert.

It's almost like the blind leading the blind or a case where the inmates have taken over the prison but that's just the way the Internet works.

Naturally, all of this is just MY opinion and I'm probably just as full of misinformation as the next person. Maybe I need to start a blog. I could become the next famous camera guru

I think you're possibly being a little bit tough. Sure there are those that have to have the latest simply because it's the latest and "greatest" rather than it actually making any real difference to their photography, but there are many that really do enjoy the benefits of the latest advances in technology. I know my D800E has meant that I no longer need 2 cameras, a crop sensored D7000 and a FF D700, as the D800E serves both purposes for me. Also, the D800/E's high ISO ability is better, as is the AF speed and accuracy, which are all important advances for my birding photography.

Also, does it matter to you or me if people use their camera as a paper weight or whether they use it as intended and end up being one of the top photogs of our time? I couldn't care if they used it as a boat anchor. However, I enjoy the hobby and it gives me great satisfaction as both an art form and I also enjoy the technology of it all. Can't we enjoy both aspects of it?

 Lance B's gear list:Lance B's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +13 more
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