What really bugs me about people who buy 1D's

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul Pope
  • Start date Start date
I have a DCS back ....they specificaly wanted film at $100 a roll charge out I'm not exactly complaining :-)

They can choose whatever gear they like .... I'm just offering my opinion on the best roadmap for people to take when upgrading their equipment.
Didn't know you were in Australia- But honestly- isn't it obvious
looking at these forums that the folks here are hobbyists? (You
don;t need $10,000 USD worth of gear to shoot cats, kids and
sunsets after all)

But so what? An amateur's choice of gear is no less valid than
yours or mine, unless they ask us directly! I write all sorts of
articles in Shutterbug Magazine and tell about my strobes etc., and
folks always E-Mail me wondering why they can't get their Hardware
store lighting to match mine.

I really don;t see a problem with chea plenses or cheap cameras for
that matter- If the results aren't to your liking then of course
you'll start looking at better lenses. Since the body is the meat
and potatoes what's wrong with getting the great body first, then
eventually upgrading lenses- again- stopped down you'll get max
performance out of the body and wide open you'll have to live with
a bit of softness.

46 rolls of 120? Who's scanning? And how large are they runnnig
that yuo wouldn't use a 1D or D60 files, or rent a DCS Proback?
 
Paul-

You charge $100 a roll? Film and Processing- $100? You're kidding right?

Jay Abend
They can choose whatever gear they like .... I'm just offering my
opinion on the best roadmap for people to take when upgrading their
equipment.
Didn't know you were in Australia- But honestly- isn't it obvious
looking at these forums that the folks here are hobbyists? (You
don;t need $10,000 USD worth of gear to shoot cats, kids and
sunsets after all)

But so what? An amateur's choice of gear is no less valid than
yours or mine, unless they ask us directly! I write all sorts of
articles in Shutterbug Magazine and tell about my strobes etc., and
folks always E-Mail me wondering why they can't get their Hardware
store lighting to match mine.

I really don;t see a problem with chea plenses or cheap cameras for
that matter- If the results aren't to your liking then of course
you'll start looking at better lenses. Since the body is the meat
and potatoes what's wrong with getting the great body first, then
eventually upgrading lenses- again- stopped down you'll get max
performance out of the body and wide open you'll have to live with
a bit of softness.

46 rolls of 120? Who's scanning? And how large are they runnnig
that yuo wouldn't use a 1D or D60 files, or rent a DCS Proback?
 
want to fill the internet with Nikon pics that a less than optimal but
don't do that to a Canon body - I think that's what Paul is saying.

I'm kidding of course. If I get a D60, which I juts might, I plan on starting with the 70-200f4 for outdoor sports and for indoor sports I plan in getting an 85f1.8. This is about all my budget can stand.

http://www.pbase.com./jimkelly
 
The lenses EOS1 system owners should aspire to are
16-35L f/2.8
I've got the 17-35/2.8 - - don't use wide-angle enough to justify the 16-35 (yet)
28-70L f/2.8
Yea! I got it
70-200L f/2.8 IS
Yea! I got it, too. (though my non-IS had better contrast)
Score another one.
85L f/1.2
Yessir, got that beauty, too. Can you say "no DOF"? Sure ya can. ;)
100-400 IS
Wahoo, got that one, too.
and finaly
the 400L f/2.8 IS
Zoinks! Nope, not yet. I'll have to live with my 1.4x-II and 2x-II TC's for a while. I'll probably never own THAT lens. Probably either the 200/1.8 or the 300/2.8 IS. Or perhaps the 400/4 DO IS.

I've also got the 135/2 -- great lens.

Oops, I also have the 28-135 IS. Guess I'll have to hide that one. ;)

(I got it after most of my other ones . . . . sorta a "Grab one lens and go" thing).

--The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.netPhotography -- just another word for compromise
 
It really bugs me to see people on this forum buying Eos-1D's and
then putting crappy glass on them.
If you going to buy a 1D for gods sake its a expensive camera so
give it the courtesy of putting nice glass on it.
I can see getting the camera you need and maybe having to use cheaper glass for a while, then selling it off on Ebay and replacing it with L glass later. Let's face it, the stuff ain't cheap.

Here's what bugs me, while we are on the subject. Someone buys a camera, a D60 or a 1D. They buy a couple of L lenses. They drop somewhere between 4-7 thousand dollars on their setup.
Then they do one of the following:

Post a message saying it's the first camera they have ever owned. Can somebody give them some pointers on how to take good photos?

Post a picture shot at F2.8 with shallow depth of field and a panicky message about how their new camera might have something wrong with it because it takes blurry photos. Someone will post a reply telling them to shoot with a smaller aperture to increase depth of field. They reply "does a smaller aperture make the focus look better?" or something else like that.

Post a message that they have had the camera for six months and have only shot in full auto mode because they are "just learning". You aren't learning anything in auto mode except maybe composition. Experiment a little. If not manual mode at least try AV or TV and see what you get. You don't even have to buy film for these cameras!

Now, I am aware that I will probably sound like a grumpy old man here. I learned to shoot with a film SLR a long time ago. I bought a used Pentax K-1000 body and a lousy Sigma lens. Full manual everything. I read every book I could lay my hands on to learn how to make my camera do what I wanted. Over the years I bought better bodies and better lenses and continued to learn. I took classes. I hung around with other photographers. I read. And I read. And I read. And I still read.

Going with Pentax was a dumb move in retrospect, at least from the standpoint of moving to digital. I have sold off all my Pentax gear on Ebay and have been shooting with a Canon G2 and 420EX for a while while waiting for the prices of digital SLRs to come down and the capabilities to go up. The D60 is in my near future as it meets most of my needs as a photographer. I'm waiting for better availabilty now, as well as seeing what the first month or two of widespread use reveals bug-wise. I'll have to buy all new Canon lenses along with the body. I'm not a poor guy, but the initial outlay for a D60 and a couple of lenses is pretty substantial.

So, back to my beef. I'm not jealous of people who have the money to plunk down without a second thought for a 1D or D60 and a couple of L lenses. I'm just astounded that anyone would buy such an expensive outfit and then not bother to learn the BASIC FUNDAMENTALS of photography in order to get some reasonable results with it.

More beefing. Whenever I get involved in a new hobby/area of interest the first thing I do is read up on it. I hit the library, the bookstore and the internet and learn all I can. Then I ask some questions in forums or newsgroups when I can't figure something out myself or by R-ing TFM. I have said this in other threads and will say it again here. One of the advantages of living in a civilization with a written language is that you don't have to do everything by trial and error, others have gone before you and some of them have written things down.

Gripe. Gripe. Gripe. Things were a lot different in my day and I'm only forty. Gripe. Gripe. Used to walk through snow drifts to school. Gripe. Kids these days don't know how good they've got it. Gripe. Used to spread emulsion on a flat rock and use an old windowpane out of the barn for a lens. Gripe. We were overjoyed to have a windowpane! Gripe, gripe. Had to have the subject sit perfectly still for an hour to make the exposure. Gripe.
-Kevin.
PS: Gripe.


I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
 
I had a 1D for about a month. My lens are all L lens except my 50mm F1.4

I recently sold the 1D because I was disappointed with the image quality of the 1D for the price. Mine had the latest hardware & came with the latest firmware, but still showed occasional banding & moire patterns. Fred Miranda's actions helped, but it was still annoying.

I have ordered a D60 to hold me over until the 1D-s becomes available. I don't think the 1D will hold its value too well when an eight megapixel 1D is available. The four megapixel 1D may actually become one of the all time turkeys for resale value at that point(maybe not, but I didn't want to take that chance)

I had visions of owning a $5500 "white elephant" one year from now!!

-John
 
The lenses EOS1 system owners should aspire to are
16-35L f/2.8
28-70L f/2.8
70-200L f/2.8 IS
50 f/1.4
85L f/1.2
100-400 IS
and finaly
the 400L f/2.8 IS
I've got the EOS 1D and the following lenses:

16-35L f/2.8
50 f/1.4
100-400 IS

I also have a 28-70 and 100-300 I use on my Canon EOS 10s, but they haven't touched my 1D. Promise. :)

I am considering a Sigma 8mm fisheye lens for the 1D to create spherical panaramas. I hope this isn't blasphemy.--Canon EOS 1D/Canon S100/Nikon 990
 
Paul,

That has been a point I have made around here time and time again. Go the extra buck on the glass, bodies come and go. My 80-200L and 85mm 1.2L were purchased years ago and have gone through half a dozen camera bodies since.

As you suggested, I bought a D60 instead of the 1d and then purchased a slightly used 300mm F2.8L with another $2500 and I am still $1000 under the cost of the 1d. When my D60 is a boat anchor, my 300mm will still be capturing images.--GSmithCreate an image today that will make someone's day today.
 
The whole point is ..... if your going to spend $$$ spend it on the
lens system before you spend it on bodies .... in the long run it
WILL save you money.
Paul, this is a wonderful paradigm for buliding a fine line of film equipment. Otherwise the sentiment is shortsighted.

The money spent on higher quality lenses will make a bigger difference in a film camera since film is, afterall, just film.

Films, unlike imaging chips, do not differentiate themselves in cost and quality to the tune of thausands of dollars.

By contrast the imaging chip in a digital camera is the single most relevant limiting factor to the potential quality of image.

People chose to remove limiting factors in order of importance as they see fit. For most, it seems the limiting factors addressed in order are: the chip (by chosing a camera); the body and features (same choice, the camera); then lens. After that, acquiring/imaging/editing, then printing. Last but not least, technique.

Bill(y)-- http://www.flatarts.com/
 
It really bugs me to see people on this forum buying Eos-1D's and
then putting crappy glass on them.
If you going to buy a 1D for gods sake its a expensive camera so
give it the courtesy of putting nice glass on it.
None of this Sigma stuff please ...none of these 70-200 f/4's .....
The only non L series lens that should be allowed near a 1D is a
50mm f/1.4 prime.
If you cannot afford the cost of L series glass to go on it a 1D is
not for you buy a D60 instead and spend the extra $$$ on glass for
it ..you will have a better system and while DSLR bodies are
updated all the time the glass will still be good years from now.
And that is my $0.02
$0.02 worth? sorry its not even worth that--Mike Bauer
 
If your thinking of a 1D but cannot afford both the body and the
glass ....go for the glass and get a D60 instead.
I wanted the quick autofocus.
The very idea of someone spending $5000 on a 1D and then walking
around with a cheap lens on it is something beyond my comprehension.
A cheap lens or a bad lens?
The lenses EOS1 system owners should aspire to are
Most of these lenses I don't need and would take years of earnings to purchase.
And I'm not looking down on anyone ...of course people can put
whatever they like on THEIR cameras ..however a $5000 body with a
$300 lens on it makes absolutly no sense to me.
OK what's the minimum amount of money I should pay for a lens? $300? $400? $500? I'm sure for that amount I'll be able to find a soft lens or a lens I will never use.
Quite simply no matter how expensive your equipment you need to be
able to understand photography before you wil lget the best out of
it but when considering equipment choices it is my advice to always
consider lenses before all else.
And until the day comes when will get the best out of your equipment, have fun, keep learning and ENJOY your hobby even if professionals don't want you to!

I'm so glad I don't do photography professionally because I'm sure I would start to take it as seriously as Paul Pope does. Last weekend I stuck a cr*ppy Sigma 28-70 f2.8 (the old one) on my 1D and took lots of perfectly OK pictures. Sure the Canon 28-70 would have made better pictures, but they're good enough for me.
 
Sorry, I know this is way off topic but your comment brings to light a pet peeve of mine. You may not feel that my comments apply to you . . . and maybe they don't since I don't know you personally and can only base my comments on what I see in print, not personal interaction.

Claiming that tact isn't your strong suit does not qualify as an excuse for rude behavior or lack of basic manners. Too many people these days think that they can act any way they want and then rationalize their actions, thus providing them with an excuse for rudeness and discourteous behavior. Life doesn't work that way, bad manners are just that . . . bad manners, and there is no excuse.

Again, this doesn't necessarily apply to you. It's just something I see a lot of these days and I find it irritating.
Jim
It ain't any of my business eirther ...but I feel its in people
considering spending major $$$ on equipment's best interest for me
to point out some of the mistakes I feel people make in considering
the Camera body over the lens.
 
Some people can just barely afford the 1D. Now they find out (according to Saint Paul) that they have to buy L glass before they can get the Imprimatur and join the big boys club.

What a crushing defeat for those poor souls who thought their Sigma 15-30 would hold them until they could afford better glass.

If I ever bought a 1D, I'd use my Canon 28-135 lens and my Sigma 15-30, as well as my Tamron 90mm macro, and be happy with the solid build, 8fps, and fast focus, to mention but a few of the benefits I'd still receive, even if I had no L glass.

Not many of us non-pros can afford the 1D AND L glass at the same time.

Lighten up.

--'Think Outside The Box.........Once you're in the box, it's too late.' http://home.attbi.com/~keylargographics
 
Yeah he did say what he felt, but he should have explained that he meant get good glass first. What he did say, needed to be posted in the Pro digital fourm!

Ricky
Rich
It really bugs me to see people on this forum buying Eos-1D's and
then putting crappy glass on them.
If you going to buy a 1D for gods sake its a expensive camera so
give it the courtesy of putting nice glass on it.
None of this Sigma stuff please ...none of these 70-200 f/4's .....
The only non L series lens that should be allowed near a 1D is a
50mm f/1.4 prime.
If you cannot afford the cost of L series glass to go on it a 1D is
not for you buy a D60 instead and spend the extra $$$ on glass for
it ..you will have a better system and while DSLR bodies are
updated all the time the glass will still be good years from now.
And that is my $0.02
--
------------------------------------------------
M.K. Whitley

'I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.'
  • Mark Twain
--Ricky L. JonesCanon Elan II, EOS 3, G1, D60(soon) http://community.webshots.com/user/rljslick
 
Welcome to the Internet!

Ricky
Claiming that tact isn't your strong suit does not qualify as an
excuse for rude behavior or lack of basic manners. Too many people
these days think that they can act any way they want and then
rationalize their actions, thus providing them with an excuse for
rudeness and discourteous behavior. Life doesn't work that way, bad
manners are just that . . . bad manners, and there is no excuse.

Again, this doesn't necessarily apply to you. It's just something I
see a lot of these days and I find it irritating.
Jim
It ain't any of my business eirther ...but I feel its in people
considering spending major $$$ on equipment's best interest for me
to point out some of the mistakes I feel people make in considering
the Camera body over the lens.
--Ricky L. JonesCanon Elan II, EOS 3, G1, D60(soon) http://community.webshots.com/user/rljslick
 
I know, I see this all the time on the internet as well as in the 'real world' . . . it's still no excuse!
Ricky
Claiming that tact isn't your strong suit does not qualify as an
excuse for rude behavior or lack of basic manners. Too many people
these days think that they can act any way they want and then
rationalize their actions, thus providing them with an excuse for
rudeness and discourteous behavior. Life doesn't work that way, bad
manners are just that . . . bad manners, and there is no excuse.

Again, this doesn't necessarily apply to you. It's just something I
see a lot of these days and I find it irritating.
Jim
It ain't any of my business eirther ...but I feel its in people
considering spending major $$$ on equipment's best interest for me
to point out some of the mistakes I feel people make in considering
the Camera body over the lens.
--
Ricky L. Jones
Canon Elan II, EOS 3, G1, D60(soon)
http://community.webshots.com/user/rljslick
 
Sorry, I know this is way off topic but your comment brings to
light a pet peeve of mine. You may not feel that my comments apply
to you . . . and maybe they don't since I don't know you personally
and can only base my comments on what I see in print, not personal
interaction.

Claiming that tact isn't your strong suit does not qualify as an
excuse for rude behavior or lack of basic manners. Too many people
these days think that they can act any way they want and then
rationalize their actions, thus providing them with an excuse for
rudeness and discourteous behavior. Life doesn't work that way, bad
manners are just that . . . bad manners, and there is no excuse.

Again, this doesn't necessarily apply to you. It's just something I
see a lot of these days and I find it irritating.
Deborah,
I could not agree with you more!
Ingrid
Jim
It ain't any of my business eirther ...but I feel its in people
considering spending major $$$ on equipment's best interest for me
to point out some of the mistakes I feel people make in considering
the Camera body over the lens.
--Carpe Diem
 
Paul is sometimes a little bit rough around the corners but , he's right in what he says .

I , also , meet too many people who are absolutely sure the quality of their pics comes from their camera .

As I'm not wealthy enough to follow the trend to get the best ( ? ) and the newest body , I prefer to invest in lenses and wait for the next 2 or 3 generations of the Canon cameras .

I enjoyd my D30 before the1D oand the D60 were intoduced and I can't help to think it makes , still , the pictures I expect it to do .

This said , I'd be too happy to own a D60 , let alone a 1D but I didn't want to sacrifice my dear lenses .
And , if you feel good with your combo ' expensive body/cheap lenses'

or ' cheaper camera/expensive lenses ' , you're on the right side of photography ; enjoy what you own for what you do .
We're all different and have different aims .
I bet that's why Canon has different model and they're all selling well .
It's photography that's about right ?
Let's live in good terms to eachother.

Best regards to all ,

Wheelie
It really bugs me to see people on this forum buying Eos-1D's and
then putting crappy glass on them.
If you going to buy a 1D for gods sake its a expensive camera so
give it the courtesy of putting nice glass on it.
None of this Sigma stuff please ...none of these 70-200 f/4's .....
The only non L series lens that should be allowed near a 1D is a
50mm f/1.4 prime.
If you cannot afford the cost of L series glass to go on it a 1D is
not for you buy a D60 instead and spend the extra $$$ on glass for
it ..you will have a better system and while DSLR bodies are
updated all the time the glass will still be good years from now.
And that is my $0.02
--Wheeliewebmaster http://www.canonians.comShooting the world from a wheelchair !
 
I can't agree that a 1D with a 28-135 on it labels me as a "photographic dolt". That an assumption. "Ass u me" as the saying goes. IF I had a 1D with a 28-135 or Sigma 15-30, it would be because I wanted the 8fps and fast autofocus more than I wanted seven different L lenses.

My next lens (for my D30) will be the 100-400L, my first "L". Then perhaps a 70-200 L IS, who knows. But don't call me a dolt because I went for the camera first and then the lenses. That's just plain unkind.
I used to sell cameras and said this about 100 times a day. But I
think buyers were more concerned about having that big expensive
label telling the world's other beginners that they were "real"
photographers, not knowing that cheap lenses labelled them as
photographic dolts with money.

Cheers,
JL
Exactly !!!!
My advice is DON'T buy the camera body ..spend the $$$ on lenses
instead and keep your old camera. In the end you will benifit
greatly and have something you can keep for a long time instead of
the 1-2 year product cycle of a 1D type camera.
--
...f8 and be there!
--'Think Outside The Box.........Once you're in the box, it's too late.' http://home.attbi.com/~keylargographics
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top