Do you really see THAT much difference in images?

Started Jul 28, 2013 | Discussions thread
erichK Veteran Member • Posts: 5,874
Re: Great cameras are....

larsbc wrote:

erichK wrote:

larsbc wrote:

IMO better lenses/cameras should improve:

a) The enjoyment and efficiency of taking photographs due to better ergonomics

b) The range of photo opportunities due to a wider operating range in terms of AF speed, tonal range, ISO range, etc.

Current cameras turn on almost instantly, focus and automatically determine exposure in less than a second. They also compensate for vibration, easily provide carefully-calculated fill-light and provide a huge range of control options Just how much more ergonomic could they be?

You're talking features/abilities, I'm talking ergonomics. Two different things. In fact, with so many features, I think well thought-out ergonomics becomes even more crucial.

While you are right about the huge ergonomic challenges posed by the sheer complexity of menus and features of the modern dslr and also EVIL cameras, you are largely missing the point made by the four pictures posted just after your post. The juxtaposition of images from a cell phone, a simple Point and Shoot, an expensive point and shoot and a top professional DSLR demonstrates any of them (yes, even the i-phone) can produce a usable image.

Tends to bear out the thinking an experienced professional photographer - and large city newspaper editor - who bought and uses the best camerad cell-phone he could find for the times that he does not have his P&S with him and an incident arises. He still uses his dslr's for predictable events that he (in his own words) "has the time and energy" to pack them for.

In the real world the traditional dslr is already giving way to EVIL cameras and large-sensored P&S and hybrid cameras. While ergonomics can help a little, the sheer size and complexity - even more than the cost- of current enthusiast and "semi-pro" (which is what most working photographers actually shoot, btw) ensures that a shrinking minority of only the really dedicated - or fanatical - will continue to buy them.

Because there is simply no way a justifying the trouble and bother of learning and carrying them, as well as the cost, for the great majority of images that people want to make. The gain in IQ is just too small. If one can get 99% of the quality of a dslr system with a device camera that is a fraction of the weight and price 95% of the time, it becomes difficult to justify buying- and especially lugging all that paraphernalia.

Nikon and Canon will, of course, try in every possible way to leverage their huge investment and inventory of dslr items, even as they quietly look for ways of moving away from these increasingly superfluous products, as Sony and Olympus is already well on the way to doing, and Panasonic has already done.

THAT is the real implication of this thread.

-- hide signature --

saskatoon, canada
Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.
- W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.
underwater photos:

 erichK's gear list:erichK's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-330 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +23 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow