Hiphopapotamus
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,175
- Reaction score
- 851
Not having to buy another camera body again.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
The best thing to do with a lack of new sensor technology?
- Thread starter Hiphopapotamus
- Start date
- Status
the best thing to do in that scenario is to buy new lens!
Yes, because no one ever needs:
- better AF
- better EVFs
- better stabilization
- better LCDs
- faster continuous shooting rates
- longer battery life
- better metering
- more video codecs and options
- features like high resolution multishot
- changes in ergonomics
- improved weather/dust sealing
If you don't need any of those things, that's great. That doesn't mean that no one ever benefits from camera iterations.
By the way, sensors have been largely mature for a few years now; and the higher resolution sensors involve their own trade-offs. You might want to get used to minimal sensor changes.
Last edited:
Invest your time and money in photo opportunities.
Hiphopapotamus
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,175
- Reaction score
- 851
I already do that. None of these shots require anything that I couldn't do with a box camera. I'm getting along quite fine without bells or whistles.
Last edited:
tonyC1994
Forum Enthusiast
I already do that. None of these shots require anything that I couldn't do with a box camera. I'm getting along quite fine without bells or whistles.
Nice shots!
rsmithgi
Senior Member
Congrats. Since as you say you are "getting along quite fine" you don't need new sensor technology either.
Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the heck out of the PDAF focusing, IBIS, faster shooting speed, and improved EVF of my "aging" E-M1 mk 1 (after upgrading from an E-M10). I'm sure I would enjoy the E-M1 Mk 2 even more, but it is more than I am willing to spend.
I am also loving the 12-40 pro and 40-150 pro lenses.
I am glad that the sensor technology of a few years ago is good enough for my needs. You seem to be bothered by it though.
Hiphopapotamus
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,175
- Reaction score
- 851
The only thing I'm bothered by is a lack of a new sensor that actually provides any significant upgrade in image quality.
rsmithgi
Senior Member
Good thing that the current sensors are already good enough.
Hiphopapotamus
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,175
- Reaction score
- 851
True.
Gary from Seattle
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,770
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 11,570
[No message]
Brian Wadie
Forum Pro
keep on taking photographs, you camera equipment hasn't suddenly got worse
Moti
Veteran Member
The best thing to do with a lack of new sensor technology is to start learning how to properly use our actual cameras in order to get the best out of them, which is something that the majority of us completely neglect.
Moti
Moti
third son
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,489
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 5,267
You need to let this go....really...you do....
I am a bit surprised at the apparent need for many to criticise what seems a statement of fact.
No doubt there are advances to be had but I agree that they are "trinkets" compared to the basic camera "grunt stuff" that truly makes images.
This is the dilemma that afflicts a maturing system where many if not most remaining manufacturers are now struggling to keep up sales numbers. This is more because more and more that are afflicted by GAS have become POP (people off purchasing).
So if anyone wishes to (for example) dump a perfectly good E-MI for a more sophisticated E-MIii before it is worn out then that is their choice and the allure of the "extras" is obviously strong enough to open wallets. But whilst I would truly like a GX85 my GX7 still works fine and I see no need to replace it just yet.
So can we consider the extra trinkets as being similar to a new car model that offers only a minimal power increase by re-tuning the same engine, new trim, a better audio system, etc etc (and clean ashtrays).
Nice to have a new car every year and of course the old johanna still works well and can be flogged off to some delighted new owner who thinks he has scored a real bargain at someone else's expense.
If cameras follow the normal technology curve they will split into two main streams - expensive, well made and built to last (obsolescence proof). Maybe the E-MIii and probably the E-MI as well. The other - amorphous hi-tech but more flimsy and cheaper and designed to be fashionable and appealing and turned over after they are effectively "thrown away" every couple of years.
The trouble with the emerging technology phase is that the gear is expensive and built to last but becomes obsolete very quickly. This breeds a whole new generation that comes to believe that owning camera bodies is an endless on-going feast.
The trouble is that dpreview forums go into a sort of withdrawal symptom if the parade of new gear slackens.
No doubt there are advances to be had but I agree that they are "trinkets" compared to the basic camera "grunt stuff" that truly makes images.
This is the dilemma that afflicts a maturing system where many if not most remaining manufacturers are now struggling to keep up sales numbers. This is more because more and more that are afflicted by GAS have become POP (people off purchasing).
So if anyone wishes to (for example) dump a perfectly good E-MI for a more sophisticated E-MIii before it is worn out then that is their choice and the allure of the "extras" is obviously strong enough to open wallets. But whilst I would truly like a GX85 my GX7 still works fine and I see no need to replace it just yet.
So can we consider the extra trinkets as being similar to a new car model that offers only a minimal power increase by re-tuning the same engine, new trim, a better audio system, etc etc (and clean ashtrays).
Nice to have a new car every year and of course the old johanna still works well and can be flogged off to some delighted new owner who thinks he has scored a real bargain at someone else's expense.
If cameras follow the normal technology curve they will split into two main streams - expensive, well made and built to last (obsolescence proof). Maybe the E-MIii and probably the E-MI as well. The other - amorphous hi-tech but more flimsy and cheaper and designed to be fashionable and appealing and turned over after they are effectively "thrown away" every couple of years.
The trouble with the emerging technology phase is that the gear is expensive and built to last but becomes obsolete very quickly. This breeds a whole new generation that comes to believe that owning camera bodies is an endless on-going feast.
The trouble is that dpreview forums go into a sort of withdrawal symptom if the parade of new gear slackens.
rsmithgi
Senior Member
It is not a statement of fact. It is an opinion on two counts:
This follows on the heals if a highly controversial thread where the OP accused the M43 vendors of lagging behind in sensor technology (which was proven wrong) and Olympus of setting itself up for failure due to bogus pricing strategy. Couple that with purposely antagonistic statements:
"If this is the best we can do, I start to wonder why I persist with this format at all. If we can only achieve what is mildly better than a warmed over 1inch sensor found in the Sony RX100 V then I think we've all been led astray.
And charging the same price as an A7R II for something that improves nothing overall in the grand scheme of things for IQ is also mildly entertaining and ridiculous at the same time."
The OP admitted in the other thread that he pixel peeps too much and in this thread he admitted that the current sensor technology is good enough for him.
All a bit strange if you ask me.
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Parsons
Forum Pro
Things will change when the Panasonic-Fuji organic global shutter arrives, then there will be a new toy to play with that should make a worthwhile difference.
Rumour has it that Fuji may get there first in 2018, but as usual, don't hold your breath, just keep chugging on with what works for you now and maybe spend any surplus dollars on improving the lens collection.
In my case the E-P5 works perfectly for all that I need and do, so that's my body until something of interest appears, none so far.
Regards..... Guy
Photo Pete
Veteran Member
.... film cameras? Manufacturers kept selling updated models and consumers still had GAS for them.... and most consumers chose to keep using the same 'sensor' with every model they bought.
There is so much more to a camera than its sensor.
There is so much more to a camera than its sensor.
I was merely referring to the original subject heading and the one line post accompanying it. I was not entering into what seems to have been some sort of earlier fisticuffs to which I may have formed another opinion.
No doubt sensor development has slowed down (at least for the M4/3 mount format). There is not a lot of early take up of the 20mp sensor and what there is seems to be resulting in expensive camera bodies. Panasonic seems to be trying another angle and simply dropping the AA filter as another form of image improvement.
Whatever is going on between the M4/3 consortium guys and Sony (the sensor manufacturer) it appears to be some sort of stand-off. This could be that Sony wishes to receive a huge order for supply of 20mp 4/3 sensors before it drops the price per unit. Panasonic and Olympus look at their sales predictions and decline to order up big. This makes 20mp sensor equipped cameras expensive. Which makes one wonder where the YI M1 stands - cheap camera and 20mp 4/3 sensor. Presumably YI are willing to place a substantial order based on selling into the Chinese domestic market or take skinny margins on its product, and that this is something that neither Panasonic nor Olympus is prepared to do.
On the basis that newer, larger, sensor sweeps all before it then the YI M1 should be rushing off the shelves. That there seems no anecdotal evidence that this is actually happening seems to indicate that the informed market is now happy to accept a removed AA Filter and alternative sophistication as good enough to continue buying product.
In this light it seems that the OP has a reasonble point in as much as others have effectively noted that other things (incidental improvements) are the things selling M4/3 cameras (at least) for the moment.
Surely this is an interesting subject to discuss without trying to shoot down the poster due to some earlier antagonism that is now dredged up?
The main point seems to be that sensors as a major sales point have had their attraction curtailed by the law of diminishing returns and price increases and that the main reason keeping users buying is in the filling out of more peripheral features. This is not a negative thing but more simply noting a fact.
No doubt sensor development has slowed down (at least for the M4/3 mount format). There is not a lot of early take up of the 20mp sensor and what there is seems to be resulting in expensive camera bodies. Panasonic seems to be trying another angle and simply dropping the AA filter as another form of image improvement.
Whatever is going on between the M4/3 consortium guys and Sony (the sensor manufacturer) it appears to be some sort of stand-off. This could be that Sony wishes to receive a huge order for supply of 20mp 4/3 sensors before it drops the price per unit. Panasonic and Olympus look at their sales predictions and decline to order up big. This makes 20mp sensor equipped cameras expensive. Which makes one wonder where the YI M1 stands - cheap camera and 20mp 4/3 sensor. Presumably YI are willing to place a substantial order based on selling into the Chinese domestic market or take skinny margins on its product, and that this is something that neither Panasonic nor Olympus is prepared to do.
On the basis that newer, larger, sensor sweeps all before it then the YI M1 should be rushing off the shelves. That there seems no anecdotal evidence that this is actually happening seems to indicate that the informed market is now happy to accept a removed AA Filter and alternative sophistication as good enough to continue buying product.
In this light it seems that the OP has a reasonble point in as much as others have effectively noted that other things (incidental improvements) are the things selling M4/3 cameras (at least) for the moment.
Surely this is an interesting subject to discuss without trying to shoot down the poster due to some earlier antagonism that is now dredged up?
The main point seems to be that sensors as a major sales point have had their attraction curtailed by the law of diminishing returns and price increases and that the main reason keeping users buying is in the filling out of more peripheral features. This is not a negative thing but more simply noting a fact.
- Status
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum