Buying expensive cameras and lenses compels people to learn to use them, or else they will be left with a painful reminder that they would have been better off spending that money elsewhere.
My insight comes from a lifelong observation of human nature, including introspection of my own nature. The basic themes of a discontented consumerist society, impulse buying, cognitive dissonance, and unconscious status seeking applies to photographic equipment as much as it does to automobiles, flat-screen TVs, and riding lawn mowers.
Do you realistically expect them to come onto these boards and admit they've wasted thousands of dollars on equipment they didn't really need and don't really use? I'm certainly projecting somewhat; this human condition is not unique to the OP.
Wrong is a subjective evaluation. The question is the cost, financial and otherwise. By the OP's own admission this is a very big expenditure for him, expensive enough to cause him a lot of strain and mental anguish. Re-read his post. He's spent months contemplating this. Instead of burning more money he would be better served evaluating why he has a gnawing need to buy more stuff, taking a deep breath, appreciating what he already has, and then going outside with his perfectly functional (and expensive) D90 and shooting more photographs.
It's not a question of deserving the D700. He deserves peach of mind, and I'll bet dollars to donuts that a $2,400 camera ain't going to give it to him.
He can only prove me wrong to himself, not me or anyone else.
Even though it's taken out of all context, this is the ONE thing you've written with which I can agree!
I was in same situation some time ago.
Even though it's taken out of all context, this is the ONE thing you've written with which I can agree!
Quite honestly, I thought your first post (your first post ever as a registered member) was written as a satire of overwrought theses posted in these forums. But it seems that you are either very good at staying 'in character' or you are serious and deliberate in your free and unsolicited personality analysis of strangers, complete with a broad brush of stereotyping applied many of the folks who come here to ask advice.
Well... all I can say is... if this is what you enjoy doing, you've got your work cut out for you around here! I'd offer you a chance to look in my head, first, but I don't think you'll find anything.
You wouldn't happen to have any photos you've taken which you'd like to share and discuss? If you need a break from instant analysis, photography might be a fun distraction for you.
Cheers!
-- Bob Elkind
Family, mostly sports. Seriously, folks, I'm not that good. If I can do it, you can do it!
photo galleries at http://eteam.zenfolio.com
my relationship with my camera is strictly photonic
The OP specifically asked for opinions about how he's spending his money and I offered mine.Hi Joe,
Wow, what a way to start the ball rolling. ;-)
You may be right, you may be wrong; however, here's my take -
I am a hobbyist and purchased the D700 (after some experience with other DSLR's) because it has the specs that meets my current photographic needs. When I purchase a "toy" I expected it to function as specified. All DSLR's ARE NOT created equal. It makes no sense to buy something and figure out a way to work around it's inadequacies. Plus, if you know those inadequacies exist, then you are probably ready to upgrade your gear and challenge yourself. If you do not know they exist, then it really doesn't matter anyway. Now, I am able to work on my photographic skills instead of my troubleshooting skills.
The only person who should be concerned with what the folks are spending there money on is the person doing the spending/earning of the money. You can't sit in judgment of what other folks deem as important of fun.
At base ISO you would not be able to differentiate a well-exposed base ISO photograph that came from a D500, D90, or D700, if all are post-processed to a uniform curve, color, and sharpening target.You may be a pro and you may not be - I don't know. However, if you think the IQ of the DX sensor in the D90 matches the IQ of the FX sensor in the D700 - I will have to say "There's know way - period."
We each prefer our own variety of happiness and mine derives from objectivity and honesty. I do tend to lose sleep when I see people falling into harmful consumption patterns. The OP is obviously conflicted about his decision and my experience and judgment tell me his conflict is well-founded. I standby my original assertions that most people are buying these expensive cameras for the wrong reasons.By the way, you really should look on the bright side of things - it's much healthier. I would also suggest that you don't lose too much sleep over what other folks do with their money.
That was not my intent and I own no malice.
However, I didn't perceive the money as the issue - I perceived the choice that he made as what he was really concerned about. Who really nows.The OP specifically asked for opinions about how he's spending his money and I offered mine.Hi Joe,
Wow, what a way to start the ball rolling. ;-)
You may be right, you may be wrong; however, here's my take -
I am a hobbyist and purchased the D700 (after some experience with other DSLR's) because it has the specs that meets my current photographic needs. When I purchase a "toy" I expected it to function as specified. All DSLR's ARE NOT created equal. It makes no sense to buy something and figure out a way to work around it's inadequacies. Plus, if you know those inadequacies exist, then you are probably ready to upgrade your gear and challenge yourself. If you do not know they exist, then it really doesn't matter anyway. Now, I am able to work on my photographic skills instead of my troubleshooting skills.
The only person who should be concerned with what the folks are spending there money on is the person doing the spending/earning of the money. You can't sit in judgment of what other folks deem as important of fun.
At base ISO you would not be able to differentiate a well-exposed base ISO photograph that came from a D500, D90, or D700, if all are post-processed to a uniform curve, color, and sharpening target.You may be a pro and you may not be - I don't know. However, if you think the IQ of the DX sensor in the D90 matches the IQ of the FX sensor in the D700 - I will have to say "There's know way - period."
We each prefer our own variety of happiness and mine derives from objectivity and honesty. I do tend to lose sleep when I see people falling into harmful consumption patterns. The OP is obviously conflicted about his decision and my experience and judgment tell me his conflict is well-founded. I standby my original assertions that most people are buying these expensive cameras for the wrong reasons.By the way, you really should look on the bright side of things - it's much healthier. I would also suggest that you don't lose too much sleep over what other folks do with their money.
That was not my intent and I own no malice.
Yes - fully agreed. But this is not a bad thing, necessarily. I think your tone implies that it is.
Undoubtedly, for some, but I don't get the feeling status motivates the OP.
Yes, a certain percentage land here.
Yep.
I wouldn't go that far. It's wasted on the person who has no intention or interest in taking advantage of those additional/upgraded features - I'd say it's a very small percentage of "dilettantes" who are both willing to shell out the cash and unwilling to learn the tool. (This stretch broke your argument a bit.)
For most.... who? What group? Most DSLR users, yes, and the stats on body sales reflect that directly. Most people in the market for a D700 or FF camera in general have already moved out of this general group, though - they've reached a point where the entry-level body and single kit zoom feels incredibly limiting. For most of them , the D700 hits a price/performance sweet spot that's very compelling.
.
).
