In defence of the DSLR.

[ray*j*gun]

Keith,

I bought my D90 because I wasn't able to get the job done with RF's of any kind and film wasn't working either. There is a reason pros use pro gear when all the BS is said and done. Now of course I'm thinking about a full frame body.....ah the beat goes on.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by ray*j*gun

Keith,

I bought my D90 because I wasn't able to get the job done with RF's of any kind and film wasn't working either. There is a reason pros use pro gear when all the BS is said and done. Now of course I'm thinking about a full frame body.....ah the beat goes on.

Actually I noticed that Camera Pro here in Brisbane are now listing the D700 as discontinued. Have Nikon given it the chop in favour of the new D800 or is that just a local thing I wonder?

[daveleo]

I use a consumer grade (APS sensor) DSLR and it is versatile, small, and makes wonderful pictures for (at least) 8X10" prints.
Uses "legacy" Nikkors as well as the new lenses. Even has a built in intervalometer and motor drive ! What's not to love ?

Ruggedness? . . . well then you need pro-grade equipment, whatever kind of camera design that you go with.

[nighstar]

Originally Posted by Keith

Actually I noticed that Camera Pro here in Brisbane are now listing the D700 as discontinued. Have Nikon given it the chop in favour of the new D800 or is that just a local thing I wonder?

i don't particularly follow Nikon news, but i'm pretty sure it's being discontinued everywhere. it was discontinued in Japan upon the arrival of the D800, so it's not surprising that it'd now be discontinued elsewhere as well. i think it's only Canon who is keeping the older full frame model in their lineup.

...as for the topic of the thread, i agree with what others have said about DSLRs not needing to be defended as different jobs are best suited to different cameras. besides, there are those of us who actually love the feel of a weighty, full-bodied camera in our hands out in the field... i'd much sooner complain about lugging my tripod around than having my 5D MK III with me. on the other hand, i obviously wouldn't and couldn't use that camera in every situation.

[kehng]

I've been lucky enough to go to a few events at the London olympics and I've only brought my DSLR to all events. A M7 or M9 would just be annoying there methinks!

[nobbylon]

I think the 700 is still being made? Hope so. It's my main camera and would only replace it with another or a D3/D3s.
As far as film bodies go, nothing beats the speed and durability of an F5. Not even an F6!
All my lenses focus faster on the F5 than anything else including the digital bodies.
My main gripe has always been the size of the viewfinder on Dslr's, even the new ones. Full frame bodies are better but still not quite there. I've added a DK17-M eyepiece magnifier to my Nikon bodies and the transformation is superb.
The D700/D3 finders are now as big as an F2 with the added bonus of being brighter.
I think there will always be a market for Dslr's especially the pro stuff simply because, as others have said, they do pretty much everything and in all weather situations.

[Murchu]

Originally Posted by Keith

Actually I noticed that Camera Pro here in Brisbane are now listing the D700 as discontinued. Have Nikon given it the chop in favour of the new D800 or is that just a local thing I wonder?

Would have thought so, and that the D700 was discontinued as soon as the D800 landed, with stores & Nikon just selling existing D700 stocks until they ran out.

EDIT: If there was the option of a reduced raw size option (say 12 megapixels), would there be any benefit to a D700 over a D800? Curious more than anything else, as the D800 seemed to me to offer the same high iso performance, while improving in other areas like dynamic range as well as obviously resolution.

[jsrockit]

After many years of resistance, I purchased a DSLR recently. I just wanted one camera with fast AF and a good OVF viewfinder. EVFs are like peep holes in comparison. Mirror slap doesn't bother me. If the X-Pro1's AF was like a high end DSLR, I wouldn't use anything else. Unfortunately, it is not.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Murchu

Would have thought so, and that the D700 was discontinued as soon as the D800 landed, with stores & Nikon just selling existing D700 stocks until they ran out.

It's had a good run and deservedly so ... if mine got destroyed or had some major catastrophy I think I'd be shopping for a D3s as a replacement.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

After many years of resistance, I purchased a DSLR recently. I just wanted one camera with fast AF and a good OVF viewfinder. EVFs are like peep holes in comparison. Mirror slap doesn't bother me. If the X-Pro1's AF was like a high end DSLR, I wouldn't use anything else. Unfortunately, it is not.

When they can get a camera like the Xpro to focus the way my D700 does I'll want one!

As for mirror slap .... that turned into mirror shuffle years ago IMO. No perceptable reaction through my D700 and I shoot it down to 1/8 hand held quite often.

[boomguy57]

As they say, Keith--"horses for courses". My D700 will be with me until one of us croaks...I don't particularly enjoy shooting with it, but it gets results every time.

[Murchu]

Originally Posted by Keith

It's had a good run and deservedly so ... if mine got destroyed or had some major catastrophy I think I'd be shopping for a D3s as a replacement.

Fantastic camera alright, and redefined high iso performance. A low light shooters wet dream, and would have loved to own one. Am happy with my D300, even though a lesser sensor in most regards, but would be prepared to drop a serious chunk of change when digital sensors reach the holy grail of film negative dynamic range. Nearly everything else is there sensor/ image quality-wise, and the only thing that counts against the modern dslr in my book, is the shooting experience.

[kshapero]

Although I would be happy shooting my M3 all day, economics require me to have a digital camera for certain jobs. I use a D7000 because the AF is very fast and accurate, the body is sturdy enough for me and an optical VF is a must for me (tried the Sony A65). That being said I was at the beach the other day with my Nikon F, my 105/2.5 and some rolls of XP2 shooting away and a guy was knocking of snapshots of his kids. He asked me why it took 10 seconds or so after he pressed the shutter button for his camera to fire. I told him he set his rig to the self timer mode (duh!) on his NIKON D800!!!!

[Keith]

Originally Posted by boomguy57

As they say, Keith--"horses for courses". My D700 will be with me until one of us croaks...I don't particularly enjoy shooting with it, but it gets results every time.

It's hard to define how I feel about my D700. In the gallery it feels somewhat cumbersome and intrusive but produces results that blow me away ... at the Moto-X track it was in it's element and really felt like the perfect tool!

[Murchu]

Originally Posted by Keith

It's hard to define how I feel about my D700. In the gallery it feels somewhat cumbersome and intrusive but produces results that blow me away ... at the Moto-X track it was in it's element and really felt like the perfect tool!

Can understand that. For me a dslr feels intrusive in more intimate atmospheres, or rather the camera feels as if it becomes part of the moment, rather than just being an observer of the moment. Hard to explain more than that, I find, at least for me.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Murchu

and the only thing that counts against the modern dslr in my book, is the shooting experience.

Yep... that's for sure. Just not as fun.

[rbelyell]

imo it comes down to a truth about humans: in the main they are willing to sacrifice quality for comfort, and then that predisposition coupled with relentless advertising convinces them they have not in fact given up quality at all. not to start a whole magilla, but i see it right now in folks talking themselves into what great results theyre getting from the xpro with RF lenses, or what great IQ the omd yields with the kit zoom (which i have).

i personally am as guilty as anyone. i traded in my tower hi fi speakers for wall mounted with a subwoofer and convinced myself it sounded just as good when i knew it didnt. it cant. just as physics simply doesnt allow the xpro to optimize RF lenses. just like an m4/3 sensor will never compete with FF. cant.

at the end of the day i think the tradeoff is not as bad as the self delusion...hopefully there is always a place for actual quality and always that minority who keep the rest of honest.
tony

[semordnilap]

I think the mirrorless/evf offerings have a ways to go, but they'll compete sooner rather than later. It's more about the will to build the camera.

Nikon built the 1 which supposedly has excellent, fast AF. Sony has the incredible EVF–that thing is just amazing, and I can't wait to see the next generation that I expect will show up in their full frame slt. And fuji has the optical/electronic hybrid viewfinder, among other things. And all these cameras will benefit from future generations of electronics, with their improved performance and lower power requirements.

There are many disparate threads waiting a few years to be tied together into something really really great. Until then the dslr will remain king, and may continue on its inertial path for a while after... but the only thing that will hold mirrorless back is crippling by the manufacturers, whether intentional or inadvertent.

[Nikon Bob]

Originally Posted by maddoc

Well ... you have to use the right tool for the job. However, I think that a huge majority of all DSLR were sold to photographer without the purpose of getting the job done ...

Virtually the same could be said of Leica Ms.

Bob

[Todd.Hanz]

I bought my D700 to replace my now defunct Fuji S2, never looked back. I got it to shoot my kids at swim meets and it performed flawlessly (sp). It was a good value at the time and the fact that Nikon kept it around for so long says something about this camera. I like mine and will keep it till it dies!

Todd

[back alley]

i didn't realize the dslr was under attack!

thanks for the heads up...

[Keith]

Originally Posted by back alley

i didn't realize the dslr was under attack!

thanks for the heads up...

'Huge geat tub of lard' ... is one decription that comes to mind not that long ago. That's hardly complimentary!

[back alley]

are you talking about me?
lol!

i think the dslr is safe for a while yet...i have no need for one but that's because of what i normally shoot.

[Nikon Bob]

It is a love/hate thing with my D700. It is great for so many things and even the things it is second best at it does well so I put up with the bulk and weight. I do think the full frame SLR/DSLR is nearing the end of it's development and is a more or less mature product.

To get passed what it's limitations/liabilities are mirrorless cameras with ever better EVFs and autofocus are the way to go. As sensor tech gets ever better the need for full frame will be much less. That coupled with advances in lens design could lead to even smaller, lighter fast zoom lenses. That I think is the future and we are just starting to get a glimpse of that now.

Until then the DSLR of today is the 4 door Chevy of the camera world. It is not a pickup truck or a sports car but it just gets the job done well most of the time for most users.

Bob

[taskoni]

I guess when the job is done and done good no one cares what camera was used, dslr, slr or rf, film or digital. I think what's really matter is that we have what to choose from!

Regards,

Boris