<|-- removed generator --> The Online Photographer: September 2, 2013

« September 1, 2013 | Main | September 3, 2013 »

September 2, 2013

Monday, 02 September 2013

Nikon D700II

D700

I think Nikon needs to re-introduce a refreshed version of the D700. Maybe a bit smaller and lighter, maybe stripped just a bit to shave the price, but essentially the same camera—no extra features or functionality, same controls in the same places, just whatever updates would bring its functionality up to SOTA.

Seems to me some cameras are such "hits"—they get everything so right—that they deserve to become classics and live on. Yeah, even in the digital-electronic era. I dunno, what do you think?

Mike
(Thanks to Joe, Jim, Bill and all the other D700 users from yesterday's post)

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Matthew: "I sold my D700 to help fund my D800, and don't regret it. The three things that I wasn't thrilled with on the D700 are all fixed: 100% viewfinder, a dedicated button for bracketing, and enough resolution for very large prints. But I handled a D700 the other day, and it just felt so much better in my hand. I can't rule out owning one of these again."

GH: "The D800 is the replacement for the D700. While the D800 may not be enough to convince some D700 users to upgrade, there's no reason to move backwards. That's what the D600 is for."

Dave Stewart: "Suspect the fact I recently bought another second-hand one will give a clue to my view...."

Tom Simonsen: "Sounds like a good idea. Talked to a D700 owner on Sunday, and he was not going to buy neither the D600 or D800. The former is missing too many things, and the D800 has too many pixels and is a bit too sluggish. A D700 refresh with the 24-MP sensor from D600 was his wish."

Glenn Brown: "I do not need a DSLR for professional work and using film converted to digital bodies and lenses make no sense at all. I switched to the Fujifilm X-Pro1 a year ago and never looked back at the too-long-in-the-tooth DSLR."

Dave Jenkins: "Canon did that with the 5D—took a great camera and just kept making it better."

[Leading Nikon expert] Thom Hogan (partial comment): "This seems to be a popular notion, but a misplaced one, I think. When I ask people who ask for a D700 update about what bringing it up to state of the art (SOTA) would mean, I start to get lists of things that, well, essentially mean it isn't a D700 any more...." [See the rest of Thom's comment in the Comments section. —Ed.]

Gene Lowinger: "Update? Meh! I'll keep my old D700 just as it is. Hardly ever use it since switching to the X-Pro1, but still love to fondle it."

John Krumm: "I'm still waiting for the sub-$1000 full-frame camera, but I guess that's what the used market is for. Alas, the D700 seems popular enough to compete with the newer D600. Both go for around $1500 used depending on condition."

Tim McGowan: "Sort of like Ford bringing back the Mustang."

Craig A. Lee: "I used to think I wanted a D700. Then I bought a D800 and never thought of the D700 again. Life and tech moves on."

Posted on Monday, 02 September 2013 at 11:29 PM in Cameras, old | | Comments (51)

Craze-y Days

I keep thinking of the 1890s. And no, to you younger readers, I wasn't around then. This post is not about nostalgia for the days of my youth.

So...why? Well, there was a camera craze in the 1890s. Previously, photography had mostly been accomplished by cameras held up on three sticks, by people who were initiates in the arcane arts of developing and printing; this took dedication and resources, and such devotees were relatively rare. The "hand-camera craze" of the 1890s was inaugurated by the advent of the Kodak in 1888; suddenly, everyone was taking pictures. Photography had suddenly become much easier, and much more widely and readily available. (Remind you of anything?) It's estimated that a million and a half Kodaks had found their way into the nation's hands by 1898—and there were just about a quarter as many people in the U.S.A. then as now. You did have to be moderately well-off to play. But it was the newest and latest technology, a modern contrivance, a modern convenience, and lots of people wanted to participate.

George
George Eastman with one of his Kodak hand cameras.
He kicked off a bona-fide craze in the 1890s.

What I've been wondering is whether we might not be smack in the middle (or maybe just a little toward the end) of just such a craze right now. Maybe, just maybe, the frenzied market for ever-improving digital cameras, the uploading of vast numbers of snapshots to the Internet, the huge influx of newcomers to the hobby, is all a phase, a fad—a craze. Maybe future photo historians will look back on this period and have a nice neat name for it, like, I don't know, the Megapixel Race or the Y2K Digicam Craze or some other nice name that ties the phenomenon up with a bow.

We humans have a touching way of assuming that everything is progress and that all progress is permanent—that all is upswell, and the swelled-up state is the way it's going to be from now on, forevermore. But I don't know. Maybe this is a wave—a rogue wave—and once it passes it'll be gone.

Just a thought.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Gregory May: "One of my favorite quotes, from Alfred Stieglitz: 'Photography is a fad well-nigh on its last legs, thanks principally to the bicycle craze.'"

Posted on Monday, 02 September 2013 at 11:11 AM in Reflections | | Comments (25)

The Most Desirable Camera on the Planet

Gx7

Reasons:

  • Good looking
  • Built-in EVF
  • Tiltable EVF
  • Tilt-up viewing screen
  • Built-in IS
  • It's the latest newest thing
  • I owned several of its direct predecessors
  • You can't get one quite yet.

The best cameras are usually ones that look especially promising but aren't in peoples' bags yet. Once they're actually shipping, their desirability takes the first big hit; because it is revealed that, in fact, despite early indications, it's just a camera, and does a lot of the same things that other cameras do. That takes the shine off quite a bit. The second big hit to its desirability comes when it gets reviewed, and the reviewers have to find a few things wrong with it, and the few wrong things are trumpeted throughout the echo chamber by people who either have bought, or have decided to buy, something else. (It's important to them that everyone else know that they have made the smarter choice.) The final nail in the coffin comes when it's a few months old and some new newest latest thing is announced...which you can't get yet. That thing acquires all the benefits of the grass-is-greener syndrome and shines with excessive brightness because of it. The old most desirable camera then seems like last Spring's fashions. Yesterday's news. Along with the first signs of wear, a slightly shabby, distinctly forlorn air clings to it.

It's funny how, with digital cameras, you seldom encounter anyone saying how much they love their three-year-old camera and plan to buy a second body on closeout so they can continue shooting with it for as long as possible. But you encounter hordes of people eager to get the first glimpse of next Spring's fashion.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Joe Holmes: "My Nikon D700 is the first body I ever kept rather than selling to fund a new body. So that's kind of the same as buying an older body on closeout."

Jim Hamstra: "I'm very happy with my Nikon D700 after more than three years' use. I have looked at the D800 have no desire to get one as I see no way it can improve my photography and the largest prints I make are 16x20, the same size I used to make in the darkroom. My backup camera has been a film camera but I recently decided to buy another D700 body and found it has been discontinued."

Mike replies: Have you two met?

Bob Smith: "One of the few exceptions that proves the rule...Nikon D700.

"P.S. My first post here. TOP has become my favorite photography site. Always good for interesting and intelligent subjects and discussion."

Mike replies: Thanks. Glad to have you. And, you're just in time to meet Joe and Jim.

Huw Morgan: "The comments on the D700 apply to my Canon 5D Mark II as well. These cameras both reached the point where they are virtually perfect at producing prints up to 16x20 inches. We are seeing diminishing returns of buying the latest and greatest. The same applies to my Sony NEX-7. We may be reaching the point in the camera market where consumers buy only when their cameras wear out. That may be sad news for Canon and Nikon."

Bill: "I just weighed and measured my favorite camera/lens: Pentax ME Super and SMC Pentax 50mm ƒ/1.4. The GX7 with 25mm Summilux weighs one ounce less, and is almost the exact same size (except the lens projects out a half-inch more). It's looking better and better!"

Tim (partial comment): "Ooh, an article born of some cynicism. I approve."

Arg: "With posts like this, how do you ever expect to earn revenue from click-through sales???"

Posted on Monday, 02 September 2013 at 10:32 AM in Cameras, new | | Comments (69)

Portals




Categories

Archives

More...

Stats


Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007