Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How often do you upgrade you camera body?
- Thread starter 0007776
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I went from the D70 to the D200 in less than a year's time and then a year and a half after that, bought the D2Xs. Hoping that I won't be tempted to buy again when the new D-whatever it will be called comes out!
Constantly. Bought the D200 about a year after I bought the D70, bought the D2Hs to shoot alongside the D200 about 5 months after that, bought a second D200 around 7 months after that, and now, about 5 months later, I'm about to buy my next body, and anticipate another within a matter of months after that.
Of course, I donated the D70 to my school and it's still running strong after over 30k clicks, and sold the D2Hs.
Of course, I donated the D70 to my school and it's still running strong after over 30k clicks, and sold the D2Hs.
Ouch.
This thread makes me kind of ill.
Replacing your camera every few years, every few months!?
The days of staying true to your body must be over.
Sucks digital makes it this way.
This thread makes me kind of ill.
Replacing your camera every few years, every few months!?
The days of staying true to your body must be over.
Sucks digital makes it this way.
I guess the current 6+ or 8+ MP cameras are ok now? I mean - we don't need higher megapixel counts do we? I know that's not the whole story, but it helps!
If I get a canon Eos 400D, it might be the only SLR I will ever get. The lenses will be expensive enough.
Well, all my film bodies are at least 30 years old and function perfectly. I'm probably going to upgrade to a D200 sometime in the next year, not because my D50 is wearing out, I just need the tougher body, more external controls, and weather sealing.
The time to upgrade is when your current camera body is no longer capable of taking the shots you want to take. This may be because you have outgrown the technical capabilities of the camera body, or because the body is worn out (every DSLR has a limited lifespan on the shutter.)
I currently have a 20D. I want a 5D. But I can't afford it, and even if I could, I can afford to wait for its successor to be released: the 20D is still doing a good job, and although there are some aspects that irk me slightly (eg: the barrel distortion in the 17-85mm), I can live with them.
In short: if you're happy with what you have right now, there's no need to rush out and replace it. It took good pictures when you bought it; it's still capable of taking good pictures now.
I haven't spent a ton of money on a DSLR body yet because I know I will be able to get something superior in about 6 months time. Eventually I will just take the plunge when Canon rolls out a nice model (maybe the successor to the 5D whatever that will be).
Lenses on the other hand are never really obsolete. At least that's my excuse for Canon L Acquisition Disorder. Don't laugh, its a serious condition.
Lenses on the other hand are never really obsolete. At least that's my excuse for Canon L Acquisition Disorder. Don't laugh, its a serious condition.
Also known as L disease. A word of warning to all Canon shooters: if you can't afford to spend thousands of dollars on camera lenses, never shoot with an L series lens. You'll catch the disease, and be bitterly disappointed with every photo you shoot until you've replaced all your lenses with L series equivalents.
Just look at me. Current gear: EF-S 10-22mm, EF-S 17-85mm, EF 50mm f/1.4, and EF 100-400mm L. Future planned gear purchases (in no particular order): EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L, EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS, EF 85mm f/1.8, EF 17-40mm f/4 L, TS-E 24mm L, possibly the EF 15mm fisheye, and the EOS 5D (the latter after I have the 24-70). I caught L disease after taking a photo of a magpie with my 75-300mm and comparing it with another magpie shot taking with a friend's 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS - both of them wide open.
Fortunately, my case isn't especially severe - witness the desire for the 85mm f/1.8 rather than the 85mm f/1.2L. But be warned!
Don't mean to hijack your thread, but I have the 17-40 f/4 L and it is an unbelievable lens for the price. Yes its pricey compared with other lenses, but my copy is very sharp despite the distortions on the wide end. I have learned to control myself, although I have been dangerously close to pulling the trigger on a 35 L, and then taking a second mortgage.
This summer I'll have had this D70 for three years. When I eventually upgrade it won't be to get more pixels (although that will certainly happen) - it'll be to get improved noise performance at ISO 800 and above. Compared to the newer cameras, these first generation bodies (D70 as well as the 300D; I've shot both) seem to exhibit a fair bit of shadow noise at 800, and everywhere at 1600.
Fortunately I don't do a lot of low-light photography, so it's not a major problem.
Fortunately I don't do a lot of low-light photography, so it's not a major problem.
I used my Grandma's N8008 for about two years and still occasionally borrow.
I now use a K100D which I'll be shooting with until Pentax releases a DSLR that shoots at least 5fps, can still shoot usable images at ISO 1600 while being 8-10MP, and has dynamic range rivaling the Fuji sensor.
Then again, I may purchase the new *DA zooms before that DSLR exists and would like to use them on a body that could take advantage of their SDM (Pentax's version of USM/SWM/HSM) AF function.
I might also have to pick a film SLR for a photo class this summer, in which I'd go with a K1000. Sure, it's MF, but it's a fine art class, and fine art/abstract photography doesn't require AF for the most part.
I now use a K100D which I'll be shooting with until Pentax releases a DSLR that shoots at least 5fps, can still shoot usable images at ISO 1600 while being 8-10MP, and has dynamic range rivaling the Fuji sensor.
Then again, I may purchase the new *DA zooms before that DSLR exists and would like to use them on a body that could take advantage of their SDM (Pentax's version of USM/SWM/HSM) AF function.
I might also have to pick a film SLR for a photo class this summer, in which I'd go with a K1000. Sure, it's MF, but it's a fine art class, and fine art/abstract photography doesn't require AF for the most part.
I loved my old K1000!
Actually I pulled it out a few days ago, mostly for nostalgia's sake. But, you know, I've got to say its viewfinder seems to work much better for manual focusing than my D70's does (or the 300D's for that matter). Brighter, clearer, much easier to determine focus.
I've heard people complain about the general state of dSLR viewfinders; but I'd forgotten what using a nice one was like.
How expensive is it to repair the shutter? Eventually, of course, it's not worth it because the price of repair is too close to a new upgraded camera.
But I do think that the big DSLR curve is over. The difference between the Nikon D1 in 1999 and current cameras will not be repeated in the next 8 years.
Sad to say, "Lens Lust Disease" is not limited to Canon shooters.... We Nikon users have definitely been exposed to this highly virulent disorder as well! Someone on the Nikon Cafe site once posted a very clever (and quite true!) version of the "12 Steps of Lens Lust Anonymous."
Yeah, when I bought my D70 I was perfectly happy in the very beginning with the kit lens and the couple extra lenses that I bought....but then I felt compelled to add a lens here, a lens there..... Once I had that D200 in my hands, though --- whoa! It unleashed a particularly severe case of LLD and it seemed as though every time I went out shooting with that camera, the D200 was whispering in my ear: "buy me this lens! Buy me that lens!" The thing was insatiable! Eventually it screamed for me to buy it a backup D200, so I dutifully did so....Next it wanted to see how shooting in infrared worked, so of course that required yet another camera body purchase, with subsequent modification for IR..... The D200 continually demanded that I stick all these wonderful "pro" quality lenses on it, but that wasn't ever enough. Seemed as though the D200 always wanted more, more, MORE! But then one day some of those "pro" lenses started chiming in, too: they wanted to experience the joy of being mounted on a D2X or D2Xs..... I eventually gave in....
I had my first slr camera body given to me by my mother at age 13. (Minolta SRT 101) My mother also developed one roll of film a month for me! What a Mother! I thought about my shots then.
My next one I bought because my first slr broke down... just before my friends graduation event (he asked me to take pics). Pentax K1000 Bought brand new!
Bought another one a 3-4 years later... Wanted one that could take 3fps. My Pentax Z1P. This was in 1995.
Just three weeks ago bought a Pentax K10D.
I'm still using all Pentax cameras.. The battery is dead to my K1000 for a few years now.
Macanadian
My next one I bought because my first slr broke down... just before my friends graduation event (he asked me to take pics). Pentax K1000 Bought brand new!
Bought another one a 3-4 years later... Wanted one that could take 3fps. My Pentax Z1P. This was in 1995.
Just three weeks ago bought a Pentax K10D.
I'm still using all Pentax cameras.. The battery is dead to my K1000 for a few years now.
Macanadian
went from d40 to d50 in about a years time had the d50 since. before that I had a konica minolta for 6 years.
I'd rather spend $150 however many times it takes to keep my Canon 400D around for 10 years than spend $800 to replace it with something marginally better.
Obviously, if it's $350 and there have been two more upgrades since the 400D (or I can afford a next tier camera), that's a different equation.
A friend of mine just repaired his Nikon D100. The repair was cheaper than anything in Nikon's lower range, and I think he considered nothing short of a D200 a significant enough replacement (I was trying to sell him on the D80).
Um.....I don't think the D40 was around a year ago; the D50 actually preceded the D40.
Actually, yes, your friend was right. There is a difference between the D100, D200 and the D80.