Increased Use Of Older Kit

CaptainPenguin

CaptainPenguin

Messages
5,161
Name
Nigel Cliff
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm not just talking about the use of film cameras although reading articles on here,other forums and in the photographic press it does appear that the decline in film use may have plateaux'd out,I am talking about 2 areas being the use of older lenses both manual and auto focus on DSLR bodies and the use of older DSLR's that only this time last year appeared to be viewed as so much junk.

Re lenses it appears that more and more Togs are realising that just because a lens is 10,20 or even 30 years old it is not a load of rubbish and may provide results that match and in some cases top more modern lenses at a fraction of the cost,ok if you want to shoot F1 racing then a 20 year old lens will not have the autofocus speed of its modern equivalent but how many of us stretch our lenses to or even anywhere near their limits.

Secondly DSLR bodies from the mists of time when 6 megapixels was as big as you got,I have thought for a long time that the obsession with megapixels has got out of hand and is industry driven,on my wall is a pin sharp shot of Barmouth Bridge blown up to 20x16 and taken on a 6 megapixel Canon D60 so theoretically why do I need more.I know that the larger sensors allow more major cropping but again for general work at say ASA 100-400 how much better results will say a Canon 500D give compared to say a 10D and the savings can be put towards some decent glass
 
Well, im not sure if you,v seen my thread but i am seriously considering downgrading to an early 1d body. The 450d has more megepixels than i could ever need!
 
This is one of the main reasons I love my Pentax K10D. Although I have a lot of newer AF lenses I am always using the older manual variety (of which there are plenty). They give a totally different look to pictures and a lot of them are much sharper than the newer offerings.

As for my K10D .. 3 years old, nearly 50,000 on the clock with a marked sensor, memory card door held closed with red electrical tape and it seems the flash control is playing up but I love it .. have even tried a 7D for a few days and still prefer the Pentax (and I really tried not to) :wacky:
 
I have a pentax lydith 30mm f/3.5 and it's probably my sharpest lens.
 
http://Hi. I use an old Nikon 80-200 2.8 on my D300 and although a bit slow on the focus side I do manage many excellent shots of bikes on trackdays. OK I miss a few but not being a pro it s not a disaster.
Last trackday I took 280 shots of my son, 145 of which are keepers.
This lens is pin sharp and can be bought for around the £300 mark in mint condition, even less if it's a bit dusty. How much would I have to pay for a new nikkor of this quality.
 
You can't really argue that new kit is not better, as it unquestionably is. The point is more that older stuff is still plenty good enough - for just about anything.

But that isn't the main reason why folks buy new equipment. The truth, if we're honest, is because we like new toys, manufacturers are very well aware of that fact, so they give us a few 'marketing' reasons to upgrade and justify the purchase on some vaguely objective grounds, and we take the bait. And everyone is happy :)

Canon L lenses are a classic - fantastic lenses for sure, but with perceived capabilities that are verging on magical. It's only the marketing that is magical.

I am as guilty as anyone. I recently sold a mint Canon 350D (6mp) for £175 to help fund my new Canon 5D2, which cost £1500 (plus a completel new set of lenses). The only person in my house that can tell which pictures were taken on which camera, is me! But I'm the one that counts :D
 
HoppyUK said:
You can't really argue that new kit is not better, as it unquestionably is. The point is more that older stuff is still plenty good enough - for just about anything.

But that isn't the main reason why folks buy new equipment. The truth, if we're honest, is because we like new toys, manufacturers are very well aware of that fact, so they give us a few 'marketing' reasons to upgrade and justify the purchase on some vaguely objective grounds, and we take the bait. And everyone is happy :)

Canon L lenses are a classic - fantastic lenses for sure, but with perceived capabilities that are verging on magical. It's only the marketing that is magical.

I am as guilty as anyone. I recently sold a mint Canon 350D (6mp) for £175 to help fund my new Canon 5D2, which cost £1500 (plus a completel new set of lenses). The only person in my house that can tell which pictures were taken on which camera, is me! But I'm the one that counts :D
Click to expand...

Richard its your money and you have every right to spend it as you wish BUT re the lenses I think better is a relative term because there are much older lenses out there and not horrendously expensive ones that can match the quality of a modern AF lens and I include L lenses in that,dont now if you buy AP but there was an article in a special 2nd hand issue a few months ago that came to just that conclusion
 
Love using old Nikon AI manual focus lenses on my camera. I also have a tack sharp old Pentax Super Takumar 55mm M42 lens that is fun to use. It also good fun hunting for a bargain. You never know what you might find in a charirty shop or cash converters.
 
older lenses can be great, my favourite is a nikkor 180mm f2.8, sharper and better contrast than anything else i've tried but of course a little slow.

older cameras i'm not so keen on. my d70 has noticeably worse white balance, colours and noise than my d300.

megapixels my not count much, but they're not all that has progressed.
 
Agreed - I've just arranged for an old Nikon F3 to come my way...I'll now be scouring the 2nd-hand shops around here - and there are many - for some old AI and AI-S lenses now to augment my 35mm f/2 (which is actually not too bad compared to my Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8 set to 35mm and at an equivalent aperture setting)...
 
I love using manual focus lenses on my GF1 - I bought a Konica Hexanon lens for £10 which is incredibly sharp imo.

P1100689.jpg
 
CaptainPenguin said:
Off to have a look at it now
Click to expand...

With respect, I think that's quite a revelaing comment - made in response to the previous suggestion by Trencheel that "the 450D has more megapixels than I could ever need."

To which I would generally agree, but that's because the sheer number of megapixels deosn't have much to do with image quality! There are plenty of compacts that have squillions of megapixels, and even some phone cameras now have more than earlier DSLRs - but their image quality can't hold a candle to them, because the pixels are too small and can't gather enough light, producing too much noise, which has to be processed away, which wrecks everything.

The 'more megapixels is better' argument is largely a marketing creation!

CaptainPenguin said:
Richard its your money and you have every right to spend it as you wish BUT re the lenses I think better is a relative term because there are much older lenses out there and not horrendously expensive ones that can match the quality of a modern AF lens and I include L lenses in that,dont now if you buy AP but there was an article in a special 2nd hand issue a few months ago that came to just that conclusion
Click to expand...

I would actually agree with you. Some older stuff is very good, asbsolutely, why shouldn't it be? But overall, in terms of optical performance (and there are quite a few apsects to that) new stuff is better.

Whether is is better value, or creates better pictures, or is more pleasureable to use, that's altogether a different matter ;)

Voyager said:
The term 'better' needs to be quantified by HoppyUK for his point to make any sense at all.
Click to expand...

I meant technical optical performance, overall. The best lenses today are better, and the cheaper ones are better than their earlier counterparts.

But there is plenty of expensive new stuff that isn't that special (the new Zeiss lenses for example) and plenty of old lenses that can hold their own today.
 
My 200 f2.8 mk1 is almost 19 years old, full of bits, but still focuses instantly and produces great images. I have no idea how long USM motors go on for, but so far, so good!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top