|
|
Current favorite still-image camera type:
| 801 votes / 4% |
| 570 votes / 3% |
| 1869 votes / 11% |
| 6552 votes / 38% |
| 978 votes / 5% |
| 4249 votes / 25% |
| 1473 votes / 8% |
| 334 votes / 1% |
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
- Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
- Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
- This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
I hate them all. (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate them all.
- Full frame DSLR bodies are ludicrously expensive.
- All the glass worth owning is designed for full-frame - smaller DSLR formats get slow and/or soft zooms and a smattering of primes in useful focal lengths at useful speeds. Non-full frame DSLR owners are a despised afterthought, despite driving most of the profit.
- All of the mirrorless systems with great glass at good prices have crummy bodies.
- All of the mirrorless systems with great bodies have overpriced/slow/crummy/all-of-the-above glass.
- Modern primes are stupidly overpriced. Adjusted for inflation, N/C/S/P lenses with mediocre quality are pricier than equivalent Leica or Carl Zeiss lenses sold in the '90s.
- Ditto flash units.
I sold my Contax kit, I'm ready to take the plunge after sitting on the sidelines for a while - Fuji XE-1 with the kit zoom looks like the (reluctantly chosen) winner. It takes gorgeous photos, the zoom is sharp, contrasty and fast, the other lenses in the system are superb and (for primes) reasonably priced, the old-skewl controls make me feel at home - I just need to put up with craptacular EXF and The Worst Autofocus in Scotland.
Light field camera (Score:2, Interesting)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/03/10/0113202
Re:DSLR... sorta (Score:3, Interesting)
I actually find the opposite.
Having a half decent DSLR around my neck means I actually use the thing to take pictures. The camera on my phone is rubbish and so it stays in my pocket most of the time.
Re:Canon A720IS (Score:5, Interesting)
Plus the excellent chdk firmware to open up features like raw mode and extra-long exposures and all kinds of other neat stuff usually found on high-end cameras.
Not to mention the underwater case ( Canon WP-DC16 ) that is (was?) available for it at a fraction of the price of other cameras and gives you full functionality and a lot more portability into harsh environments.
I recently picked up a used Canon T2i, but it actually doesn't seem to take substantially better pictures than what I could capture with my A720IS. I'll still be getting plenty of mileage out of that Point and Shoot.
Re:What did you pick? (Score:5, Interesting)
I picked "other" for the same reason. I have a rather morally old Canon S5 IS, which is neither a DSLR nor a pocket camera. It's what was called a "bridge" camera at the time. It does have a body, you can put a limited number of accessories on it, but it's not a DSLR.
Re:What did you pick? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's an adaptation from my native language. It means something that still works perfectly, just no longer fits in the definition of being useful much. Like a 486DX in the world of i7. :)
Sorry about the confusion I created
Re:Phone (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:What did you pick? (Score:2, Interesting)
Compared to film even the most expensive 35 mm size digital is pretty damn sorry, right up to offerings by 'blad.
Gone are the cool tricks of photography like 3 color sliders and bulb settings, f stops and other things that made art happen at the camera level.
Digital has a long way to go to be cool.
On the other hand, I recall an article, maybe a year or two ago where some geek made a view camera with a flatbed scanner for a back.
THERE are the missing pixels that todays digital cameras lack. The slow speed of scanning even lent a cool bulb-setting-like trick, while the fact that it was a view camera made it possible to use readily available (now)cheap lenses from the old days of film cameras. Not very portable, but then view cams never were.