The DSLR is fading away. Now what?

08/31/2021 05:18:47 PM · #26

Originally posted by posthumous:

Do you know that last year vinyl albums outsold CDs?

There's a chance that in a few years DSLRs will outsell mirrorless cameras for the same reason.

Having fought with high end turntables, solid surfaces for them to sit on, and the fookin' cartridges, only to have the albums get dirty and deteriorate no matter what you did, I was *never* so glad to have a laser read the music.

What idiot wants to go back to guaranteed destruction?

It makes *no* sense to me.

08/31/2021 07:50:44 PM · #27

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

...What idiot wants to go back to guaranteed destruction?

It makes *no* sense to me.

LOL!
Audiophiles are notorious for dumping incredible sums of money, four and five digits, on stuff that physics says *can't* make the slightest difference, but the ~~marks~~ users still swear there really is a difference.
I still have a couple dozen half-speed mastered vinyl discs from the '80s and early '90s. I also still have my Dual 714Q turntable from 1981, so there's that. I haven't actually *played* a vinyl record in a few years. Most often I stream music from Tidal. Their "master quality" streams sound better than CDs.

I'm sure that 10 years from now I'll still have one or more DSLRs about the house. I'm also sure that I will be shooting with a mirrorless camera as my primary. It is cool that my 5D from 2005 is still 100% functional and still gets a little use (my son shoots with it).

Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS

08/31/2021 07:52:15 PM · #28

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

Without electrical contact, it's not much better than using vintage lenses.

Edit: Actually it's worse, because there's no manual aperture control on most M-mount lenses - only on MF lenses like those from 7artisans.

Yes, worse, in fact not tenable. Just sayin' that I think a full-function adapter is possible. Not that I would bet on it happening.

vawendy

Sony Alpha 1

08/31/2021 08:01:13 PM · #29

Originally posted by pgirish007:

I have both 5DM4 and Sony A7Rii and I find that Sony has something missing like when I a having a flash on top of sony and Canon (same flash brand), I find that Sony takes 1-2 seconds to fire the flash after hitting button and sometime it takes 3 seconds too where as the Canon is spontaneous. I tried looking all options in Sony and so far no luck.

Oh that's weird... I have the a7III (no r) and there is no delay with a flash attached. Although I'm using a Godox flash. But absolutely no problem with it (or with the A1).

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

08/31/2021 08:17:51 PM · #30

Originally posted by vawendy:

Oh that's weird... I have the a7III (no r) and there is no delay with a flash attached. Although I'm using a Godox flash. But absolutely no problem with it (or with the A1).

So you're not "waiting for Godox" then?

tanguera

Nikon D750

08/31/2021 10:09:17 PM · #31

I received a Z2 for my birthday last year, with a 24-70mm lens, because I rented one for shooting BTS for a movie due to the silent shutter feature and sweetie thought it would make a great present. It did :)

But while I love the silent shutter (it was perfect for the movie, I find the quality of resulting images kinda "crunchy". Quite different from my D750 DSLR. Not to mention the battery issues, which others have pointed out. I can shoot continuously for 3 days with my DSLR, but need to pack numerous batteries to get through a single day with the mirrorless.

I don't plan to invest any more $$$ into the mirrorless system until they've sorted out the battery issue. It's a dealbreaker for me.

09/01/2021 07:40:51 AM · #32

Originally posted by tanguera:

I received a Z2 for my birthday last year, with a 24-70mm lens,

Whassa Z2?

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/01/2021 07:43:46 AM · #33

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

What idiot wants to go back to guaranteed destruction?

It makes *no* sense to me.

Maybe the same idiots who buy paint instead of Photoshop, or chisel away at marble instead of using a 3-D printer, or ...?

People with better ears than I say that you can hear a difference between an analog recording (phono disc or tape) and a digital recording -- this should be so, since it is impossible to completely fill the area under a sine wave with rectangles, though current technology provides a very(!) close approximation.

Also, if desperate and given appropriate tools and some resources, I believe I could fabricate a device that would extract sound from a phono disc -- no way can I build a laser and mechanism to spin an optical disc and write the software and ... oh, and all of that will only work if you have a source of electricity.

FWIW some clever folks at Lawrence Berkeley Lab developed a system for reading even older recordings (I think wax and foil cylinders) with lasers, extracting usable audio without further degrading the extremely fragile media.

09/01/2021 08:34:19 AM · #34

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

What idiot wants to go back to guaranteed destruction?

It makes *no* sense to me.

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Maybe the same idiots who buy paint instead of Photoshop, or chisel away at marble instead of using a 3-D printer, or ...?

That's not the same thing, and I can give you a better example of the reality of old versus new and why progress is a good thing. Besides, comparing a 3D printer with sculpture is bullsh*t.....completely different ends sought.

Cars. I restore older cars and have been doing so for most of my life. For some weird reason, I am also reasonably adept at modern cars and the technology that has come along, especially since about 1980. Car manufacturers struggled mightily initially, and developed some truly weird sh*t trying to figure out how to manage power, emissions, driveability, and fuel mileage. What they ended up with as far as today's automobiles is nothing short of miraculous and spectacular. They are exponentially faster, more efficient, get better fuel mileage, steer, stop, and handle better, and to top that all off, are incredibly safer.

Yet the one statement I hear more than anything is: "They just don't build 'em like they used to.". And this means that people who think they know something about cars lament the "good ol' days".

I love old cars, but I'm also well aware of how much better we have it now.

It's not an uncommon thing for me to work on two cars in the same day that were built 50 years apart. And since I've been fascinated with the evolution and progress, I've gotten to reap the benefits of it and appreciate it.

And I could bore you even more with the constant misinformation that is rife in the industry.

"Digital will never replace film"

Yeah, that!

Originally posted by GeneralE:

People with better ears than I say that you can hear a difference between an analog recording (phono disc or tape) and a digital recording -- this should be so, since it is impossible to completely fill the area under a sine wave with rectangles, though current technology provides a very(!) close approximation.

Yeah, there's always someone out there who swears that the old ways will never be surpassed.

Do you really think that if the older systems gave better sound quality that the simplicity of the newer systems would be enough for the hardline audiophiles to switch?

You know anybody that even has a TEAC reel-to-reel any more?

Message edited by author 2021-09-01 08:38:08.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/01/2021 09:19:46 AM · #35

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I highly recommend a story called "With These Hands" by Cyril M. Kornbluth.

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

You know anybody that even has a TEAC reel-to-reel any more?

Uh, yeah ... :-)

09/01/2021 10:06:22 AM · #36

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

You know anybody that even has a TEAC reel-to-reel any more?

LOL, you asked the wrong guy!

I had an Ampex reel-to-reel (ATR700) but sold it years ago (like 25 years). A buddy of mine still has one. I cringe at what tape for those machines would cost these days! It was expensive back in the day, especially as the machine was configured as two-track stereo, not four-track as is common.

09/02/2021 04:10:33 PM · #37

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

You know anybody that even has a TEAC reel-to-reel any more?

Originally posted by kirbic:

LOL, you asked the wrong guy!

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Uh, yeah ... :-)

It was a trap. You both got caught in it.

Here we have it, folks!

The two most serious packrats in this community.

Can you get tape for them any more?

Do you still use them?

LOL!

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/02/2021 04:14:04 PM · #38

The title of the TEAC image was true -- I have some live recordings from 50 years ago I plan to digitally archive (and edit for release some of them).

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

09/02/2021 04:18:33 PM · #39

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Can you get tape for them any more?

For obscene prices, yes. A 3600-foot reel of good quality 1/4" tape will set you back nearly $100. On my ol' ATR700 that would net me a whole 48 minutes of music. (!) Now you know why I sold mine 25 years ago.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

09/02/2021 04:22:14 PM · #40

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

The two most serious packrats in this community.

GeneralE isn't a packrat, he's closer to a Luddite :-) He's the epitome of the classic "Yankee" attitude of "Use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without."