D100 vs Canon 10 D etc

[lnbolch]

Robert

Some great points, but worth mentioning that the intended buyers for the D1/2H and 1D really don't worry about depreciation. The cameras are aimed not at enthusiasts, but at magazines and daily newspapers. There they pay for themselves quickly, and are used until worn out.

For most enthusiasts, features like eight shots per second and a forty exposure buffer, wireless ftp to the press box and so on are of little value. Few enthusiasts would buy a 4MP camera now - at least for the price of a D2H - but it works fine for a news shot. Much of the noise is simply hidden in the half-tone dots. In news and sports shooting, content is really about the only factor that counts.

They are special purpose cameras aimed at a very narrow range of problems, and handle them superbly.

With the 1Ds, turn-around time for a commercial shooter is vastly reduced, meaning more shooting and less time spent running back and forth to the lab. With commercial photography, time is money. Dumping a used Hasselblad and a couple of lenses pays for the body, and clients are just as happy with the quality in most cases.

Again, a camera built for a specific market, where it pays for itself quickly.

larry!
ICQ 76620504
http://www.larry-bolch.com/

 

[oskarb]

I’m enjoying this thread very much, a great resource for those who may be thinking of plunging into the infuriatingly seemingly complex world of “!@#$%†DSLRs.

We all know that in terms of ultimate image quality different models do a very acceptable job with certain situations but end up producing disappointing results in other conditions. You only get one sort of film with a DSLR and the perfect all round performer has yet surface. This inherent feature of digital capture must have an affect on the way you work and the body of imagery made. I’m from the old school of thought that believes the camera system used, dictates to a large degree the resultant imagery. At the end of the day it is not about the features of any particular camera, it is about the images a photographer can achieve with the tools at his or her disposal. Put another way, the best DSLR is the one that meets the needs of the photographer. Finding that particular camera is the rub of the problem. The poor value retention of digital cameras in general must make it hard for the avid enthusiast, at least a working photographer can write off a bad decision but it still hurts when the inappropriate choice is made.

At least with Nikon compatible systems the range of equipment available is greater which makes it easier for people access Digital photography and have future scope to build on their systems. It’s also nice to have the ability to have an FM2 or FM3a body in the bottom of your camera bag for when the batteries run out on your DSLR. And inevitably they will right at that moment when that Pulitzer Prize winning shoot finally presents itself. Heavy battery dependency of DSLRs is still a real issue despite real improvements in this area in some models. And it is primarily this issue that has stopped me from plunging in to digital capture just yet. The old Supercool Scan 4000 ED still has legs yet.

Just my 4 cents worth, and best regards Craig.