View Poll Results: Why do you NOT want a DSLR?

Voters
658. You may not vote on this poll
  • Too bulky

    352 53.50%
  • Quality is not good enough

    74 11.25%
  • Presence of Focal Length Multiplier

    88 13.37%
  • Can't do video

    95 14.44%
  • Relatively low continuous shooting speed

    19 2.89%
  • Don't want the hassle of postprocessing

    93 14.13%
  • Storage media issues

    52 7.90%
  • Battery issues

    49 7.45%
  • Others

    185 28.12%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1234712 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 255

Thread: Why do you NOT want a DSLR?

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    yeah the popularity of digital is becos it separates the medium from the content, think of it as a novel, the book and its story. The book may may rot but the story does not change.
    but of cos the separation also causes the loss of easy decoding.
    as for getting a good image, premium digital can already beat most films in terms of grain and noise, and the good part of electronics is that today's premium is tomorrow's commonplace, whereas film is already a mature and stabilised technology, commercially and scientifically.
    perhaps the next step to replace film is to have a low-power portable viewer like the new foldable OLEDs... so u will have ur photo album replacement. although today, u already have those image tanks with video outs.
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  2. #22

    Default

    nah, backup is not a safe measurement, storing is . In Singapore, most will store theirs in Cisco, for a price of coz.

    never depand too much on technology, I've being doing backup for my company(using $10K equipment) for many years. sometime, things just screw. It really does not mean you are safe once you backup, naw, never will.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    dust, cost and size/weight are the factors that deters me. cost being the most important now. if cost dropped to less than $2000, then size/weight would eb the dominant factor.
    Check out my wildlife pics at www.instagram.com/conrad_nature

  4. #24
    Bedpan
    Guests

    Default

    Well... When you look at cost you need to include the cost of Film.. I won't do the math here, but it does not take all that many rolls of film to equal the differnce in price between film and digital. You may also find that getting away from film and the cost/shot factor you shoot more, get more good shots and are able to improve your style technique etc.

    Mike

    Originally posted by mpenza
    dust, cost and size/weight are the factors that deters me. cost being the most important now. if cost dropped to less than $2000, then size/weight would eb the dominant factor.

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    237

    Default Re: Re: Why do you NOT want a DSLR?

    Originally posted by Bedpan
    To me the big loss moving from Digicam to DSLR is the loss of using the LCD to preview.... Can make getting some shots a bit more of a challage... I still love me 950

    Mike

    LCD STILL don't give accurate view; You don't see 100% & you can't see properly if you object is properly focus.

    frankly, if money not a issue; not only DSLR, I also wanna collect all Nikons, Canons, Leica, Rollei, Mamiya, Hasselblad (add more yourself to the list) etc etc etc
    Last edited by zOOm; 5th October 2002 at 10:43 PM.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: Re: Re: Why do you NOT want a DSLR?

    Originally posted by zOOm

    LCD STILL don't give accurate view; You don't see 100% & you can't see properly if you object is properly focus.

    frankly, if money not a issue; not only DSLR, I also wanna collect all Nikons, Canons, Leica, Rollei, Mamiya, Hasselblad (add more yourself to the list) etc etc etc
    Hmm....just wondering, are you aspiring to be a good photographer or a camera collector?

    Regards
    CK

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    57

    Default

    too expensive to own one....

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    Originally posted by Bedpan
    Well... When you look at cost you need to include the cost of Film.. I won't do the math here, but it does not take all that many rolls of film to equal the differnce in price between film and digital. You may also find that getting away from film and the cost/shot factor you shoot more, get more good shots and are able to improve your style technique etc.

    Mike
    I already have a digital camera mah, so no need to include the cost of film liao.
    Check out my wildlife pics at www.instagram.com/conrad_nature

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Originally posted by StreetShooter
    Oooh, another argument!

    Better get my 2 cents in before this thread closes down as well.
    Hahahaha.

    As for the rest, a nice coherent post. You've taken the time to explain what I didn't bother to. Thanks.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Originally posted by StreetShooter
    Oooh, another argument!

    Better get my 2 cents in before this thread closes down as well.
    LOL! that's the funniest thing i've read today!

    yeah u're right. i regretted missing out the action in the other threads!
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  11. #31

    Default Too expensive.

    Simple : It is too expensive.

    My SLR's cost : approx $600 (got it used)
    Equivalent DSLR : approx $3800

    Resale price after 4 yrs:
    My SLR : $450
    DSLR : $800? $400? $100?

    Upgrade cost for better pictures:
    My SLR : $6-7 (better film)
    DSLR : $4000

    Printing at a pro lab:
    Lab handling charge for CD : $5 per CD
    Film : None

    Duh?!? You do the math.

  12. #32

    Default

    Originally posted by Jed
    You get the same quality 5000 years down the road you get today,
    Hehehehe... forget 5000 yrs. See if your media can be used 50 yrs down the line... Hell, even 5 yrs down the line all our CD's may be obsolete with the upcoming 40 and 50GB DVD formats.

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by sriram

    Hehehehe... forget 5000 yrs. See if your media can be used 50 yrs down the line... Hell, even 5 yrs down the line all our CD's may be obsolete with the upcoming 40 and 50GB DVD formats.
    The smart digital photogs will re-burn them along the way to new CDs, or DVDs, or whatever new media that comes along.

    Printing at a pro lab:
    Lab handling charge for CD : $5 per CD
    Film : None
    as for this, heh, there IS a developing fee for film, typically $3.50 or so. And you don't have to print everything, unlike what people typically do with negs.

    That's why I posted the poll as "If cost is not an issue".

    Regards
    CK

  14. #34

    Default

    Originally posted by sriram

    Hehehehe... forget 5000 yrs. See if your media can be used 50 yrs down the line... Hell, even 5 yrs down the line all our CD's may be obsolete with the upcoming 40 and 50GB DVD formats.
    As what streetshooter mentioned, as new media comes out you'll be backing up your stuff on to the new media, and it'll still be lossless (no loss of quality). What about slides?

  15. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Richard


    As what streetshooter mentioned, as new media comes out you'll be backing up your stuff on to the new media, and it'll still be lossless (no loss of quality). What about slides?
    You invest in a good humidity controlled storage system, and duplicate them (wait..... this is not quite lossless.... )

    Regards
    CK

  16. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Originally posted by sriram

    Hehehehe... forget 5000 yrs. See if your media can be used 50 yrs down the line... Hell, even 5 yrs down the line all our CD's may be obsolete with the upcoming 40 and 50GB DVD formats.
    i think u all missed Jed's point on this.

    the great advantage of digital is the easy reproductivity (if there ever is such a word) of the images - across storage mediums.

    want to take advantage of DVD ROMs? no problem, simply transfer the images and they will last another 50 years. Afaid of the dog chewing on your old CDs? no problem, write the image a 100 times across 100 CDs and u have a reliable backup.

    I've seen a dog chew on a friend's underwear, so don't think your old negs stored in that old shoebox is safe! ha!

    The longetivity of digital images is superior to negs and slides, unless u also scan those negs and slides as backup. Physical media such as negs and slides are too prone to elements of weather, erosion by age and sloppy handling all of which reduce the quality of the precious images.

    Ditto for those wonderful prints. And if you want to reproduce the print 50 years from now and u are not around.....can u guarantee there will be another printer to execute the same vision exactly as you want in the final print? Can u guarantee the continuation of b/w processing for that matter?

    why do u think they have technologies like ICE, ROC or GEM in scanners? Precisely because film cannot stand the test of time, sloppy fingers and dogs.

    a more coherent argument for film would be the ability to scan them into your PC and have both advantages of physical media and digital backup.(then again u're back to digital).

    i've seen no one put forth such an argument yet.
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Originally posted by Red Dawn
    i think u all missed Jed's point on this.
    Sigh. Why does that sound SO familiar?

  18. #38
    Bedpan
    Guests

    Default Re: Too expensive.

    I have done the math.. I also have an S2, enjoying th world of Digital, getting better shots everyday, learning as I go. I suppose your also the type who is probably still using a 486 cause something better is coming soon.. To afraid to spend money and enjoy the technology..

    You must also have one hell of a prolab to be getting Free prints.... Last time I checked it would be close to $20 to purchase the film and have it printed. Even using your wonderful math provided...

    Your Camera will cost you $150 to own
    The digital will cost you $3000

    The digital will cost you $2850 more then the Film Camera....
    Probaly a little high, but at $20 a roll for film and processing thats only about 140 rolls of film. Not sure how much you shoot.. But in the 4 months I have had my s2 I have already taken about 4500 shots.. The true advantage of digital is you never have to be afraid to push the shutter button. It does not cost you anything. Yes I have wasted a lot of shots. Yes I have played around a lot. But doing both of these things teach me about the camera, how it is going to respond and what to expect.

    I am new to SLR photography. I am damn glad I went straight to digital; It has given me the freedom to shoot.

    DUH?!?
    Mike


    Originally posted by sriram
    Simple : It is too expensive.

    My SLR's cost : approx $600 (got it used)
    Equivalent DSLR : approx $3800

    Resale price after 4 yrs:
    My SLR : $450
    DSLR : $800? $400? $100?

    Upgrade cost for better pictures:
    My SLR : $6-7 (better film)
    DSLR : $4000

    Printing at a pro lab:
    Lab handling charge for CD : $5 per CD
    Film : None

    Duh?!? You do the math.

  19. #39

    Default

    249 reasons why i like my Digital consumer cam:


    #203 I could take mini pics with my wife on our way to jalan jalan, make fun and watch it when i coming home after a long day at work. cannot do that on DSLR

    #097 self portriats with twisting LCD. canot do that on DSLR


    #001 lighter than DSLR


    ......

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Originally posted by Red Dawn


    .... easy reproductivity (if there ever is such a word) ....
    I think should be reproduceability?? Right? Wrong?

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1234712 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •