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 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 4567811 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 255

Thread: Why do you NOT want a DSLR?

  1. #101
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In the void.
    Posts
    1,323

    Default

    For me, I don't foresee that my picture taking is going to get any better or worse if I get a DSLR. The only advantage I get is the convenience of being able to preview the picture. Which don't mean very much for me.

    Also, I like to view slides on my projector. It's a really nice experience. You can't do that with digital pictures, unless you have a LCD projector which is like whoa.... worth another DSLR.

  2. #102
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    389

    Default

    I am still a big klutz at using my digicam and still struggling with the cam controls and stuff. I don't think I would be able to handle a DSLR and it would be a waste to have such good equipment and no knowledge or experience to fully utilize it.

  3. #103

    Default

    Here's another reason: I have other things to commit before photography since I am not a professional.

    Reason No. II: Still have alot of things to learn from jeffgoh, megaweb, and the others.

    even though people keep saying its time for me to upgrade..
    Last edited by djchris; 15th May 2003 at 08:22 PM.

  4. #104

    Default

    My view on this...

    My reservations to digital cameras is due mainly to three things - high initial setup cost, improving sensor technology, and size of sensor chip.

    High cost. That's the biggie, I find. I have just witnessed a new photographer making his first (and very expensive) purchase in a Tandy and realising that it was not such a good buy afterall. I think he regrets it a little. I don't have that sort of money to fling around. Even if I did, I would be better off purchasing better optics.

    Like Viewfinder has commented, 5MP maybe acceptable now, but down the line (in the space of 6 months or less) we can see better MP values in the digital cameras. Adopting the Murphy's Law (you know, that law about computer microprocessor getting faster within a few months), the situation for digital cameras (to me) is really unstable.

    Size of sensor chip. I find the costs of premium optics to be quite prohibitive already. If I use my existing 28-135mm on a, say, Tandy, I will be getting a multipled focal length. That is probably good for longer focal lengths, but on the wideangle side, it will become hideously expensive. You may even have to consider purchasing extreme wideangle lenses to compensate the multipled effects.

    Of course, anyone can argue that we can all troop down to a camera shop and do a MO of EOS1DS. Full sized chip (equal to 35mm so no worries about mulitpler effects) and great MP (11+MP). But who can really afford a EOS1DS (then again, I might be wrong)?

    I'm not going to get into the argument about storage of images and negs and trannies (my wife and I bicker about it constantly), as others can make their explanations and comments better.

    My only concession to digital photography is purchasing a Nikon Coolpix 5700 and using it in tandem with my film-based cameras. What do I do with it? I use the digicam to recce places that I want to shoot in film or tranny. I bring home the digipics and look at them in my laptop. I'll scrawl all over the images digitally and make notes for myself before I go out to take the pictures again.

    It may seem a bit strange and exhausting, but I like it that way.

    My two cents' worth. Dun flame hor.

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    Originally posted by VincentLin
    My view on this...
    Size of sensor chip. I find the costs of premium optics to be quite prohibitive already. If I use my existing 28-135mm on a, say, Tandy, I will be getting a multipled focal length. That is probably good for longer focal lengths, but on the wideangle side, it will become hideously expensive. You may even have to consider purchasing extreme wideangle lenses to compensate the multipled effects.
    It depends on what you shoot I guess. I remembered reading some comparisons and longer telephotos are much more expensive than ultra-wide angles. So, for those who need a big range, say 20mm to 600mm, smaller sensor size helps save costs....
    Check out my wildlife pics at www.instagram.com/conrad_nature

  6. #106

    Default

    Originally posted by VincentLin
    Adopting the Murphy's Law (you know, that law about computer microprocessor getting faster within a few months)
    That's Moore's Law..

  7. #107

    Default

    I guess so.

    But what do you want to take that would involve 400mm plus? Aspiring voyeur?

    I have yet to use any focal length larger than 400mm (based on my older Canon cameras), simply because there really isn't a need for me.

    I guess you are right. It really depends on what and how you want to shoot?

    Mmmm... when was the last time I used a 300mm? It was some time ago involving infra film and being in the same clothes for more than five days.

  8. #108

    Default

    CaeSiuM> I stand corrected. Bad vince bad vince.

  9. #109
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    716

    Default

    The technology isn't matured as yet.. Perhaps when the time comes where consumer class DSLR's come with full 35mm sized sensors; Then only would I get one. It's kind of pointless playing the MP game if you're not willing to bump up the sensor size so that noise becomes much less of an issue.

  10. #110
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    thought noise levels are already pretty good now? probably comparable to film's grain for the higher ISO like 1600.

  11. #111
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpenza
    thought noise levels are already pretty good now? probably comparable to film's grain for the higher ISO like 1600.
    It could be better.. No/ minimal noise at ISO 1600 for the 350D/ D70/ E300 class DSLR's perhaps?
    And a 35mm sensor has the added advantage of no-crop-factor as well..

  12. #112
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Potong Pasir
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Allow me to add a simplistic way to reason why I have not moved from film to digital. In time when better technology improves DSLR, a DSLR user may be inclined to upgrade his DSLR. While he invests in a better model, a film user has an option to invest it on additional lenses. Or he might move to digital, so it pays to wait :P My reasoning is based on a hobbyist's viewpoint.

    At the end of the day, though DSLR looks appealing, I just can't reason why film has a big hold on me.

  13. #113

    Default

    I think film is matured else digital has more to go.
    It is pricey and it is like PC.. non stop upgrading.. $$$ until you drop!
    DOS, Win 3.1 to Win 95, 2000,XP, long horn.. 32bits ... 64bits..digital actually kills and we are like fools, we just follow.. upgrade, more upgrade,more more upgrade, more more more upgrade and the $$$$ of the vendors go up, up, up, up, up ,up...... but can we stop the trend? I don't know as I am one of them!

    Yappy

  14. #114
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    3,530

    Default

    hi guys got something which someone told me long time ago just to share ...

    "digital makes u a good photographer but not a pro photographer..."

    i been thinking abt this guess there is some real meaning hidden withing this simple words ... so its up to u what u want to be at the end of the day

  15. #115
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Why I DO NOT want a DSLR? Good question!!!

    My reasons are as follows :-
    1) Lifespan of DSLR is damn short..
    2) Too much electronics...
    3) Too much gimmick...
    4) Too much hype....
    5) Value drop like hell after a new model came out...

    Anyway, I dun even bother a 2nd look at DSLR as I am still very much a happy user of Leica M6.

  16. #116

    Default

    muz change every few years...not like film one....15 years liaos still same cam....

    and very bulky..

    ahah

  17. #117
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    350D, E300 and *istDs are very small

  18. #118
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    north
    Posts
    1,310

    Default

    recently downloaded a folder of pictures into my PC and the stupid PC just save it over a previous folder of photos of the same name( stupid owner never rename the file) at least should ahve prompt me. luckily got backup in another PC. bad thing about DSLR is deprecaition. me bought a s2 about 1.5 years ago now worth less than half the price i paid for. better to put money in lens os value stays. for camera jsut bought one and use until it dies. ugrade will flush money down the drain.

  19. #119

    Default

    I have a prosumer for the last couple of months. Already having trouble trying to organise the filing of the images ....but I guess I have the same problem using film.

    And the reason for not having a DSLR? CA$H (or lack of it)

  20. #120

    Default

    Because I cannot make silver images with any digital cameras. Perhaps I might want to make huge digital negatives for the purpose of contact printing. But at the present moment, digital cameras cannot do silver prints. Although inkjet black & white prints are now quite good, they are still not silver.

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 4567811 ... 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
  •