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 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 25678912 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 255

Thread: Why do you NOT want a DSLR?

  1. #121
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    153

    Default

    digital photography is definitely not for people like me wiht low disposable income ,

    imagine d70 $1888 ley

  2. #122

    Default

    i want a DTLR if possible... dun i dun tink have le

  3. #123

    Default

    Price still the major issue for not getting DSLR.

  4. #124

    Default

    The short life cycles of models is a turn off.

  5. #125
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Witness
    i want a DTLR if possible... dun i dun tink have le
    What's a DTLR? I've heard of ZLR but TLR?? Are you talking about through lens viewfinder without mirror reflex? ie. Olympus E-10/ E-20 which use a prism

  6. #126
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firefox
    What's a DTLR? I've heard of ZLR but TLR?? Are you talking about through lens viewfinder without mirror reflex? ie. Olympus E-10/ E-20 which use a prism
    I think he mean DTLR = 'Digital Twin-lens-reflex'???

  7. #127
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX Boy
    I think he mean DTLR = 'Digital Twin-lens-reflex'???
    Oh... You mean like those Seagull's and Rollei's from the yesteryears?

  8. #128
    Senior Member glennyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,587

    Default

    biggest prob. is not the DSLR. its the lens !!!!!! the lens cost more den the body !!!!

  9. #129
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firefox
    Oh... You mean like those Seagull's and Rollei's from the yesteryears?
    Yes, those are the good old days (which I am not even born!)!

  10. #130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ckiang
    Assuming that price is not an issue, and what are the reasons which stop you from getting a DSLR?
    Every Tom, Dick & Harry carries one these days. Not cool at all.

  11. #131
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    1 Dalvey Road
    Posts
    474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jed
    Not sure I agree with most of that, and for the first bits, actually I believe all that actually is pro-digital argument, not pro-film. Assuming you store your digital pictures intelligently, your digital photos will never deteriorate. You get the same quality 5000 years down the road you get today, ceteris paribus. No matter how kid gloves you treat your film, it's going to break down over time and with exposure to the elements. Yes you don't have to keep worrying about storage standards, but at the same time, I consider this an over-exaggerated threat. Conversely, unlike with film, you don't have to worry about constantly buying a bigger house and a warehouse of storage products like dehumidifiers to contain your ever expanding collection of negs and trannies.

    As to slides having better highlight detail, you really should give negs a go. That will blow your mind (yes, that was tongue in cheek). Seriously though, that slides have better highlight detail than a digital camera is a very debatable topic.

    As, for that matter, is getting a better digital image scanning a slide than shooting with a DSLR.

    As for the rest, it's all a matter of opinion and you're perfectly entitled to yours. Long may it last.
    not replying to ur reply,
    but can stick to english.

    m not highly schooled,
    so latin out,
    know-know what u mean by ,"ceteris paribus" leh?

  12. #132
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    1 Dalvey Road
    Posts
    474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kahheng
    Every Tom, Dick & Harry carries one these days. Not cool at all.
    just kaypoh n went thru ur profile,
    wow!!!
    u make big money!!!
    toilet repaier eh.
    can call u shifu,
    need some money to finance this 'full-time job; of mine


  13. #133
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    1 Dalvey Road
    Posts
    474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by judeseah
    just kaypoh n went thru ur profile,
    wow!!!
    u make big money!!!
    toilet repaier eh.
    can call u shifu,
    need some money to finance this 'full-time job; of mine

    sorry full of typo,
    its raining, dark and i can't type to save my life.

    ps-this took me more than 30secs.

  14. #134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by judeseah
    sorry full of typo,
    its raining, dark and i can't type to save my life.

    ps-this took me more than 30secs.
    You're now on my ignore list

  15. #135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX Boy
    Yes, those are the good old days (which I am not even born!)!
    Heehee, not so yester-year lah Can still buy new Seagull and experience the joy of low-tech!

  16. #136
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    near the Equator
    Posts
    1,255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by judeseah
    not replying to ur reply,
    but can stick to english.

    m not highly schooled,
    so latin out,
    know-know what u mean by ,"ceteris paribus" leh?
    Ceteris Paribus=All other things staying constant
    We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities. - Oscar Wilde

  17. #137
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    716

    Default

    I'd like a DSLR that has:

    1) 35mm full size sensor.
    Except if the system is totally redesigned for DSLR use like 4/3 then it's better to just list the 35mm equivalent focal length (2x FoV factored in) on the lens since it'd not be used on 35mm cameras anyway.
    Larger photoreceptors are less receptive to noise issues and CMOS technology can offset the power consumption of the larger sensor.

    2) True 9MP to 10MP. That's to say 9 million red pixels, 9m blue & 9m green. Layered like the Foveon sensors and with lunminance information derived from all 3 channels.

    3) Good engine like the Digic II or Venus II LSI (which derives lunminance from multiple channels anyway)

    4) Fast bridge between DRAM and storage card.
    No point putting fast SDRAM inside if you're only going to use it at 4MB/s. A good integrated bridge that read/ writes to both SDRAM and CF/ SD card should obtain transfers between the 2 medias at speeds far faster than 10MB/s. Not to forget, a bridge capable of extremely high speed transfers to the media will not require much buffer. And the buffer can be made from faster SRAM instead.


    Edit: The closest camera to this ideal is the EOS 1Ds. Lacking only in that it's sensor isn't like the Foveon. Engine is good, buffer is fast and large and has a 35mm FF sensor. But the price for a 2nd hand piece is also very painful..
    Last edited by Firefox; 5th May 2005 at 03:05 PM.

  18. #138
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    2,196

    Default

    For me, it's mainly the price.

    $1.8k is considered very cheap for a DSLR (compared to just 2 years ago), but it's still very expensive considering that it's most likely a base model that would be superceded within 12 months. I remember saving up for my very first film SLR, and it cost me $650. That was hella lotta money then (10 years ago)! If I had a 1.8k budget, I would've gotten me a top-bracket SLR that could've lasted me for at least a decade! I know DSLRs can never be as cheap as fSLRs, but right now, the price jump is still very high.

    Crop/magnification factor results in the need for super-wide angle lenses just to get 24 or 28mm. And these lenses aren't cheap. (But yes, you get added zoom for the same reason). And the "Di" lenses make poor backward-compatibility when you have a 35mm film SLR, and hence, poor economic value.

    The next issue is the lack of dust management systems (except for Olympus). And this really, really, really bothers me.
    Sony Alpha system user. www.pbase.com/synapseman

  19. #139

    Smile

    DSLR/SLR will "stun/frighten" certain people, losing the natural factor.

  20. #140

    Default

    Sorry, totally off the topic....why can't I vote on polls? So sad

Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 25678912 ... 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
  •