How quickly I’ve become obsolete!

[Bob Hullinger]

You are always going to be relevant and never obsolete as long as you have the pride you so obviously have in your skill and your well earned photographic proficiency. The price of the camera, or paint brush, or guitar or any other artistic tool, that one uses has nothing to do with their ability or the intelligence they possess and ability to create.

I will be attacked by some here for remarking that every time a new Nikon is released it's like the circus came to town. The reality is that at the end of the show people who choose not to participate in the circus are still creating amazing images with classically great Nikon, and other brand, bodies and lenses including some that are older than the daughter you mentioned. Just keep releasing your shutter and ignore the show in the center ring.

Love of photography is the primary tool required to create interesting photographs. There may be a few people here who could tell what camera Steve Perry used for his best images if you put them all up in one gallery but I doubt it's possible. You only see the effort applied, not the camera brand or model, in great photographers work because the tools are mostly irrelevant in the hands of an expert.

A talented photographer can teach anyone to take great images with any properly working camera with any brand name or price range but buying the most expensive tech will never make an undedicated, unskilled photographer who doesn't put in the time a talented, or interesting, photographer. The price someone pays for their camera will never make their work interesting. The price of great photography is measured in time and effort and has nothing to do with the creator's credit limit or bank account balance.

I think the key is to just skip the distractions and let the product release fans have fun doing their thing while you continue to enjoy something that nobody can buy. Your enjoyment, pride and love of the art. Without your hands to hold it and brain to operate it, any camera ever made or marketed takes exactly the same image as a rock.

It works that way because cameras don't compose or expose images. Photographers do. You can't buy native intelligence, learned skills, dedication and hard-earned experience.

Enjoy reality.

You already possess all the tools you need to create great images for the rest of your life.

 

[Roy]

First the Sony A1, then the Nikon Z9, and now the Z8 - what’s a guy (or gal) to do in this tidal wave of mirrorless technology? Just two years ago, I considered myself reasonably current and capable with my two D850s, and a smattering of quality F glass. Now, I feel banished to a backwater bayou with the equivalent of two-string banjos. Somehow, I’ve managed to capture some decent images with my rusty old equipment, but I wonder about all that I’m missing by not spending my daughter’s inheritance on shiny new camera equipment. Surveying all of the recent posts on this forum, it’s hard to find many that aren’t about the new mirrorless cameras. Is there still room for meaningful discussions about “old” technology, or am I just whistling in the wind?

I'm using the Z9 and now a Z8 backup but I still love using my last D850 body - it still does some things better and is more fun ...

 

[Butlerkid]

to @Abinoone - and others ........ I'm feeling more "obsolete" with the passing of each 6 months! I used to admire images by very accomplished photographers - and rely on my skills to duplicate such imates. But technology can now handle the technicalaspects and enable fairly novice photographers to capture equally nice images.

It is obvious to me that it was the challenge to get those images that motivated me. Now that it is easier, I find my interest waning.

 

[lancej]

You are always going to be relevant and never obsolete as long as you have the pride you so obviously have in your skill and your well earned photographic proficiency. The price of the camera, or paint brush, or guitar or any other artistic tool, that one uses has nothing to do with their ability or the intelligence they possess and ability to create.

I will be attacked by some here for remarking that every time a new Nikon is released it's like the circus came to town. The reality is that at the end of the show people who choose not to participate in the circus are still creating amazing images with classically great Nikon, and other brand, bodies and lenses including some that older than the daughter you mentioned. Just keep releasing your shutter and ignore the show in the center ring.

Love of photography is the primary tool required to create interesting photographs. There may be a few people here who could tell what camera Steve Perry used for his best images if you put them all up in one gallery but I doubt it's possible. You only see the effort applied, not the camera brand or model, in great photographers work because the tools are mostly irrelevant in the hands of an expert.

A talented photographer can teach anyone to take great images with any properly working camera with any brand name or price range but buying the most expensive tech will never make an undedicated, unskilled photographer who doesn't put in the time a talented, or interesting, photographer. The price someone pays for their camera will never make their work interesting. The price of great photography is measured in time and effort and has nothing to do with the creator's credit limit or bank account balance.

I think the key is to just skip the distractions and let the product release fans have fun doing their thing while you continue to enjoy something that nobody can buy. Your enjoyment, pride and love of the art. Without your hands to hold it and brain to operate it, any camera ever made or marketed takes exactly the same image as a rock.

It works that way because cameras don't compose or expose images. Photographers do. You can't buy native intelligence, learned skills, dedication and hard-earned experience.

Enjoy reality.

You already possess all the tools you need to create great images for the rest of your life.

Well said Bob.

 

[Bob Hullinger]

A little dismissive don’t you think? I certainly wasn’t complaining about BCG, just noting that much of the recent discussion has been focused on mirrorless, and legitimately asking if there’s still room for meaningful dialogue on DSLRs. I’ll just continue “hanging out” here, thank you very much.

You were far too kind with your choice of the word "dismissive". Your self-control and composure is incredible.

 

[calcal]

First the Sony A1, then the Nikon Z9, and now the Z8 - what’s a guy (or gal) to do in this tidal wave of mirrorless technology? Just two years ago, I considered myself reasonably current and capable with my two D850s, and a smattering of quality F glass. Now, I feel banished to a backwater bayou with the equivalent of two-string banjos. Somehow, I’ve managed to capture some decent images with my rusty old equipment, but I wonder about all that I’m missing by not spending my daughter’s inheritance on shiny new camera equipment. Surveying all of the recent posts on this forum, it’s hard to find many that aren’t about the new mirrorless cameras. Is there still room for meaningful discussions about “old” technology, or am I just whistling in the wind?

I think it's fair to say that the D850 is the greatest DSLR of all time. Indeed a camera for the ages. Every time I start to thinking about parting with mine (I do have a Z8 on order), my head starts to hurt. In 2023, with more than a handful of excellent mirrorless cameras introduced in the years since the D850 was launched it is still objectively one of the greatest cameras you can buy today. You own TWO of them. As time goes on they will increasingly be behind with the latest advances in tech, but they will always be great cameras. A two-string banjo? Not so much. Maybe start a thread that tackles the erosion of photography skills as the camera takes on more and more of the work. We may all eventually evolve into great composers at best...that could be a fun discussion! (or not). In any case enjoy your D850's.

 

[eaj101]

It seems inevitable that the discussion on fora like this will be largely about gear. It's a tangible and concrete thing, many of us have some kind of technical/scientific background and answers can be relatively simple and straightforward. Compared to discussions of the photographic process itself, at least.

While I do enjoy the discussions of gear, I'm with you in wishing for more discussion that isn't equipment related. What kinds of subjects really draw you in, and why? What do you look for in selecting a subject, how do you think about finding the angle/perspective/framing you want? How much to you have an idea of what you want the final image to be like when you push the shutter? These kinds of issues are part of why I think of Galen Rowell's Mountain Light as one of the greatest nature photography instructional books ever done - it's what he does for a sample of his own images.

As to D850s... I still have my gripped D850 and I still use it at times, despite the Z9 and Z7. There are F-mount lenses that work well on it, and except for small, fast and erratic subjects (aka birds) I don't think the D850 is all that limited. With the steep drop in F-mount lens prices there are actually a few that I always lusted after that are getting into my price range. For that matter, I recently considered a D6 at a great price.

You're not obsolete yet!

 

[Doug Herr]

... cameras don't compose or expose images. Photographers do. You can't buy native intelligence, learned skills, dedication and hard-earned experience.

Absolutely true! And it's true whether the photographer is using a classic camera or a camera with current technology.

The reason many choose to use current technology is because the technology softens or eliminates barriers to expressing their vision. Not everyone encounters those barriers and for these people the new technology offers few benefits.

Photography has always been technology-driven. Where would we be without the technological innovations such as the pentaprism, the instant-return mirror, TTL light metering, AF, and digital imaging? Each of these innovations was hotly debated when it was new, with the same arguments on each side as we now see with mirrorless vs. DSLR.

"It's the photographer who makes the photograph, not the camera". This was said as an argument against TTL metering, against AF, against digital and in favor of continuing to use the previous technological step. Can we learn from photographic history? It seems not.

No question, there are people still using older technology to make fine photographs. New technology doesn't change that, but let's recognize that few of us want to step back to cameras before AF, before digital, before a built-in light meter. What newer technology does is erase impediments to accomplishing photos that were previously assumed - because the technology wasn't developed - to be nearly impossible. BIF with a manual-focus film SLR? Possible, yes. Difficult, very. AF and faster frame rates made BIF of predictable subjects like waterfowl possible. Warblers, kinglets? Same story, but erratic unpredictable subjects were still mostly beyond reach. Subject recognition is another of these technological steps: for those whose photographic goals and vision does not include erratic subjects this technology is meaningless. Others, whose photographs were stymied by technological limits embrace the capabilities of the new technology. I find that BIF of fast unpredictable subjects such as flycatchers and the Phainopepla are now reliably possible. Those who don't wish to photograph flycatchers in flight? They'll say Meh, and with justification for their particular use cases.

There are still people using rangefinder cameras. They make fine photos suitable for their own goals, but not for mine. Can you believe SLR vs. rangefinder was once as hotly debated as DSLR vs. mirrorless is now?

Whichever tool or brand we use there will always be technological limits, some of which we will never challenge, some of which block us from stretching our boundaries. Those who use and embrace rangefinder cameras are willing to put up with the numerous technological limitations of the type. For myself a rangefinder camera is nearly useless, and for myself the DSLR likewise has too many obstacles and limits. YMMV.

 

[O]

to @Abinoone - and others ........ I'm feeling more "obsolete" with the passing of each 6 months! I used to admire images by very accomplished photographers - and rely on my skills to duplicate such imates. But technology can now handle the technicalaspects and enable fairly novice photographers to capture equally nice images.

It is obvious to me that it was the challenge to get those images that motivated me. Now that it is easier, I find my interest waning.

I have to agree to a point, and its the way many of my friends and camera club members feel. Their interest and enthusiasm is also waning.
What was a challenge is now no longer as much, skill sets you need less, these new cameras do just about everything for you.

 

[O]

to @Abinoone - and others ........ I'm feeling more "obsolete" with the passing of each 6 months! I used to admire images by very accomplished photographers - and rely on my skills to duplicate such imates. But technology can now handle the technicalaspects and enable fairly novice photographers to capture equally nice images.

It is obvious to me that it was the challenge to get those images that motivated me. Now that it is easier, I find my interest waning.

So many people are just doing the same thing now...........

 

[O]

I think that gripe is too strong of a word…the question is about the lack of older body discussion and whether there was still a place for older technology gear. My answer to both is yes…amd the older DSLR gear will take just as good images as it always did…and if a user is fine with that then there is no pressing need to upgrade. But the reality is that technology has moved on and DSLRs are now not where any maker is spending any RfD money. They went mirrorless primarily because it is fewer mechanical parts so smaller bodies can be made…and not because mirrorless is inherently better. The only part of mirrorless that is actually tied to being mirrorless is the EVF…and while that is different from optical VF and some like one or the other better…the advantages of EVF of which there are many need to be considered to see if they make sense for a users style. Actual exposure preview, additional info displayed, live histogram, zooming if one goes to DX mode…all of those come from having the EVF instead of optical…and whether it’s worth it to a user…depends on the user.

Everything outside of the EVF that mirrorless brings is really unrelated to the lack of a mirror…it is just better/faster/more powerful tech as time marched along just like the D6 was better than the D5 was better than the D850, etc and one can make t(e same statement with different models from other brands. That other new tech arrived when it did and of if Nikon had introduced a D860 in 2020 it would have a lot of the other tech in the Zs…but the hardware and software changes just happened at the same time.

Me…the advantages of the EVF make the new hardware tech better and the new software just works seamlessly with the new hardware…so I’m glad I upgraded. What all that stuff does is make shooting more fun…and…gets more keepers on the card which is the real goal.

I think there are a lot of people with older gear, or have gear that's not on point, by standards compared to the current hi tech mirror less gear.

A) they cant afford to invest more into gear
B) they have no desire to re invest
C) there very happy with what there achieving with what they have.

Old news doesn't rank, it become niche.
I think there are some advancements in mirror less technology, but its not the end all.

Remember unless Sony cracked the egg and gave us mirror less the way they did the other two would still be giving us just bread and water.

 

[Patrick M]

having older gear can be beneficial. It can make us THINK more about the finer points of composition and light. Film was making a bit of a comeback. It's nice to show an image that people love and you can say you shot it with a 1936 Box Brownie !!

 

[Doug Herr]

having older gear can be beneficial. It can make us THINK more about the finer points of composition and light. Film was making a bit of a comeback. It's nice to show an image that people love and you can say you shot it with a 1936 Box Brownie !!

Older gear actually makes us think more about the mechanics of aperture, shutter speed and ISO. Composition and light are the same whether for new or for old equipment.

 

[O]

I take my old friend my D3X with a 50mm Ziess 1.4 and just enjoy honing my skill sets, I enjoy how simple it is to use and create something all by my self, i can pop on the amazing 70-200 FL and i have to pixel peep to tell if its the Z9 or D850.

For travel i use the DF small light i use a 50mm 1.4 or a 28-300 and a lightweight mono pod, love it i shoot full manual i slow right down look think compose enjoy.
Ironically i can do the same with the D850 or the Z9.
My favorite enjoyable cameras are D3X D4S, D6 D850, mirror less so far the Z9.

I am waiting of the Nikon low res power house low light king, has to be coming soon LOL.

I love my work horse lens the 24-70 2.8 G, and the speculator 70-200 FL. WOW, add the 200-500 and that's my favorite all round kit, for wide angle i like my 14-24 or 16mm fish eye.

If i cant get what i want using that then i have to look at what i am doing.

Only an opinion

 

[Turberticus]

I think there are a lot of people with older gear, or have gear that's not on point, by standards compared to the current hi tech mirror less gear.

A) they cant afford to invest more into gear
B) they have no desire to re invest
C) there very happy with what there achieving with what they have.

Old news doesn't rank, it become niche.
I think there are some advancements in mirror less technology, but its not the end all.

Remember unless Sony cracked the egg and gave us mirror less the way they did the other two would still be giving us just bread and water.

Agree with A, B and C. My wife and I both earn a comfortable wage but we have a young son to support who is our priority. I'm one of those with older gear; D7500 and 200-500. Sometimes I feel left behind when I see the many Z8/Z9 and 600 F/4 threads while I'm chugging away with my slow focusing mirror slapping setup. With that being said, I'm still finding ways to improve while simultaneously trying to take full advantage of the gear I have. I also feel fortunate I'm able to find the time to enjoy this amazing hobby despite having such a chaotic life. I've seen the ages of some members here, and that tells me I'll enjoy this hobby for many more years to come. Maybe I'll pickup a Z9 someday.... at Goodwill

 

[Whiskeyman]

Hi Abinone

Either you fly first class or your kids will Go ahead and spend your daughter's inheritance, at least some of it. Sounds like you have a good case of GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome). It is your life, enjoy it - especially if having the latest and greatest gives you joyi.

What my family is finding out is that it doesn't really matter what most of us plan to leave to our children after we die, unless we are one of the true, few, financial outliers in the world.

My parents planned to leave a lot to their children and grandchildren, but it is nearly all gone, having been spent on elder care and my parents' health issues at life's end-stage.

My in-laws also planned to leave their estate to their children and grandchildren. After my father-in-law died, my mother-in-law was easily separated from her savings. One of the biggest problems was that she often donated to charities that would sell her info to other charities. She couldn't say no to a heart-tugging message with a request for a donation. Some of the donations she thought were one-time ones ended up being recurring, often monthly. We've since discovered the issues and have taken over her finances by keeping her checkbook and cancelling all of her credit cards, save one, which now has a very small spending limit, and flags any purchase over a certain amount to contact my wife for confirmation of the transaction.

The bottom line? If you want to give something to your descendants, give it to them now, and also enjoy some of what you have. It's still true that you can't take it with you, but today the litany of those ready to take it before or after you go is ever-growing. If you don't think the latest gear is what you need or want, that's just fine. Not always buying the latest gear means you have more to spend on travel, which is often a bigger expense than gear ever will be!

 

[O]

What my family is finding out is that it doesn't really matter what most of us plan to leave to our children after we die, unless we are one of the true, few, financial outliers in the world.

My parents planned to leave a lot to their children and grandchildren, but it is nearly all gone, having been spent on elder care and my parents' health issues at life's end-stage.

My in-laws also planned to leave their estate to their children and grandchildren. After my father-in-law died, my mother-in-law was easily separated from her savings. One of the biggest problems was that she often donated to charities that would sell her info to other charities. She couldn't say no to a heart-tugging message with a request for a donation. Some of the donations she thought were one-time ones ended up being recurring, often monthly. We've since discovered the issues and have taken over her finances by keeping her checkbook and cancelling all of her credit cards, save one, which now has a very small spending limit, and flags any purchase over a certain amount to contact my wife for confirmation of the transaction.

The bottom line? If you want to give something to your descendents, give it to them now, and also enjoy some of what you have. It's still true that you can't take it with you, but today the litany of those ready to take it before or after you go is ever-growing. If you don't think the latest gear is what you need or want, that's just fine. Not always buying the latest gear means you have more to spend on travel, which is often a bigger expense than gear ever will be!

Correct, here the government, both sides, has further implemented the agenda to stop us leaving wealth to the next generation, they want you to use it to pay for health care and replace your pension with a reverse mortgage, on top of that there trying to upscale death tax. So yes go hard is the answer.

 

[O]

Agree with A, B and C. My wife and I both earn a comfortable wage but we have a young son to support who is our priority. I'm one of those with older gear; D7500 and 200-500. Sometimes I feel left behind when I see the many Z8/Z9 and 600 F/4 threads while I'm chugging away with my slow focusing mirror slapping setup. With that being said, I'm still finding ways to improve while simultaneously trying to take full advantage of the gear I have. I also feel fortunate I'm able to find the time to enjoy this amazing hobby despite having such a chaotic life. I've seen the ages of some members here, and that tells me I'll enjoy this hobby for many more years to come. Maybe I'll pickup a Z9 someday.... at Goodwill

Brilliant, you have one thing that has been slowly waning away for many people and that is you enjoy what your doing, and especially with what you have.
There is nothing wrong with what you have, discovering, learning, enjoying, pleasing your self 1st, 2nd, 3rd LOL is all that matters.

90% of what you achieve comes from you, not just the gear, i see in our club award winning photos cream the competition and the gear is as they say OLD.

Enjoying your self is paramount, loose that and your done for, myself, i am suffering, i am trying to get back on the horse to try and stay there, like so many others i know.

Never ever feel your left behind, a photographer is a photographer, the gear does not maketh the photographer, LOL

As my girlfriend says, its not the size of your gear that matters, its how well you use it that counts, she judges a photographer by the photos they make, how they connect, evoke emotion with in me.

There is a lot of amazing USED gear out there that was 5 star world class only a moment ago, along came mirror less and all of a sudden everything before it is now OLD and out of date, sorry, its not quite the case, things are just different, when you take a brilliant money shot enter it into a open competition, no one other than by reading the Metta data, can tell if its a D6, D850, Z7II, Z9, A1, R3, 600mm F4, 800mm F5.6, yet the meta data shocked everyone that its a D7100 on 300 2.8 VR II, with a 2xIII TC............

The best tool for any photography is light, combined with the right amount of time and speed.


Only an opinion

 

[O]

A good or great photograph is 90% behind the lens, 5% equipment, 5% software.

Absolutely correct, a complete beginner may need to rely on the camera 90% in the beginning..........less as they increase their skills.

Yet modern high tech cameras now seem to make it so that you need less skill sets than ever before, sadly.

We teach at the club on training days, that investing in your self pays back more than anything else.

One member is a graphic designer, he takes everything in raw with a D800, one lens, either the 16-35 or 24-70, and with his absolute wizardry makes a scene and creative photography that has you in ore............and he wins all sorts of competitions, with his skill sets and as long as he has a raw file he can make anything he wants, and perfectly may i say, amazing, almost living AI.

Another member shoots only JPEG fine, D850, 28-300 adjusts in the camera the contrast colour etc etc to suit the situation, photos are almost perfectly ready in camera, prints at local printing and stationary store like a King Ko equivalent, here its Big W which is like a Sears, and she actually sells most of her new work in A4 A3 size for under $250 unframed.

I can understand a full professional needing to be on point and be competitive, surprisingly when i look and listen to some of the pros i know and meet often, not all but many seem to stay with a lot of what they have that actually works and meets their needs, often they only upgrade if it practically warrants or tangible benefits in what they do, its not Oh Gosh i have to buy the next model all the time.

Many have embraced mirror less bodies, and a mix of glass DSLR and ML, A lot find video is the a critical challenge changing their lives. Especially with commercial work, some are graduating and some are not.

Interesting how things are changing.

Only an opinion

 

[Hermann]

You’re not a dinosaur.

There are times when it feels good to be a dinosaur.

Hermann

 

[O]

It seems inevitable that the discussion on fora like this will be largely about gear. It's a tangible and concrete thing, many of us have some kind of technical/scientific background and answers can be relatively simple and straightforward. Compared to discussions of the photographic process itself, at least.

While I do enjoy the discussions of gear, I'm with you in wishing for more discussion that isn't equipment related. What kinds of subjects really draw you in, and why? What do you look for in selecting a subject, how do you think about finding the angle/perspective/framing you want? How much to you have an idea of what you want the final image to be like when you push the shutter? These kinds of issues are part of why I think of Galen Rowell's Mountain Light as one of the greatest nature photography instructional books ever done - it's what he does for a sample of his own images.

As to D850s... I still have my gripped D850 and I still use it at times, despite the Z9 and Z7. There are F-mount lenses that work well on it, and except for small, fast and erratic subjects (aka birds) I don't think the D850 is all that limited. With the steep drop in F-mount lens prices there are actually a few that I always lusted after that are getting into my price range. For that matter, I recently considered a D6 at a great price.

You're not obsolete yet!

100% well said absolutely a D6 and some good DSLR glass holds its own.