> For many serious photographers the D60 does belong into this 
> catagorie, too. They have switched despite this shortcomings but 
> now find a real good solution in the 1Ds with full-frame sensor, 
> rugged body, fast AF, (almost?) film equaling resolution, film 
> surpassing cleanness, etc. Therefore, it is a valid point for them 
> to say that the D60 was not the real solution they've been 
> looking for.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. They were perfectly
satisfied with the D60 as long as it was the best. But now the 1Ds
was born, which is the new "best". Suddenly the shortcomings of
the D60 have started to show.
People are ready to accept some shortcomings as long as they
think "Oh well, what can I do? This is as well as it gets". But 
when a new camera appears that doesn't have these shortcomings 
any more, the "as good as it gets" part is not valid any more, so the 
"older" camera starts looking like a toy.


>> It's a psychological thing. The EOS 650 was an extraordinary
>> camera at the time of its release, and it would take today exactly
>> the same pictures that it took fifteen years ago. However, it now
>> looks like a toy compared with the EOS 1, 3, or even 30.

> I haven't updated to the 1v and never will. I am perfectly fine with the
1n.
> Yes, the 1v has some features I would like but being reasonable it's not
> worth the additional investment. So I stay with what I have and what
serves
> me well.

Of course there's no reason for you to upgrade as long as your
1N performs well. But if you didn't have the 1N and you were to buy now a 
camera, maybe you would go for the 1V. I know I would. I can't be sure 
about you, but I certainly would think "Well, the 1N may be a fine camera,
but it sure is an older design, so I'd better choose the 1V. I may not need
the 45 AF points and the 10 fps motordrive, but at least it's newer".


>> The
>> EOS 5 was a superb camera when it was released in 1992, and
>> it still is exactly as good as it was back then. However, who would
>> buy now a Canon camera without E-TTL and without even a real
>> battery pack?

> I would. I dumped the 5 for other reasons like rediculas power-drain. This
> was a real short-comings and warranted an update to a better body.

Oh, and there's the badly designed command dial as well. But I 
didn't try to enumerate all its deficiencies. I think you got the idea
anyway.


> Don't tell me. My wife wants me to replace my Mazda 323 with a big BMW or
> Jag. And a red Dodge Viper with yellow aluminum wheels sure would look
hot.

This is exactly the same discussion as with your 1N. As long as you car
is OK, there's no need to change it. But if you didn't have any car and
wanted to buy one, what would you choose? You'd choose a Mazda,
but what kind - a new one or an old one?


> It always depends on what you want or/and what you need. I don't think a
> person who uses a film-based P&S camera will update whenever the
resolution
> increases by another 2 Mpixels as 5Mpixels give them more then they need.
> And after 5-8 zooms come out, higher sensitivity with still high SNR are
> available, etc. there really isn't much to desire to update to the latest
> model. Similar claims can be made for professional cameras.

We'll see. Maybe you're right. However, I'm not very convinced. Practice has
proven otherwise, and I'm not talking only about computers. This applies
to everything that depends on technique: TVs, CDs, cars, phones, everything.

Even light bulbs. People always want the newest and the best products, 
even if in most cases they don't really need them.

Let's take for example the phone. A phone does exactly what it did 100 years
ago. There's no way you could make a phone work better (you can already
hear perfectly the other person's voice; you can't get any better than
that).
Besides, it is usually a reliable device, that could last for decades unless
abused. There would be absolutely no need for anybody to change his/her
phone, as long as the dial (or buttons) and the reciever and the microphone 
work. (And they could work perfectly for years and years). However, new 
phone devices appear every day, with all kinds of buttons, functions, 
memories, etc. etc. And they sell! People actually buy phones with more 
functions and with more melodies, although their existing devices work
properly, 
and although they won't ever need a phone with 30 different melodies.
It's all psychology. This is not caused by advertising. This desire of
having
always the newst and best product(s) is already in the human nature, 
advertising just takes advantage it.

And you know what? I don't like it. I'm the kind of person who would prefere
to choose one product and stick with it, rather than changing it whenever an
upgrade is available. I hate this phenomenon, but I can't deny it. It's
real,
and it's exactly what causes progress in the first place.


*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to