>> Now where did I put that thing? It's down on the floor holding the door open!
Kenneth Waller ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 11:48 AM Subject: Re: What Would Make a DSLR "Obsolete"? > Well in 97/98 when I paid almost $1000 for my Sony Mavica with a little over > 300,000 pixel resolution, and the recording medium was 1 MB floppy, it was > pretty much the bees knees as far as consumer digital cameras go. > > Now where did I put that thing? > > Tom C. > > > > > >From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >To: Shel Belinkoff <pentax-discuss@pdml.net> > >Subject: Re: What Would Make a DSLR "Obsolete"? > >Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:40:49 -0700 > > > >Hello Shel, > > > >Yes, to some degree it is the techno-buffs talking. The DSLR you > >purchase today will continue to take pictures in the future as it is > >today. In some respects, you could consider film cameras outdated as > >new models were introduced. If you had a manual camera and auto > >exposure were introduced, some would want that feature and feel their > >old camera was outdated. Same holds true for AF. > > > >There are some who purchased a DSLR knowing it was a compromise for > >them and intending to upgrade as technology got to the point they > >wanted. For those, yes, older DSLRs become obsolete. > > > >The areas where some are wanting improvements are bigger, denser > >imaging chip, better AF, faster, bigger buffer, better TTL flash > >handling. Of those, somewhat knowing your style, only the imaging > >chip would actually have some material effect on you. Along with > >bigger chips, comes the need for more storage space and more computing > >horsepower. > > > >-- > >Best regards, > >Bruce > > > > > >Tuesday, August 23, 2005, 3:47:47 AM, you wrote: > > > >SB> As the time approaches for my purchasing a DSLR, the comments about > >these > >SB> cameras becoming obsolete keep running through my mind. As a user of > >older > >SB> film bodies, which don't become obsolete and which continue to make > >good > >SB> pictures and use a wide variety of lenses, it's hard to consider that > >in > >SB> six months or a year a new DSLR will have become "history." > > > >SB> It seems that, unless there's a camera malfunction, these new > >SB> techno-marvels should continue to make decent pics for years to come, > >yet I > >SB> keep hearing about how models just a few years old (or less) are dated > >and > >SB> need to be upgraded. Am I missing something? Is it just the > >techno-buffs > >SB> who are saying this - those who must have the latest and greatest, or > >are > >SB> there hidden issues, like software compatibility, lack of peripheral > >SB> equipment (such as a memory card type being discontinued), and things > >of > >SB> that sort? Maybe I've answered my own question. > > > >SB> What's the reality of getting 10 years of use from now current Pentax > >DSLR? > > > >SB> Shel > > > > > > > > > >
