Cameras are now vastly too expensive

[FunkyGibbon]

Matt.. said:

.My 5dmk2 + 24-105L is ~1.8kg
.

I realise that you are probably only after full frame, but as a comparison:

G9 + 16-60mm = 1kg
G9 + 100-300mm = 1.25kg

For main hiking I use the peak design clip strapped to my shoulder strap. For more casual walks I use the peak design sling - it IMHO is ace.

[Rogue86]

Simpo Two said:

As the saying goes, 'Which is heavier, a pound of lead or a pound of feathers?'

Apparently a pound isn't a pound if you're already carrying 165

[Matt..]

Derek Smith said:

You can see the problem for camera makers. They don’t sell enough for significant investment, and if they don’t make regular significant improvements, they don’t sell many cameras.

I fully agree. The camera market barely exists so there’s little reason for innovation and the companies are drifting along as long as they possibly can to milk the remnants of a dying/dead market.

What should be happening is dramatic software advancements similar to what is seen in cameras on phones. The type of advancements there would have dramatic improvements in the consumer camera market. It’s expensive to invest in the R&D though and the market is minuscule so it’s clear the companies aren’t bothering.

[C n C]

Matt.. said:

What should be happening is dramatic software advancements similar to what is seen in cameras on phones. The type of advancements there would have dramatic improvements in the consumer camera market. It’s expensive to invest in the R&D though and the market is minuscule so it’s clear the companies aren’t bothering.

Genuine question as I'm interested but haven't really kept up with developments in phone cameras (I'm still using a 6+ year old iPhone 6), but what specific dramatic software advancements/features are you referring to?

[Tony1963]

C n C said:

Genuine question as I'm interested but haven't really kept up with developments in phone cameras (I'm still using a 6+ year old iPhone 6), but what specific dramatic software advancements/features are you referring to?

Exactly. I’ve a 12 Pro and while it’s in a completely different league as a camera(s) the 6 I had before was more than good enough.

To the OP: list the huge steps forward in SLR tech before digital. Outside of autofocus and film improvements, there wasn’t a lot really.

I think you want too much for too little outlay.

[sticks090460]

£2,500 for an R6, which you’ll probably keep for 5 years, doesn’t seem too much for the use you’ll get out of it. It absolutely blows a 5dii out the water in terms of ease of use, which it really should considering it’s only been out for a year. Plus, you can still use all your lenses with the EF/RF adapter.

[Simpo Two]

Matt.. said:

Derek Smith said:

You can see the problem for camera makers. They don’t sell enough for significant investment, and if they don’t make regular significant improvements, they don’t sell many cameras.

I fully agree. The camera market barely exists so there’s little reason for innovation and the companies are drifting along as long as they possibly can to milk the remnants of a dying/dead market.

Though the idea of 'upgrading' your camera every year or two is a modern phenomenon based on digital gubbins. 'Ooh must change it, almost a year old, obsolete now' etc. Landfill. Back in the days of film you'd keep a camera for a decade or more, but the camera companies managed to keep going.

[TheAlgarveCyclist]

Matt.. said:

500g is significant when the entire pack is 6-10kg inc consumables.
500g isn't a lot if you're wearing combat gear and other kit.

I should be able to save 500g on camera+lens as some brands have much smaller/lighter lenses. The physical size can also reduce quite significantly which makes packing it easier, and gives options for carrying it out of the pack (eg. Peak Design Clip).

My 5dmk2 + 24-105L is ~1.8kg
The Sony A7 III and 24-70 F4 is ~1.2kg

The main issue I have with the R6 is Canon have no small RF lenses. Sony have quite a few options for smaller and lighter lenses though, so they appeal.

My R5 and RF 70 - 200 2.8 L combo is a lot smaller and lighter than my 5DIV and EF 70 - 200 2.8 L was.

It's a big improvement.

The RF 70 - 200 F4 L is slightly smaller and lighter than the RF 24 - 105 L.

The RF 35 is a wonderful compact size on the R5.
With 24 - 240 it is a relatively lightweight one lens hiking combo.

The RF 100 - 500 is more compact than the EF 100 - 400.

One of the big advantages of mirrorless for me is the weight and size savings.

I have found my R5 and RF lenses to be a significant leap forward and worth the cost over my DSLR past.

The quality is excellent, workflow easier, faster, the kit lighter and smaller.

[ch37]

Recently bought 2 Nikon Z5s for £2200 in total, nothing from 2009 at £1100 would even begin to compare in terms of features and image quality and that's not even factoring in inflation.

The Z 35, 50 and 85mm 1.8 S lenses were nearer £500 than a grand each and laugh in the face of older lenses costing many more times than that.

Sony a7RIIs are a similar price (lightly used) and although a few years old now, are still absurdly capable. That they've not really depreciated in the past 3 or 4 years is proof of that. I had those before the Z5, bought used and resold a couple of years later and lost absolutely nothing Plenty of Sony glass under £1k that is exceptional.

The Sony a7III kinda breaks the argument that you need to spend £2.5k to get a camera that is comfortably better than a 5DMk2. I'm not sure what you're shooting but if low light, dynamic range or AF factor in at all then it is a significant leap forward from a 5DMk2.

Edited by ch37 on Monday 31st May 06:48

[xeny]

Matt.. said:

On the money side I don't believe I have much choice. I think the pricing is insane, but it's what it is.

Smartphone cameras enjoy insane economies of scale, and some of the capability is derived from software which is cheap to mass produce.

Camera manufacturers have more complicated hardware (which they're trying to reduce hence some of the reason for mirrorless) combined with vastly smaller and shrinking sales.

Look at the financial statements from the manufacturers - as far as I know, none are making vast profits, so either they're all terrible at manufacturing cost control, or the pricing is a result of R&D and manufacturing cost.

[gangzoom]

C n C said:

Genuine question as I'm interested but haven't really kept up with developments in phone cameras (I'm still using a 6+ year old iPhone 6), but what specific dramatic software advancements/features are you referring to?

Main improvements have been near real time image stacking to essentially eliminate the need for tripods at night, allow for back lit subjects to exposed without a fill in flash, and fake bokeh to allow for subject separation from the background despite having high f stop numbers on tiny lens/sensors.

Better reach is what I expect will improve on these phones over the next few years, again alot of improvements will be done via software rather than pure optics.

Edited by gangzoom on Monday 31st May 08:00

[ch37]

I think it is unfair to say cameras haven't advanced in the past decade based purely on landscape photography, low ISO tripod photography hasn't needed to change much since the film days, plenty of resolution and good glass with excellent corner performance and you're golden (many new mirrorless lenses excel at this).

The big advancements have benefited pretty much every other type of photography though and they've been substantial. Eye AF (and tracking AF generally), absolutely absurd dynamic range with ISO invariance, very usable high ISOs well into 5 figures and of course video capabilities that have gone from nothing to being capable of shooting Hollywood movies.

[DailyHack]

I use 5dmk4's for work but routinely use my 5dmk2 for the same work sometimes, it's always in my bag as backup.

Only thing I miss on the 5dmk2 is the 'high quality touch screen' on the back which the 5d4 has, nice to have not essential...but love my 5dmk2 with good lenses it's a killer package still, such a great sensor still has so much soul to it and very good raw files for posting.

Still amazes me how the shadows can be brought back from nearly nothing!!...was way ahead of the game back in 2008/9.

Stick with it and upgrade your glass maybe...or maybe you have a good collection of fast wide aperture primes (apologies if you have) but these can completely freshen up your perspective on a DSLR body with a extremely fast lens!

Remember the 5dmk2 was the first official digital camera to shoot President Obama's portrait in the white office, and also the last US series of 'House' was shot on a 5dmk2

Edited by DailyHack on Monday 31st May 22:49

[Simpo Two]

DailyHack said:

Remember the 5dmk2 was the first official digital camera to shoot President Obama's portrait in the white office

That's a strange claim to fame. Was it product placement by Canon or simply what the tog happened to have?

[ch37]

DailyHack said:

Remember the 5dmk2 was the first official digital camera to shoot President Obama's portrait in the white office, and also the last US series of 'House' was shot on a 5dmk2

He (Pete Souza) uses Sony a9IIs now after dabbling with Sony a7RIIs during the Obama administration, which at £4k a pop probably doesn't help this discussion move along

Edited by ch37 on Tuesday 1st June 05:55

[singlecoil]

Simpo Two said:

DailyHack said:

Remember the 5dmk2 was the first official digital camera to shoot President Obama's portrait in the white office

That's a strange claim to fame. Was it product placement by Canon or simply what the tog happened to have?

If you happen to see a bunch of press photographers you'll notice that a good proportion of them (sometimes most of them) are using Canon cameras.

[DailyHack]

ch37 said:

He (Pete Souza) uses Sony a9IIs now after dabbling with Sony a7RIIs during the Obama administration, which at £4k a pop probably doesn't help this discussion move along

Edited by ch37 on Tuesday 1st June 05:55

Ha I know, just thought it was 5dmk2 relevant, but yes doesn't help the expense bit

[ch37]

Fortuitous timing (despite the misleading headline) proving that factoring in inflation, the cost of cameras (and lenses, mostly) has not increased. In fact, with the introduction of cameras like the Nikon Z5 and Canon RP, the barrier to entry has never been lower for 'full-frame' gear...

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9545017500/why-h...

Edited by ch37 on Tuesday 1st June 08:26

[Mr Whippy]

I remember using the 5d.2 at work a lot, and then for filming using magic lantern too.

At the time I had a d70s for my own stuff.

They were both great but both very limited to the iso, shutter speed and aperture balance still.
Also the video on 5d.2 was great because of the sensor, but it was a hack job.
7d was nice too.


Then when my sister in law (photographer) bought the newer 5d.3 with its iso range... wow.
Suddenly you were loads more free’d up creatively on aperture or shutter speed setting.

Then they’ve moved on again on iso and software.

I owned an a77 for video at one point but it was a joke on the sensor noise.


So yeah the 5d.2 was a game changer, but unless you just shoot landscapes or stuff that doesn’t move, in good natural lighting, then the modern stuff opens up the entire world... video, poor light, action, everything is infinitely easier and intuitive and creatively unbound, in both stills and video.

I’d pay £3,000 for the latest greatest body.

Generally the canon bodies for the top kit usually hold value well enough to make the hobby/professional cost not that significant all in.

[Disastrous]

The thing is, if you shoot landscapes in daytime primarily, you don't really need that fancy a camera IMO. Glass is more important but you definitely don't need a lot of the features modern cameras have.

FWIW, I'd just stick with the 5D you already have as they still take excellent photos but if weight is really an issue, I recently 'downgraded' to an M50ii as a lightweight hiking camera. It's brilliant. IQ is great and on realising that for what I shoot I really don't need much more than aperture, shutter and ISO controls. Ok, it's APS-C but you can get a speed booster that makes it FF equivalent.

Does video and even just about manages 4K with a crop. £500. And I can use all my lenses. Cheap enough not to worry too much about a couple of spots of rain and I suspect I'll be selling my 5D soon enough.

Honestly, they ALL take good photos these days. Just get one with a form factor that suits and a price tag you like and don't worry about it.