In looking through the latest toy catalog aka the B H Digital
Photography Source Book, I had an ipiphany.
Several years ago, many of you will recall, I had extensively
studied a suitable replacement to the OM system. My conclusion
was that the N*kon F5 was the best choice for me. It suited my
shooting style, had the feature set that I desired and most
importantly, it felt right.
However, this was before I revived the darkroom.
Flash forward a couple of years. I've now gone through three
medium-format systems and am currently using 4x5. Meanwhile,
the OMs are still being used, albiet a whole lot less than they
were. My system is tired. It's been worked very hard through
the years and some of the componants, like flash equipment are
no longer reliable enough for shooting weddings. As a result, I
have ceased taking on any new clients with the exception of the
occasional portrait session. I will not do another wedding
until I have a new system. I've come to accept digital. Since
I need a new system anyway, it might as well be the best
possible digital system I can afford to get.
This drives the decision of what system? One that is immediatly
disqualified for me is C*non, due to the grip shape. I
literally cannot hold onto the camera for more than a couple of
minutes. The N*kon grip is shaped ever-so-slightly different
which does not aggrivate my wrist. That simplifies things a
little, as C*non makes very good stuff.
My only two serious choices right now would be the Olympus or
the Nikon. Every six months, these two companies will introduce
a new feature or body. The E-1 is superior in several areas
right now (self-cleaning, nicer color), but is so completely
lacking in several crucial spots.
1. Lack of 3rd Party support. This may change, but there are a
couple of excellent Tokina lenses that I wouldn't hesitate to
stuff on the front of my camera. Including an affordable , yet
world-class 300/2.8. The "4/3" standard isn't a standard until
multiple companies emprace it. The new R*bel doesn't. The new
P*ntax *ist doesn't. N*kon won't. S*gma doesn't... Oh, that's
right Kodak kinda does, but how many "standards" has Kodak
introduced and later dropped through the years?
2. Accessories and Lenses. It took years for Olympus to build up
the macro line with supurb lenses, flashes and multitudes of
accessories. At the pinnacle, they had one of the finest
wildlife outfits you could buy. But since this new system is
not backwardly compatible in anyway shape or form, they will
have to build up a whole new set of accessories. N*kon and
Canon never stopped advancing.
3. Sensor size. I believe that the smaller sensors are strictly
a case of manufacturing costs and current capabilities. A
smaller sensor has little advantage other than a minimal
decrease in lens size. Nikon's APS sized sensor is the smallest
I'd go.
4. Rental/loaner equipment. As a professional, I must use a
system in which I can get rental/loaner lenses and bodies when
necessary. We all know which systems that means.
5. Compatability with film-based cameras. I like the idea of
carrying a backup film camera for the odd occasion that the
digicam croaks or for B&W film.
6. Safety in Numbers. Nuf said.
Anyway, the point is, I had already figured out what my next
system was going to be long before I got distracted. The "film"
is different, but the rules are the same. I see no valid reason
to second guess it now.
When? I'm in no immediate hurry. Ain't got no money at the
moment and we're looking at moving somewhere. Once we land,
I'll worry about it then. Good thing too, because I'm excited
about 2004 and the revolutionary changes that will occur in the
DSLR world.
Why do I say that? I'm remembering when the AF craze took off.
C*non was in the mode of introducing a new model every 4-6
months. There were a few jewels that emerged during that time,
but they were essentially single-run cameras. Until two models
were introduced: Rebel and the EOS-1. The Rebel anchored the
bottom end and the EOS-1 became the true no-compromises
pro-level camera. In digital, none of the manufacturers have
achieved this point yet. N*kon is still futzing around and
hasn't introduced the full-framed digital F5. They are very
close, though, and when it happens, it'll probably be a 14MP
wonderbrick on steroids. They could also do the digital version
of the F100.
The EOS-1Ds costs something like $8000 today. In a year or so,
we should have this capability in the $2000 range. I'm not
going to invest in a system that will be obsolete by design in
two years.
AG
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|