Camera Gear Info That Doesn't Suck?? Help me brainstorm!

Home Photography Forums General Photo Chit Chat Camera Gear Info That Doesn't Suck?? Help me brainstorm!

This topic contains 9 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Rob Wood (Admin) 5 years, 8 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #94074

    You probably noticed that we don't do a lot of gear reviews here.

    There's one main reason for this.

    All of the gear information on the internet has either been done to death on other sites, or just plain sucks – ie. it's boring.

    If you had infinite budget and a huge team of coders, hackers, videographers and writers, what would you build on a website to do with camera gear?

  • #94076

    Stewart
    Participant

    A basic library archive something along the lines of Camerapedia with a comment section on each page so folks can find out pros and cons from each other
    …. also maybe a script that sends me a carton of Jack Daniels and coke everytime someone opens each page, just because….

  • #94148

    tom dinning
    Blocked

    I'll have some of that @redman.
    All gear purchases are based on price so just a current list of cheapest sites will do.

  • #94215

    Richard Wood
    Participant

    One thing that may be useful is info on model numbering system vs. market segment for each major camera manufacturer…. to differentiate between consumer, prosumer and pro markets.

  • #94240

    Ehpem
    Participant

    As a dedicated user of vintage glass (read, small budget), a section dedicated to adapting old lenses to newer cameras, which ones will work on which bodies, which ones are worth the effort (or more to the point, not worth it). There are many uses where a good quality old manual lens is just the thing for the job (video, timelapse, some macro situations, …) so pointers in that area too. What to be aware of in terms of lens condition and other bummers for the unwary.

    And, my preference for those clicking on this page would be good quality single malt scotch….

  • #94325

    A few decent ideas here.

    But @tomdinning‘s suggestion really clarifies it. It is true that the only difference, after you know what you want, is price.

    How about this:

    The tech specs of a piece of gear along with its price on the major trustworthy sites WITH a little tool that asks for you email and asks you to input a price. When one of the sites has your piece of gear at or below the price you want to pay, you get an email notification telling you that it's available with a link.

    Thoughts?

    @camerasinger – I don't really understand you suggestion – can you clarify?

    @ehpem – I am not a big old glass user. Realistically how many old models of lens remain useful? Would you say it's a few hundred or a few thousand? (I am just trying to get a feel for whether your idea could be done manually by a researcher or would require actually being built by a coder and using a database)

  • #94327

    Richard Wood
    Participant

    for example Canon offers DSLRs with the following designations: 600D, 60D, 6D both Nikon and Olympus do something similar… is there a systemic method to these numbering systems… for example does the 600D or the 6D represent the more expensive pro model?

  • #94329

    Ehpem
    Participant

    @admin – you did say infinite budget 🙂 There are thousands of serviceable lens models but these need to be multiplied by the differences between each camera body. For instances, the following link takes you to list of 279 m42 screw mount lenses which may, or may not, work on the Canon 5D. The Canon 5Dii has a different mirror dimension, and some of the lenses on the 5D list can't be adapted to work on the 5Dii – the 5Dii mirror hangs up on the internal parts of some lenses which work fine on the 5D.

    5D – http://www.panoramaplanet.de/comp/
    5Dii – http://forum.mflenses.com/5d-mark-ii-lens-compatibility-chart-t15761,highlight,compatibility.html

    And then there is the 5Diii, about which I have not researched.

    There is some value in doing this though. One of the things that sold me on a full-frame sensor was that I had a bag or two of Spotmatic bodies and Takumar lenses that had been lying fallow for a decade. The ability to use those lenses (8 primes, or so) on a new digital body really brought the cost of the new camera down, in the short term. And they can be adapted with useable focus confirm, so they are upgraded in the process.

    Since then I have bought and been given Nikkor lenses as well. For instance, I have a nice pre-AI Nikkor-N Auto 24/2.8 that I got for about 80$ (I had to modify it to work) – no way I can afford a modern fast wide lens of similar quality. Likewise, I have adapted a Canon FL bellows unit with FD macro lens for high magnification macro. Getting high quality 5X macro is otherwise beyond my budget.

    Of course these lenses lack modern features and coatings, but they are still very good lenses. I have also bought some more modern lenses, even though I have vintage equivalents, because I appreciate autofocus in many settings. And I would love some longer IS lenses but just cannot afford them.

    And as I first mentioned – for video the manual lenses are usually preferred for the manual focus and the ability to change aperture without interrupting the video (on a 5Dii anyway) – and some of them for their fantastic bokeh. For timelapse, they are preferred because they eliminate aperture flicker introduced when automatic lenses reset the diaphragm with each shot, ever so slightly differently.

    I know that many people won't put old glass on their new bodies, and only a few that are willing/able to modify a lens if that is needed. So if you care about audience-views / dollar-spent then it is not going to be very economic undertaking, even it becomes the go to place for all lenses and all major bodies. But if you have an infinite budget, then economics are irrelevant!

  • #94385

    Stewart
    Participant

    The more 0's in the title the more consumerish it generally is. If there was a 6000D it would be ridiculously cheaper than a 6D, as the 6D would have a full size sensor and a metal chassis where as the 6000D would probably be a plastic disposable camera, if you get my meaning 🙂

  • #94536

    Wow, I never really looked into old lenses, @ehpem – sounds like I have quite a bit of learning to do!

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.