The changing demographic of DSLR ownership

[K1W1]

I was thinking earlier today (in itself a dangerous thing to do) about the changing demographic of DSLR ownership.

Remember when the D50 was introduced?
There were howls of protest from DSLR owners - No rule of thirds grid overlay in the viewfinder, no top lit LCD, God forbid - SD cards! All of these things were about to bring the end of photography just one step closer.
Forums ran hot for months with people posting about how could they survive without the overlay, how could they take photos at night without the illuminated LCD and how do you use those "tiny" SD cards with American sized fingers? There were tips on mounting LED lights to neck straps and somebody even worked out how to etch a rule of thirds overlay on the mirror from memory. People with large clumsy fingers accused Nikon of an unAmerican plot to force everybody to diet.

Then the D40 (and x) were introduced.
No top LCD at all. No rule of thirds overlay and still SD cards - and no howls of protest.
I can't remember reading a single post anywhere on the Internet from a D40 owner looking for a rule of thirds overlay. I can't remember a single post begging Nikon to re engineer the D40 to accept CF cards and I don't recall many posts bemoaning the missing top LCD.

I think the D40 introduction showed that people buying lower end DSLR's are generally coming up from the P&S end and are not Pro users downgrading so those buyers largely don't know or care what they are missing out on, they are more interested in what they have and how well it works for them.

Nikon are about to introduce at least one new body that, depending on which rumour you subscribe to will be a D40x or D80 replacement so I'm wondering what new features will be there and what will be missing and what the forums will be talking about. Will the older "pros" be screaming or will the newer "upgraders" be deliriously happy?

Now that Canon have changed the XT from CF to SD I must view some Canon forums, there should be fun reading there - maybe Canon forums will be discussing what Nikon ones were three years ago.

[Rooz]

its an interesting topic cos it used to be all happenign quite slowly and then all of a sudden the d40 came out and changed the rules very very quickly imo.

the SD vs CF thing, yepp, the canon forums here are already complaining that they hope this isn;t the way memory is going. i am the opposite. when the d300 said CF i was dissappointed cos i much prefer SD. (my built in laptop card reader doesn;t even support CF). now that canons xsi is SD along with the d40, i think its the beginning of the end for CF. mind you its gonna take many many years and TBH i don;t care that much. memory is quite cheap these days and is only gonna get cheaper. its certianly not a deal breaker whichever memory gets it.

the top LCD has now been clearly reserved for mid-top end slr's which have the size/ weight to support this. and not to mention the more serious user who tends to want that top panel. in saying that, alot of the newer gen users have never had the top panel so don;t know what they're missing and dont; care either way. i couldn;t live without it. to me it's invaluable.

the new nikon body, if its the d40 replacement, will be specced slightly below the xsi and be cheaper. the d80 replacement will be specced slightly above and be a bit more expensive, better built, better AF system and metering and be larger, just the way it has been for a while now. i think the d40x and XT are probably gone now ??

the new "must have" is the 3inch screen and LV. any new body without the 3inch screen is imo, already falling behind. and any screen that is not the new hi res version is behind again. the fact that the d300 has the hi res screen is a massive trump card. anyone that has seen it will understand exactly how this feature made itself a benchmark and indispendable the minute it hit the market. canon would be kicking themselves cos they got caught with their pants down on this one. for SURE the 6d will have it.

can;t wait to see who will get LV right and give us a flip screen. my bet is its gonna be olympus filtering it down from the E3. going forward, every dslr from 2010 onwards will have a flip screen and LV. take that to the bank.

its quite an exciting time actually...even for "non gear heads." :)

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

I bet a DSLR is a fashion object for 99% of the worlds affluent population. Much the same way 99% of all 4 wheel drives (SUV's) never see a dirt road.

If it's not for fashion then I bet the rest of the 99% want less compromises with their photos than the P&S's particularly with regard to kiddie photos but how many are really going to slog through the learning process.

As I saw someone post recently I bet Nikon underestimated the number of people who want to buy a 2 kilo, $2,000 fully automatic camera.

On the upside the emerging mass market is only going to drive down the price and drive up the quality of this wonderful money pit of a hobby for you fellas that can truly use the technology.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[Rooz]

On the upside the emerging mass market is only going to drive down the price and drive up the quality of this wonderful money pit of a hobby for you fellas that can truly use the technology.

Just my 2 cents worth.

i agree completely. its already happening. we can thank sony and olympus in particualr for that imo.

mind you, i doubt the hi spec lens' will be coming down in price anytime soon. and no, $50 will nto help me much DP. :p

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Darned I knew trying to get you to toss in the blinded insects would be a deal breaker. Curse my greed.

[XaiLo]

The D40 is an excellent alternative to a superzoom especially if picture quality is a concern. 3" screen,LV, and flip screen would definately be appreciated.

[mugsisme]

What sold me on the D40 was the lack of shutter lag. As a mom, I was sick and tired of taking pictures that STUNK because my DD moved between the time I pushed the shutter release and the camera took the picture. It drove me batty. The D40 was affordable, and no way was I going to get into photography. No way was I going to buy any more lenses. Of course, once I got it and feel in love, I needed a drop more zoom. then I needed a faster lens, a flash, and then even more zoom. Now, truthfully, I am finding 3 af points limiting, but I just can't justify a new body after less than a year!

BTW, there is a rumor on DPreview about the D60 to replace the D40. Basically all they added was a sensor cleaner and upped the MP to 10.

Rooz, what is so great about the top LCD screen that you can not live without?

[VTEC_EATER]

Im still not seeing "live view" as a beginner must have.

I know the xsi comes with it, but when you look at the specs of that camera vs. the 40D, it would be foolish to choose the 40D unless you absolutely need 6.5 fps shooting.

I think the gaps between intro and pro are getting quickly narrowed, and can eventually cause self-competition in the line-ups. TheD40 was nice because it was cheap, and was very user friendly. You could ease into the world of DSLR's and always knew that if you wanted more, you could easily upgrade to the next step up.

Now, all these new features are adding cost to the intro DSLR, and body only they are running $800. The D40 could be had for $599 with the kit lens at its introduction.

If anything, this is looking like a step in the wrong direction to me.

Im sure many will disagree to me and say that all these features that are in D300 and D3 are required on an intro DSLR. They certainly are not required. No need for the new CAM3500 system with 51 focus points. The D50 and D70/D70s had a whopping 5 focus points and worked great. No need for all the custom settings, and programmable buttons, and user definable custom options.

Just a basic DSLR that meets a price point, and offers great quality right out of the box. Thats all an intro DSLR really needs to be. But I'm sure that wont be happening now that Canon ups the playing field and basically makes a Mini-40D for $400 cheaper than its bigger (lower resolution) brother.

Who knows. Im happy with the D300. Im just looking for some new prime lenses. This is a place where Nikon is sorely falling behind.

[erichlund]

Don't just blame Canon for doing the semi-pro camera killer. The D-70 was a D100 killer. The D-80 would have been a D200 killer, except that the D200 was so strong on pro feature set that it couldn't touch it. The D200/300 body format is what sets those cameras apart. The D40/D80 image quality is basically as good (as the D200, the D300 is a whole other story), with advantages in high ISO.

Each time a new camera comes out, it has features inherited from its bigger brothers, and newer, better sensors. This is just the nature of evolving technology.

[XaiLo]

There's always going to be change and progression, along with different needs. I've contended that the D40 was excellent option over a P&S for along time now. Considering the cost of both a Canon S2 & S3, the D40 plus an 18-200mm seems like a great deal in reflection.

I was all set to move on to a D200 but what I really needed at the time was to replace the S3. The D40 came out and I felt Nikon would release a new body latter in the year (which they did) :)

There's also going to be a gap between the novice and artisan no matter what the tools are and as technology molds the next generation of imaging the cycle will just continue. No doubt manurfactuers will keep developing reasons for to want to pay more.

There's a war brewing over the entry level user why? because there are more of them and larger profit margins to be had. Will all of these new entrants go on to be pros, semi-pro hardly. Digital may have changed the landscape but taking pictures is work and taking good pictures is more work, and taking consistantly great pictures is mastery a level which very few will do what is required to get there. :(

[Fiasco]

I would love to have a rule-of-thirds overlay in my D80 viewfinder.

[Rooz]

Rooz, what is so great about the top LCD screen that you can not live without?

leah, its a personal preference. i find it easier to glance at the top lcd panel to adjust my settings and get all the info i need. i prefer it to the back lcd. i also like it cos its unobtrusive, that back lcd is bright as hell to have on just for shooting.

i actually tried displaying all the shooting info on the back lcd panel of the d300, (i never had that option on the d80), just to see what it was like in practice, but i didn;t really like it that way. its just a personal preference.

vtec, i agree about the primes. well, in particular the 85/ 1.8 really. the 50/ 1.8 is fast enuf for me. but the 85 is a bit slower, (mind you its still faster than my sigma 18-50). the 85 is just a sitter for af-s and VR.

imo, the launch of the 2 new 2.8 lens' and the d3 and d300 which have been stellar performers, plus the new pro telephoto lens', plus the new tilt shift lens and what looks to be a awesome macro 60mm lens, i can;t help but get the feeling that the "prime" issue will be sorted out just around the corner. maybe photokina which i think is this year ??

think about it...some holes are getting filled here almost like they have a checklist from people who complained about the nikon system and are slowly ticking the boxes.

update your fast lens' already ! check
nikon, get your ISO performance sorted ! check
give me some TS options cos i want the control ! check
give me full frame goddamit ! check
i want better prime options ! watch this space.

[Rooz]

I would love to have a rule-of-thirds overlay in my D80 viewfinder.

if you are referring to the grid overlay in the VF, the d80 does have it. cant remember now what menu its under, but its there somewhere.

[VTEC_EATER]

leah, its a personal preference. i find it easier to glance at the top lcd panel to adjust my settings and get all the info i need. i prefer it to the back lcd. i also like it cos its unobtrusive, that back lcd is bright as hell to have on just for shooting.

Agreed. Its just a convenience factor. Just like all those extra buttons on the back of the D300 vs. the D40. It just puts the controls right at your fingertips without having to dig through the menu system.


vtec, i agree about the primes. well, in particular the 85/ 1.8 really. the 50/ 1.8 is fast enuf for me. but the 85 is a bit slower, (mind you its still faster than my sigma 18-50). the 85 is just a sitter for af-s and VR.

I have not tried the 85mm primes, but c'mon no 35/1.4 with autofocus? How hard is it to add autofocus to this already existing manual focus lens? It just doesnt make sense in my mind. And why do we need another 3.5-5.6 zoom lens in the 18-70 range? That makes 5 in that focal range, all introduced within the last 4 years (to the day even... thats scary). Seriously Nikon, STOP!!!! This is getting ridiculous!


imo, the launch of the 2 new 2.8 lens' and the d3 and d300 which have been stellar performers, plus the new pro telephoto lens', plus the new tilt shift lens and what looks to be a awesome macro 60mm lens, i can;t help but get the feeling that the "prime" issue will be sorted out just around the corner. maybe photokina which i think is this year ??

I have not tried the current 60mm Micro, was there anything really wrong with it? Did it need nano-crystal coatings? AF-S yay!

[Screenclutter]

I think the gaps between intro and pro are getting quickly narrowed, and can eventually cause self-competition in the line-ups.

It's the purchase of lenses that will separate the intro and the pro. You are right in that there will be self-competition in the lower end lenses segment.





Im just looking for some new prime lenses. This is a place where Nikon is sorely falling behind.

Will Nikon make AF-S versions of their current primes, or will they develop completely new AF-S primes? Of course, all the D40 owners want all the current primes re-released as AF-S. If I were Nikon though, I'd be looking at developing an AF-S 50mm f/1.2 or f/1.0 lens rather than updating the f/1.4 or f/1.8 lens.

[Fiasco]

if you are referring to the grid overlay in the VF, the d80 does have it. cant remember now what menu its under, but its there somewhere.

I found the grid overlay, thanks. However I wish it divided the image into thirds, and not fourths as it doesn't really give a "rule-of-thirds" guide when divided into fourths.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

VTEC I think Nikon have been very clever making 5 short zoom variations if we consider how many lenses od each size they must sell.

If we accept a statement I read from Nikon somewhere that the initial kit lens is all that will be bought by most customers.

I'd further guess that most customers account for like 99% of Nikon's sales. Photography buffs are probably only 1% of the customer base.

Then 99% of the perceived market can now choose from 5 different options to get just the system they want at a price they want. This is a bit like Sony having a few options in every entry level category DSLR, P&S, Video, DVD player, sterios etc (give the mass market choice to maximize sales).

The remaining market base (the much smaller professional/enhusiast base) can still choose from some great lenses, just not as big a range as they might like.

Will Nikon have a mass market customer base though with what is being said in other threads about the new Canon and how it compares to the D60 and D80. I still want to buy my Nikon D80/D200/D300 but you sure make me nervous with all this pessimistic pro Canon entry level stuff.

[Rooz]

I still want to buy my Nikon D80/D200/D300 but you sure make me nervous with all this pessimistic pro Canon entry level stuff.

if your gonna buy a d300 then its a no brainer, no competition. but if you're looking at a d80...well...i dunno, the xsi looks very sharp.

[tcadwall]

I wish it divided the image into thirds, and not fourths Fiasco, were you drunk when you posted that, or is there something wrong with your camera? There should be 2 vertical lines, and 2 horizontal lines. That is the rule of thirds.

As far as the AF-S primes, I am thinking that the max aperture might have something to do with a design challenge as well. I am really not sure how large the internal focus motor is, but I would think that with an f/1.4 or f/1.8 lens, it might actually get in the way of the image circle.

Of course, if they made a new AF-S f/1.8 that was larger diameter, that would be a lot more glass surface area and might bump the price up even MORE than the motor and its complexity by itself.

[VTEC_EATER]

If it is a question of Barrel size, take a look at the 70-200 VR vs. the 80-200 AF-D. Much narrower barrel on the 70-200, and I think the lenses are equally as long. Eh, maybe the 70-200 is an inch longer.

I think it can be done, but it may take a fatter lens body to do it. Maybe even larger optics. Personally, I'm all for it. I think my 50mm is really wimpy looking, especially on the D300 with the battery grip. I want something meaty, like the 85/1.4. Big 77mm filter size, fat body that actually fills your hand, some nice girth to it, ya know?

But I'm sure it would be problems for the D40/D60 crowd, who may be looking for something a little smaller, lighter weight, and more proportional to the camera body.

[tcadwall]

I want something meaty, like the 85/1.4. Big 77mm filter size, fat body that actually fills your hand, some nice girth to it, ya know?

But I'm sure it would be problems for the D40/D60 crowd, who may be looking for something a little smaller, lighter weight, and more proportional to the camera body.

LOL! - I think the 50mm f/1.8 looks scrawny on my D70s... On a D200 / D300 it must look like a complete JOKE!

The point is, that you don't need the AF-s on your D300 anyway, and the target crowd that would REALLY benefit from that feature is also the crowd that might find it cost prohibitive if it did require a larger barrel...

The reason the 50 is cheap is not because it is not good, it is because the design of the normal lens is the simplest design, and the size and simplicity make it very affordable.

- btw you are not comparing apples to oranges to compare the 70-200 and 80-200. It obviously is a much wider barrel for both of them than the existing 50mm

Heck, I am just guessing with this whole theory anyway... It could be the length as well

[erichlund]

I wish it divided the image into thirds, and not fourths

Fiasco, were you drunk when you posted that, or is there something wrong with your camera? There should be 2 vertical lines, and 2 horizontal lines. That is the rule of thirds.


I agree. However, if you look closely at the Nikon grid overlay, there are three horizontal and three vertical lines, though, IIRC (not at home or with camera at moment), the center lines do not run into the center of the image. So the center box, where the center-weighted circle is, is free of grid lines. Overall, it is divided into fourths both horizontally and vertically.

In some ways, I'm glad. One should not be slavish to the rule of thirds, and placing the gridlines exactly on rule of thirds proportions might lead some photographers to do so. This way, even trying to be exactly on rule of thirds is still an estimation. The gridlines are very useful for leveling the camera, which I believe is their intended purpose.

[tcadwall]

Well.

Ok, I was wrong - kinda - Looking through my viewfinder there indeed are 3 "lines" the center lines are not part of the rule of thirds really, they are just a center. I am quite sure that the other two lines are the reference lines for the rule of thirds... "What?" you ask... "The spaces look like fourths." Well, I believe that your viewfinder is not 100% and that is likely why the top / bottom / edge portions give the impression that they are less than 1/3. So what I am saying is ignore the center lines. Base your composure on the other lines for the rule of thirds


---- Wrong again ----

I just took, loaded, and put a grid of over a test shot.... You are all correct. It indeed is NOT by the rule of thirds!

LOL - I am going to hide.

[VTEC_EATER]

LOL! - I think the 50mm f/1.8 looks scrawny on my D70s... On a D200 / D300 it must look like a complete JOKE!

It really is goofy looking. Kinda of like the camera has a nipple.


The point is, that you don't need the AF-s on your D300 anyway, and the target crowd that would REALLY benefit from that feature is also the crowd that might find it cost prohibitive if it did require a larger barrel...

Well of course every DSLR Nikon has made, with the exception of the D40/D60, has the focus motor but remember that screw driven lenses are louder and typically slower to focus than their AF-S counterparts. Not to mention you have no easy manual focus override. Instead you have to flip the switch on the camera to "M" and then adjust focus if need be. Its a pain in the ass, but not not the end of the world, I suppose.



- btw you are not comparing apples to oranges to compare the 70-200 and 80-200. It obviously is a much wider barrel for both of them than the existing 50mm

I was just comparing the two zoom lenses and their barrel size relative to each other. The VR is narrower than the AF-D, but the AF-D is 1 inch shorter. I do not know exactly why. I know the 50 is about as small of a lens you can get, and I'm sure it would have to increase in size a bit to incorporate the AF-S motor, but that should be pretty easy. As I mentioned before, I would like it to be a little larger in size, but some may not.

[tcadwall]

-- 3rd look ---
I figured as a way to make ammends for my completely wrong shot at Fiasco (Sorry by the way), I would post what I found...

Here is a shot I just took here in my office.

The 4x6 picture is very close to right along the hash-marks of the grid in the viewfinder. The viewfinder grid is super-imposed in red... The actual rule of thirds grid is depicted in black.

http://www.inventorypeople.com/img/DSC_3565.jpg

[rawpaw18]

Good looking crew Tracey, are they aware of dad's problem with
the rule of thirds?:D

[tcadwall]

You don't even want to know what I was shooting with back then... I think it was a 35mm Pentax P&S.... It actually did pretty well considering the price.

This picture reminds me of the cobler's son having no shoes. I only have ONE recent photo at my desk! I have been here too long. That picture was new when I put it up... That dog died 4 1/2 years ago and was the reason we were taking the picture. He had cancer. My daughter is a senior in high-school right now. The tree behind us has been removed, and the 13" sapling that I replaced it with is about 12' tall now, etc.