For Those Thinking Drones are Expensive

[PatR]

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

news360.com

 

[Grumpy]

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

news360.com

Kinda like that S-100 camcopter that goes for $400,000.00.

 

[Mrgs1]

At least get a Telephoto lens!

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR Lens

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR Lens features Nikon F Mount, FX Format Compatible. Review Nikon 800mm Lens

www.bhphotovideo.com

 

[PatR]

There ya go! $2500 for the camera body, $16,300 for the telephoto, $8,000 for a 58mm and you’re good to go until the next model comes out 3 months after you bought.

 

[Fred Garvin]

Big aperture costs $$$$$.....nothing new here. The faster the glass, the more $$$$ leaves your pocket.

It takes a seriously talented Photographer to push that lens creatively beyond what a good 1.4 Prime or 2.8 zoomer will produce anyway.....hence the price....only a seriously talented Photographer will be willing to spend the funds. This lens will appeal to the Professional Portrait Photographer who is shooting the new Nikon Z’s.....but just who is that? The portrait togs at this level are shooting Hassy H6D-100C’s and on......

 

[PatR]

Completely agree with your assessments.

What I’m trying to do is demonstrate that photography has a very wide range in equipment costs, and the drone photography, at least at this forum’s end of the scale, is fairly economical for what we obtain from it.

Photography is much less expensive than it used to be due to digital technology. In today’s would we get to shoot a picture that stores on an SD card that is used over and over, we review the image within seconds, elect to keep or retain it, and sit down at a computer loaded with programs to further refine an image.

In the old days everything was shot on film of various types that could be used just once, that had to be processed as negatives, slides, or prints before viewing them. Undesirable shots had to be weeded out after expensive initial processing, and any further enhancements was a laborious process. After all that prints required enlargement and transfer to photo paper. Any serious photographer could go through $300-$1,000 in a month of shooting.

 

[Fred Garvin]

One of the biggest boon’s to photography with the digital revolution....film is now free. (And much to Kodak’s chagrin) Even so, it’s still taught in school to be your mantra: Get it right in camera. Meaning, learn to make great images....don’t depend on post processing to make a mediocre image good.....rather to make a great image incredible.

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

Where is the 40.5mm adapter, to mount it on the C23?

 

[Fred Garvin]

Where is the 40.5mm adapter, to mount it on the C23?

 

[Mrgs1]

There ya go! $2500 for the camera body, $16,300 for the telephoto, $8,000 for a 58mm and you’re good to go until the next model comes out 3 months after you bought.

My 500mm was state of the art a few years ago and produces excellent results, I'm fine with that what improvements there are now are on paper and marketing hype, I wouldn't see the difference and I don't have an optical lab to see alleged results, so the money can stay in my wallet!

 

[Thecloth]

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

news360.com

Both Nikon and Canon were slow coming to the mirrorless party. Nikon's equipment high prices won't make up the profit loss gained by Sony and others.

 

[Mrgs1]

Completely agree with your assessments.

What I’m trying to do is demonstrate that photography has a very wide range in equipment costs, and the drone photography, at least at this forum’s end of the scale, is fairly economical for what we obtain from it.

Photography is much less expensive than it used to be due to digital technology. In today’s would we get to shoot a picture that stores on an SD card that is used over and over, we review the image within seconds, elect to keep or retain it, and sit down at a computer loaded with programs to further refine an image.

In the old days everything was shot on film of various types that could be used just once, that had to be processed as negatives, slides, or prints before viewing them. Undesirable shots had to be weeded out after expensive initial processing, and any further enhancements was a laborious process. After all that prints required enlargement and transfer to photo paper. Any serious photographer could go through $300-$1,000 in a month of shooting.

One thing you forget and it's been talked about a lot on different forums is people tend not to delete any files, even out of focus pictures and tend to fill up their hard-drives pretty quickly, it seems quite a few seem reluctant to delete images.

 

[PatR]

There are people that think logically and with cognizant reasoning and those who don’t. Not much can be done to change that.

Hoarding isn’t limited to physical possessions, it occurs with digital data as well[emoji6]

 

[Ty Pilot]

There are at times a few exceptions to the rules, for example; any Canon shooters out there? Then you probably have heard of the 'Nifty Fifty' or the 'Plastic Fantastic', at one time this 50mm 1.8 lens was under a 100 bucks and even though it is a no bells and whistles fast lens, it is Tac sharp and one of my favorites, especially when I was shooting video in low light. I just wish they made a wide range of these cheaper, but very good lenses.

 

[Dougcjohn]

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

news360.com

Outstanding technology and amazing glass... f0.95 Wow!!
In comparison what Sony has accomplished in 2015 with the A7Sii was amazing.

Both Nikon and Canon were slow coming to the mirrorless party. Nikon's equipment high prices won't make up the profit loss gained by Sony and others.

The 5yr old A7Sii with it's ultra night photography with practically minimal noise... one could use a decent 50, F8 and still obtain beautiful sharpe night shots.

Canon & Nikon sat on their hands while Sony got out front... they'll have a tough ride to get out in Ft for the mass lost to return.

One thing you forget and it's been talked about a lot on different forums is people tend not to delete any files, even out of focus pictures and tend to fill up their hard-drives pretty quickly, it seems quite a few seem reluctant to delete images.

Agreed... I'm guilty of that too... maybe for laziness when HD's or SSD storage is so low priced.
Ah yes, remember the Negative Binders, taking care not to scratch... the little self made tools to dodge & burn.

It was actually a different form of art... the craft of the capture, the knowledge of darkroom & chemicals, and the patience to get the one & repeat the same procedure for duplicates.

The ones I'm amazed with are the early Pros and the amount they captured. The Civil War era, the massive number photos captured is simply amazing when you think of the "Gear" they hauled over mud, tall grass, rain, etc.
We complain if the hardware exceeds a 10-20lb bag.

 

[Fred Garvin]

There are at times a few exceptions to the rules, for example; any Canon shooters out there? Then you probably have heard of the 'Nifty Fifty' or the 'Plastic Fantastic', at one time this 50mm 1.8 lens was under a 100 bucks and even though it is a no bells and whistles fast lens, it is Tac sharp and one of my favorites, especially when I was shooting video in low light. I just wish they made a wide range of these cheaper, but very good lenses.

It’s the first lens I advise people to buy when the kit lens no longer meets all their needs. I’ve got both Nikon’s, the DX focused one for my croppies (3300, 7200) and the full frame one for my D810.

 

[Fred Garvin]

One thing you forget and it's been talked about a lot on different forums is people tend not to delete any files, even out of focus pictures and tend to fill up their hard-drives pretty quickly, it seems quite a few seem reluctant to delete images.

Not me. I’m absolutely ruthless culling images. If I won’t use it now, I never will. Any image with even the slightest flaw is gone....especially out of focus, blurry, blown out Images. Why keep them?

 

[Mrgs1]

There are people that think logically and with cognizant reasoning and those who don’t. Not much can be done to change that.

Hoarding isn’t limited to physical possessions, it occurs with digital data as well[emoji6]

I think were in a minority, the hundreds or thousands of images stored on smartphones, numerous memory cards, people's cloud storage etc, in some circumstances keeping everything has helped salvage a memory lost if not for a image blurry or however not perfect of a loved one or favourite holiday or pet, that would be lost!

 

[PatR]

Makes me think of Simon and Garfunkel’s “Kodachrome” song.

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

Actually, that was Paul's alone... 1973 - There Goes Rhymin Simon...

Kodachrome had such different processing requirements, that you would be happy to wait a week to see your results. It is unfortunate that by the time high resolution scanning was readily available, most Kodachrome images had shown enough deterioration from age, to never be able to capture all the inherent resolution of the original.