I still have a real nostalgic love for the Canon EOS 350D, which was my first ever DSLR. A tiny part of me is tempted to pick another one up one of these days (although I shoot with a Nikon D610 nowadays) because I genuinely think it was responsible for some of the best photos I ever made. A fantastic little workhorse camera
That's 8M full color triplet pixels though. DSLR pixels are one color measured and two colors interpol..ished. (and then humans cant see color detail so it's fine again)
And most images on the Internet are under 2 megapixels. People are going too hard on the pixel chase but I bet you most of them do not use me than 6 mp for delivery.
@ I think high-pixel photography won’t reveal its value until 10, maybe 20 years from now. I have to facelift an old website, but those digital images were too small to display properly on a high resolution monitors, AI restoration can only do so much at this point. So get high res images if storage isn’t an issue.
@@MiniTruckMatt Look at how describe EVFs and camera displays as "3 million, uh, pixels" when they are 1280x960x3. That's where it breaks down. Also why "6MP is enough" turned into everything having 18 to 24 megapixels, thanks for coming to my tedx talk
Problem is that any time a reasonably popular UA-camr suggests a decent affordable older camera, the price immediately triples wherever you go. We need some sort of secret society! 😁😁
@@NinnyHorseI don't see how him basically saying "this camera is cool but not worth keeping for me so I'll sell it" would lead to the prices going up significantly lol
I recently bought my first 'serious' camera, a canon 5D mark 2 along with a plastic fantastic 50mm F/1.8. And I absolutely love it. It's bulky, heavy, shutter is loud, and it has a learning curve as compared to shooting with smartphone but the images it produces are absolutely awesome. The experience of shooting with a heavy brick with OVF and the beautiful images make me want to use it constantly. Highly recommend it to everyone!
I got a 5D Mark I for $100 a couple of years ago. Other than my EOS 620, my most entertaining camera to shoot with. jpegs out of it have so much charm. The camera is only about shooting pictures and nothing else. My EOS RP feels more like using a smartphone sometimes lol.
I advise you to buy a Canon EF 40mm F2.8 lens if possible. This is a very good glass. The sharpness is already at 2.8, has smooth calm edges, compactness, convenient focal length for the human eye, you can shoot even landscapes, even portraits. I highly recommend it!
As a mirrorless owner, I purchased a DSRL a few months ago and I have been blown away! Built like a tank, surprisingly fast, I love the controls, and lastly, I love that OVF!!! People love rangefinder cameras and pay thousands for a "street photography camera" but a DSLR with an OVF is perfect for that as well imo
I bet you that if 5 mainstream UA-camrs start walking around with one you'll see prices triple! It's all about promoting new gear right now and people happily hand over their money to switch to a new cam every year! All my gear are from the 2012-18 era and I don't plan on upgrading anytime soon!
@@nicolasguillenc that's awesome man, shoot whatever inspires you!! Sometimes what works for everyone else just doesn't click with you, and that's all cool
Depends what you are doing in the streets. Rangefinder, if used properly, is not blocking your left eye. For some of us it means safe framing while walking. And framelines gives you extra capabilities for fast and precise framing (cropping is for losers :) ). DSLR is nothing but tunnel vision. Yet, if no money for digital rangefinder, the Ricoh GRD, GR will do. Different shooting technique, but very effective on the streets. If you are into it :) . But overal DSLR is better tool for photos. OVF has no lag and else, battery lasts weeks. And AF is much more predictable, without useless complications. Just more needs to be known to be able to use it effectively.
It's a reason why I just don't want to go mirrorless. I really don't mesh with EVFs very well. Admitedly, I've never tried a really high-end one; but those I've tried (or owned in the case of the Sony a6000) just didn't do it for me at all.
Depends on the work you do. For example Olympus and OM Systems are the best for wedding photographer like me. Because my cameras are set up to display the image for 0.3 seconds after I take it. This is a big help in avoiding mistakes. Weddings there are no do overs and they can be very stressful at times.
From a pragmatic standpoint, nothing beats an EVF with instant feedback to your exposure compensation dial. It’s just a tool and all that matters are the resulting prints.
Yep, the optical viewfinder is what I like the most about these older cameras. Kind-of the only reason I am still using Pentax cameras. And they make some nice optical viewfinders.
My issue with OFV is that I still can't take pictures that looks like what I see through it, idk why, when I look on the OFV I see what I want but when I took it's always different, the light that shades, the color, everything, maybe I still need to learn something but don't know what
@@MidNightBuoy That's when understanding the camera and its settings comes into place more... makes you think a little more, that is true. But I do enjoy them more than EVF.
Excellent program. Ex pro here-I made all my money shooting for big companies with a 12 megapixel DSLR - the amazing Nikon D3. Genuinely waterproof too.
I love my Nikon D200. It takes the pictures I have in my mind. The photos look better than the reality. The focus is super fast and I have it set up to focus on what's closest. It bothers me to have out of focus things in front of my subject. I loved my Canon 5D, fast focus too, but it always focused behind the subject. I've always wanted a Nikon D810. There's something magical about the way that sensor renders landscapes. I recently purchased an Olympus refurb. and I have to admit, I love it. Getting older, had to lighten the load.
Yes I love my Nikon DSLRs, but my recently bought used Z5 has better colour science than I thought it would. I bought a Nikkor 28mm f3.5 Ai last week and was blown away with how it renders on the Z5. Most reviewers say the D3X is a really bad camera, but I've had mine nearly 6 years and I love it. The D200 is great too. 😊
I recently bought a DSLR after using a film SLR for my whole life because digital was a little too expensive back in 2007 for me to get into. I got a T5i and the kit lens for $200 and I'm getting some really nice shots on it. I'm picking up some cheap lenses after the holidays and I couldn't be happier. I even think my mom is buying me the Canon 50mm f1.8 lens for Christmas, even. It's amazing to me how cheap this all was for the power my 14 year old camera still has.
I have a T3i with the 50mm 1.8 and I still get some great shots with it. Even old entry level DSLRs will produce way better pictures than phones if used well (but of course phones are more convenient).
The biggest mistake is to assume mirrorles are BETTER than (D)SLR, they are simply DIFFERENT, they have, as you mentioned at the end of the video, Disadvantages and Advantages each over the other system, to make the roundup complete also Rangefinder in comparison, EVF and OVF. I'm lucky i have not to crawl through 100+ cameras, but still 30+ (most anlog from Minox to Linhof) is really enough.
Thankfully I picked up a few second-hand DSLRs 'before it was cool', and I managed to grow my collection without breaking the bank too much. It all started with a Nikon D200, which was my first foray into DSLRs, coming from a Nikon Coolpix 8800, a bridge camera. Now I also have a D700, a D2Hs, a Canon 40D, a Fujifilm S5 Pro, an Olympus E-1, E-300, E-420, and it's really difficult to choose a favourite. The colours and mood I get from the E-1 and the Fuji S5 Pro are something else, but so are certain results from the Nikon D700 and D2Hs, which I'm told resemble film photos. As you say, these are different tools that can each inspire in different ways. I tend to go with my mood and the day's general mood. You know? Today's a 'Nikon D200' kind of day, and I know that the results I get will reflect, with their colours and atmosphere, the mood I was feeling. Cheers! //Rick
Preach it brother. DSLR are my favorite style. Keep going back to my original Pentax K10d. Wonderful DSLR bult like a tank and has lasted over 14 years! Thanks for sharing!
Also : having cheaper and less fragile gear will set you free. Your camera won't be that precious thing you only take out for certain occasions, but a reliable tool you can throw in a backpack each time you go somewhere.
Someone has to make this point: mirrorless are not more fragile than DSLRs, if anything they are more reliable. DSLRs feel tough because they are large and heavy, but wrapping fragile precision mechanical contraptions in a big box doesn't take away the fact that they're fragile. Mirror linkages break, phase detect sensors and secondary mirrors go out of alignment. On mirrorless the only moving part is the mechanical shutter, and some even got rid of that.
@@dixinggao7178 I see your point but I also see the fact that mirrorless cameras are often not weather-sealed and do not possess anything to protect the sensor when you change your lens. Plus, DSLR being cheap makes you feel like it's not a problem if they get a few scratches.
@@antoineminjoz8318 most mid-range and higher end mirrorless cameras today are weather sealed. Canon's entire FF line get weather sealing, plus the APS-C flagship R7; Sony's entire current Alpha line has it*; Nikon's entire FF line plus the Z50/II has it. *Only the latest version of a given product line is considered. My local Sony website still lists several older A6x00 series cameras, of which the A6100 isn't sealed. ZV-E series aren't "Alpha", but the E1 has sealing as well. Admittedly the entry fee for DSLR weather sealing is cheaper than a mirrorless, but we're comparing used vs new at this point. As for the exposed sensor, I was uncomfortable with it at first, but it's not as dangerous as it seems. The sensors aren't fully exposed, manufacturers always glue a piece of optical glass on top of sensor actual. Which is why you can clean "sensors" in the field with some properly sized swabs, it's just a piece of glass. I've done it a couple of times and it's surprisingly easy to do. It does become problematic if you want to swap lens in the field, but some mirrorless cameras allow you to drop the shutter at shut down, acting as a make shift dust cover. Definitely not disagreeing with the last point. Having a less valuable camera does bring peace of mind. I recently chipped the paint on my Z8 and was really bummed out by it.
@@antoineminjoz8318 AFAIK all full frame mirrorless available new today have some level of weather sealing, even the EOS RP. Some higher end APS-C cameras get it as well (EOS R7, Z50/II, some A6x00). Getting a weather sealed DSLR is admittedly cheaper, but we're comparing used vs new at this point. Exposed sensor seem nerve-wracking, but it's not as vulnerable as it seems. There's a piece of optical glass on top of the actual CFAs and CMOS, which are well protected. You can clean the "sensor" (protective glass) in the field with properly sized swabs. Surprisingly easy to do. Definitely don't disagree with the last point, having cheaper gear that you care less about does bring peace of mind. I recently chipped the paint on my Z8, really bummed out by it.
I have an old Pentax K5 IIs (that, due to a nearby vineyard fire, the camera and my work got published in some bigger name publications) that I absolutely adore. It's not a CCD sensor, but it DOES work phenomenally with my old film camera lenses. Shooting that camera is absolutely a happy place for me. ... But it still feels like a modern upgrade cause I shoot way more film than digital 😅
One thing that earlier DSLRs with crop sensors, like the Nikon D40 and D80, offered was their relatively compact bodies and lighter weight, especially compared to the "flagship" models like the D3, or even the weight of the D700. Now that I don't HAVE to choose one of the old DSLRs I find myself more likely to pick up my smaller D80 and take it with me on an excursion or holiday.
Yes D700 is a massive brick, it certainly makes me feel more PRO everytime I take it in my hand. Then I realize it's only PRO-sumer camera and go back to my D40
Wow, Snappy! I thought I needed professional help for owning 18-ish cameras. Against 120 cameras that you have, I feel like a toddler. Great video! You spoke a lot of truth!
Try the original 24-120 AF-D lens. I love the range and while it’s a screw drive focus motor it’s still fast enough. Image quality is great and it makes a nice, one lens solution for a minimalist kit.
@jayabramson6702 I have the 24-120 f4 AF-S that normally lives on my D780. It's a great lens but really big and heavy to carry around all day. For the Df I think a better standard zoom is the 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 D
I'm taking a Nikon D90 on holiday this week, rather than anything newer, because I just love the quality of the pictures (and it handles low-light in auto way better than anything I can try to figure out, manually)!
Started with film slr's. (yeah I feel old). Then my first dslr was the Canon EOS 450D, after that the 7D, and then lastly the 5Dmkii. They were all great and taught me so much, but I went mirrorless and have not looked back other than for nostalgic reasons. Mostly I miss my 5Dmkii. Got a Minolta 7D a few years back, and have a pretty ok collection of slr's. The Minolta produces great images, but the convenience and IQ of mirrorless full frame paired with old glass is hard to beat. That's another tip - buy and adapt old lenses if you've got a mirrorless camera and like the vintage look.
Great video!! I shoot on both mirrorless and DSLR systems. But lately, I've been gravitating toward my Nikon D300 as an everyday camera. It's been so much fun to use with a manual 28mm lens for street photography. Plus the camera is built like a tank!
I stumbled upon your channel not too long ago and I really enjoyed your videos on old cameras and your discussions around it. I also learned some things too from your Haul videos. haha! Til now, I'm still using my Nikon D750, which is a 10 year old camera this year, for my work and leisure. There's definitely a charm of using an optical viewfinder and I feel like I'm more connected with my camera by it when I'm shooting. I'm not hating on mirrorless camera btw, I kinda need one for my work to perform faster and I'm aiming for a Nikon Z. And I agree, a DSLR is still a great choice to learn full Manual photography today on a budget and for its controls and handling. I'll definitely keep this D750 forever tho. There are a lot of F Mount Lenses that has character and affordable too!
I'm a semi professional and STILL have a 5Dii in my camera bag as my trusted backup body 😊... its reliable and just keeps going and going & deliver VERY good quality photos if you know how to handle it properly when shooting
I have and use a Pentax K-5, it has 16.3 MP and it is the only camera I'll ever need. I also have and use a Pentax K-110D, it still works and only has like six MP. 📷📷📷📷📷
I still have my 2009 Pentax K20D, and used it just last week. It has a Katzeye split image and microprism ring focusing screen with the high brightness option, and a Pentax Magnifier Eyecup that increases viewfinder magnification by 1.18 times; I'm sure you've already guessed it's set up for manual focus lenses. The camera certainly gives a different rendering to my K3 and K3iii.
Picked up an old 6D this year as an entry way into full frame. Zero regrets, I often pick it over my newer bodies if fast autofocus isn't of concern to me
I still have 3 DSLRs alongside my mirrorless, and I use them just as much. The simplicity is nice and with Magic Lantern they are beasts. And yes, the optical viewfinder just can't be beat
I've gotten into photography over the past two years and my current collection is: Nikon D200, Nikon D7100 and a Panasonic Lumiux G2 because I wanted to try mirrorless and the Micro4/3 system was cheap enough for me to "get my feet wet" with. I still find myself going out with the D200 and 7100 far more often than the G2 because I really like the process of finding a shot, lining it up with the viewfinder and then making sure I have the image framed perfectly before I take the shot. There's something kinda therapeutic about looking through an optical viewfinder and seeing exactly what the lens/sensor is seeing as opposed to an electronic viewfinder or just using the back screen as with the G2.
I have several mirrorless cameras but recently got a Pentax K-x. OVF, 12Mp, a jillion K-mount lenses, and Shake Reduction. And mine is lime green. What's not to love?
A Nikon D700 and a 50mm F1.8 can be had for well under $500 USD -- that's the world we live in. I love my modern Nikon mirrorless kit for work, but if I was shooting solely for fun? There's almost no casual shooting scenario I couldn't accomplish with a D700; portraits, landscapes, lifestyle, even some amount of action/sports. It's 12MP of pure Nikon goodness, vintage 2008.
agree. I just bought a D700 with only 15k shutter count, a 50 1.4D and a 28mm 2.8D for 400€. Amazing colors/"rendering", even for night photography up to iso 6400.
And even the D800 is cheap, and it's a brick powerhouse like the D700 but higher megapixels and dynamic range for landscape or such. I've never used the d700 but I do have the 5D original with 12.7mp and it still packs a punch despite the extra years older.
This video popped up at an interesting time. I was going to sell ALL of my Canon DSLR's and lenses and switch to Olympus mirrorless. (Don't get me started on micro 4/3 quality.....it's there.) I bought an Olympus OM D EM-1mirrorless camera and some lenses, which is an amazing piece of technology, but I just can't make myself break away from DSLR's with optical viewfinders. The technology in this Olympus is astonishing for it's age! The body has 5 stop image stabilization, and when used with a lens with image stabilization, the results are phenomenal! But for some reason, I just can't make the switch. I will continue to build a micro 4/3 system for some specific jobs I do, but I don't think I can part with all of the Canon DSLR gear I have. Micro 4/3 is more than capable of producing incredible results, but I prefer less technology from DSLR's of days gone past. I have a Canon 5D Mark IV, and I set it to the most basic settings possible.....either aperture priority or manual mode, and I use a center focus point and do the "focus/recompose" method. I have a Canon 10D and 20D (6 and 8 megapixel respectively), and I used to shoot weddings with those cameras. Higher megapixels are nice, but not a necessity. Thanks for posting!!
I'm still using a Pentax K5 to this day. I use iPhone for video so with the camera market having shifted towards vlogging I really want a camera focussed on stills and the K5 still produces great photos. The viewfinder is another reason I stick with it, as you suggest in the video.
@@snappiness What I really want to know is which camera would replace my K5 from the modern crop of products. After the Pentax I find the menus on my wife's Fuji counterintuitive and the build quality is not as good as the K5. However, I also don't want to live in the past if sensors to make DSLRs are no longer going to progress and thereby production will cease. My main concerns are viewfinder quality and battery life with mirrorless. The rear screens on most cameras don't come close to phone quality - well you know the issues!
I own 2 top mirrorless cameras the R6 and R5, however, I prefer my 5D Mark IV which I will never get rid of. To this day my best photos were taken with an 8mp DSLR. So I agree with you 100%.
I have owned or used literally 100s of cameras over the years (work in a camera shop for 10+ years). Despite I love my A7III for regular assignment stuff, my old trusty Leica M9 with CCD and Nikon Df with optical viewfinder are by far my fav cameras. Love the ''problems'' they give me, and indeed therefore boost the way I look without coming back with 1000s of images, but rather a few I am happy with.
I like both. I love being able to preview my image as I'm taking a picture on a mirrorless viewfinder and I love the charm and familiarity of an optical viewfinder. For me the main point is that these cameras became capable of easily taking beautiful images about 20 years ago. I held out for the first 5 years of digital because CCD sensors did _not_ look like or act like film. But as the tech came along, they became capable of making beautiful images of their own. Now, many of those fully evolved cameras are practically being given away as people upgrade for features many barely use. And these wonderful cameras are inexpensive and the barrier to trying them out is very low. It actually reminds me of that time I was holding out. I was buying film cameras for next to nothing. I bought a Pentax 6x7 in great working order with a 105 f2.4 for about $120 which I still have and use. And Mamiya TLRs with big lens sets for about the same. Who will ever want to use these things, the sellers were thinking. These DSLRs that blew people's minds in 2010 didn't get worse over time. Pros were using them to take incredible pictures then and there's nothing stopping anyone getting the same kind of images out of them now.
Shooting with an OVF really connects you to the scene you’re looking over. Also the more tactile the ergonomics of DSLRs/SLRs give me greater connection with the images I create, I feel I’m making the picture not the camera
Great video, I have an old Nikon D200 with an entry level lens and I have lots of fun with it. It is glitchy and makes you slow down and just enjoy taking pics.
I recently picked up a Nikon d300 with battery grip for just under 100 pounds (~130 USD) and I love the thing. This is coming mostly from film and borrowed digital stuff. Took it on a trip and got some truly stunning pics with it. It does show it's age but it's built like a tank and 12mpx is plenty for my hobby uses
Loving my new to me Nikon D700, it makes a nice companion for my 10 year old D7100 that I bought new. No need for mirrorless while one or both still work.
I've had my Canon EOS 40d since new in 2008, still works well. I added an EOS M to shoot video with but still use the 40d quite a bit. They can be had dirt cheap now for what they are.
Get a Canon 5D classic, It does everything great, it's only true weakness is not good dynamic range in landscapes but that can be overcome with bracketing and the use of grad filters. The sensor on the 5D classic is amazing.
I have a Nikon Z50 and I do love it.... But I will never give up my D500 nor mi D750. You said it, there is something romantic looking and compose through a real view finder!!!!! I am 65, and still love to use my trusty Nikon FG with Black and White film Photography, than I digitize the negatives with my D750 and a macro lens, my Nikkor 60mm f2.8 macro from the 90's... What a magnificent feeling....😍🤩🤪
Have had many mirrorless cameras over there years. But I’m never quite happy with the results and all ways end up grabbing my old canon 40d! Amazing camera
My Sony a7RII is the camera I usually bring with me when I want to shoot some birds, or some indoors shots in low light, but... I got my hands on an unused, in box, Minolta 7D (the plastic protector were still on the screen *high pitch screams of delight*) a couple of years ago and I love it. It's technically lacking compared to the Sony, but I'm having a lot more fun shooting with my Minolta. The colours are great, usually looks allmost perfect straight from the camera. It also feels like an analog slr when I'm using it, with great controls and a screen so lacking that I usually don't bother using it, so I don't get to see the photos untill I get home.
@@nikobuerk346 true, even at 25.600 ISO, i made 19cmx13cm prints and they still look VERY good. I still have the 6D but besides low light/high iso, in normal/good light MUCH MORE prefer the 5D1, 5DII or Nikon D700 (this also excels for night photography, up to iso 6400). ALL of these have MUCH better color than the 6D, and more importantly, a distinct "rendering" and "feel" to the pictures.
Love your videos! I still like to use my old Canon 1Ds M2 once in a while. I bought it second hand in 2010. I just love how it feels in my hands, I love the heavy weight and the huge optical viewfinder. It's a beauty!. And even though it's not a CCD sensor, the camera was released in 2004 and the photos have some magical look that I don't find in my modern mirrorless Canon. Thanks for your content! ☀
I love old DSLRs ! That's why I have one for everyday of the month. 31 DSLRs. My favorites are the Nikon D300 and Pentax K5. The real reason I have so many is that they are cheap. I shoot a hell of a lot and I don't want to ware out the shutters. (250 to 350 shots a day) I have newer, higher MP DSLRs Nikon D7100 and Pentax K3 but their images use up a lot of space on my computer. For what I do with my images 12 and 16 MP is just fine. I don't think I could stand an electronical viewfinder. I started out with a Pentax K1000 back in 1977, and optical viewfinders are all I know and want. I prefer the look of the output I get from my old cameras. It may sound crazy but the image from a D300 looks better to me than one from a D7100.
I just bought a Fuji S5 Pro and a Tamron 15-30 f/2.8. Still wrapping my head around proper exposure (the metering system is a little weird) and finding colour settings I like, but I'm really enjoying the learning process so far
I like the argument and points you made. I think old DSLR's are great for beginners. However, my big reason to move to mirror less was the size reduction and I do like the overall improvement in image quality. There is a vibrancy and a higher level of detail with my mirror less that I could never achieve with my old DSLR..which makes cause it's newer but besides that point. I do miss the optical viewfinder but I feel the tradeoff in image quality and size reduction was worth it. For someone with a newer camera I can't see too much of point in grabbing an old DSLR besides not being worried about it getting broken or stolen
I actually recently brought a Sony A99V which is an SLT (single lens translucent) camera so it’s kind of a cross between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera I brought it since it had a full frame 24 megapixel sensor and it uses sony a mount so I can get quite a lot of cheap lenses for it and I also love the screen since it can move in lots of directions and it also has GPS tagging, which is a nice feature (V model only) I have also used my grandfather‘s old Camera (his current one is a Sony A300) which was a Minolta Dynax 7D and my A99 reminds me quite a lot of that Camera since they have a very similar atmosphere to them (metal body, lots of buttons, locking dials, beautiful looking) And I really do love that 7D although it has some limitations for being such an old Camera (it has a CCD sensor so it has pretty bad noise at anything above 400 ISO and to make it worse it’s an APS-C sized sensor so worse noise)
I still shoot with my canon 6D mk1. I never really understood what the mirrorless hubbub was about. You can make a smaller camera…but they make them bigger anyway because they’re more comfortable to hold. Optical viewfinders are better on batteries. You have more dedicated buttons with a DSLR. If we like cameras that get out of the way, a DSLR is just as good and sometimes limiting your options on purpose inspires creativity. Try shooting everything with just 1 fixed focal length lens for a while.
Having used an R6 and 6D, the images from them aren't very different but the accuracy of autofocus and even moreso light metering is a big boost to speed. But I also use a 5D classic and the images from even it are superb. 6D is even better specs and lowlight and has wifi for transfering to your phone. Throw a 40mm 2.8 on that thing and just use the hell outta it, it's so good. Faithful -2 contrast is my favorite look as it's simply true-to-life as you saw it. I'll edit the raw if I want to spice it up for print.
another thing to keep in mind, part of the change in colors on older vs newer cameras may be due to the different dyes used in the older color filter arrays, they may let in a slightly different amount of light to each channel.
just picked up a Fuji S5 pro and a 50 f1.8 to fiddle with, it'll be a nice addition to my primary shooter of the much newer GFX 50s, excited to have the freedom to go between a CCD APS-C DSLR and a way more modern medium format mirrorless setup for whatever I'm feeling
i own three mirrorless, full frame,sony cameras for work. I love them. But i also love the sony a99, their older slt, so much i just went and bought my second one .
My old Canon SL2 has a optical viewfinder. It can also shoot in live mode like a mirrorless without viewfinder. Of course I have my M6 mark II that I still say is the best Under $1000 mirrorless camera. The SL2 is the camera I got when I learned real photography.
The 5D Mark III is a beast of a camera, 22mp FF can't be compared to stuff from 2005 and the amount of trial and error using the 20 year old camera is going to frustrate and possibly put off a new photographer. At least with the 5D III it has a pretty decent AF along with bells and whistles that are sought after these days. I know you're a vintage/retro camera fan but a lot of people get into photography these days because the camera assists and helps them learn.
I would argue the 6D as well. Focusing not so much as way less points, but the center point is super accurate and sensitive compared to the older cameras, and iso performance is fantastic. The same year as the 5D3 and 5dsr.
For photographers that don't want to or need to do much post-production the older DSLRs are really great. I use the latest and greatest (Nikon Z8) for my work, but recently picked up a D80 for $69 (chuckle). During some recent headshot sessions I grabbed the D80 with an old 28-105 Nikkor zoom and took a few shots. One just happened to make the cut as the client's favorite, and I had no problem delivering it to her. And since the resolution wasn't there to do a lot of work on it, the retouching was quick and easy. From looking closely at the files I'd compare the resolution to fairly high resolution 35mm film scans or slightly better.
In short, you will not have the space for editing that a larger file gives you, but it is still an advantage in this case. And your testimony shows that a good photo, even if it was taken with a mid-range DSLR camera almost 20 years ago, is still a good photo.
I'd argue that for the novel photographer, a camera that is too old it can have frustrating quirks like having to buy special cards, the batteries that are dscontinued or too old-looking menus. I think there's a sweet spot around the early 2010's with cameras like Canon 6D where they feel modern and familiar yet they are quite affordable
Been with Canon EOS 1300D for 7-8 years. Wanted to change it and move to mirrorless or medium format, but they're so expensive! I wish my photography would have paid me something to upgrade. Yet, 1300D still serves my needs with a proper combination of lens.
One thing drawing me towards old DSLRs is how bulky and heavy some of them are, the shutter sound and sound of the mirror slap. I shoot a mirrorless compact with my vintage lenses and i miss the feeling of having something mechanical and solid in my hands. I still get that feeling with my film SLRs, but shooting on film is a whole different thing.
I always say that modern mirror cameras have an improved cell phone photography look. They are undoubtedly sharper or generate a sharpening effect and it seems to me that the software is perhaps doing too many things there. When I use an old DSLR camera, for example D700 or D3 but even some first mirrors like the EM-5, the images look much more natural to me, I mean, what I see in the photograph is very similar to what I was seeing with my own eyes. The same thing happens with the "science of color", there are Sony cameras with CCD that have a fairly faithful color science but then, you take an APSC for example an A6000 and from a blue sky it makes a blue sky as if you had put a polarizer , (not to mention skin tones). Luckily there are many good old cameras available with optics that are also great, many with the precious 3D effect that today is almost impossible to see in low-mid range lenses.
Those of us who have an old DSLR may as well hang onto it, since its resale value is trivial. I've had my D200 for 11 years now and can think of no reason to not keep using it. Its color just hits me in the right place and though the files are "small," I can do pretty much any size I want with Gigapixel. A new Nikon mirrorless would be great fun, don't get me wrong. But absent pro-type assignments, the 20 year old D200 will do nicely.
I have been looking for a Canon 6d MK2. Nice option for an entry into full frame photogrpahy. On the down side, seems the optical view finder is one of the common first things to get corrupted on any model.
Thanks for the video. Down here in the very bright southwestern US, electronic screens can be difficult to see. I always have a selection of older DSLRs around for just this reason. So much easier to compose, not to mention being a true view of the scenes. Mirrorless is great in lower light, but give me an optical in the blazing sun.
Very true. I love the exposure preview so I can fiddle with the compensation as desired, plus the very accurate metering, but the optical is fantastic as well, for different reasons. In full sun even a viewfinder is very dim when your eyes are adjusted for full sun, and it takes a second to really see what you're looking at even without glare. Both are ideal for different reasons. I've got an R6 and love it, but still like using even my ancient DSLR's like the 2005 5D from time to time. Maybe I ought to pick up a cheap 5dsr or something.. er, one day, for landscape stuff. Although live view fine focus adjust might show the DSLR problems again, but it's cheap for 50mp.
I recently discovered that my digital cameras from around 2010 don't age very well. Many lenses show AF issues and some material starts to deteriorate - like rubber on zoom rings and plastic bezels around the front lens. To be more exact, I have issues with Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 and Nikon 18-135 DX lens. Nikon D7000 has issues with card reader and Nikon D80 shutter probably died - camera shows Err on the screen. It doesn't mean they were not well made -they served it's purpose. However, one should still be careful to test several functions prior buying such an old digital camera. Film cameras from 70s aged better IMO :)
2005 is when I started my dslr career. Back then these things were magical. Very few today have ever experienced the magic in real time back in the day
I follow your train of thought, although I don't think I's go back as far as the 10mp cameras you showed. Like the guy who won that photo competition, I think something like a Canon 6d or 5d mkiii is the sweet spot. Fantastic image quality, great manual handling and pretty low cost. In the UK a 6d from MPB starts at just over £200, and 5d mkiii under £300. In many respects the 6d is the better option as it's slightly lighter and less likely to have ben flogged half to death by a pro. A lot of camera for the money.
If I'm going to be focusing on a matte screen, I'd rather go medium format or large format. Experience the best of the best if you're going to go backwards, and there's little that's better than focusing on a huge focusing screen, like a 6x7 format or 4x5 Graflex.
Decade, or even a few years more, is still very competitive as far as sensor performance goes, but beyond that low-light performance starts taking quite a hit. The D90 is my oldest that I'd still rate as good enough with a fast prime. The old school big prism viewfinder is definitely a pleasure to use - something Nikon sadly dropped from later models in both the DX and FX line that all give 70% reduced view.
I recently had to fall back to shooting a dslr for a period while my mirrorless camera went out for repairs, had to relearn the muscle memory for it. While it certainly did the job, there are just some things inherently mirrorless is better at, some is newer technology and some is just advancing times, but in my portraiture should I choose to blow out the background at f1.2, I have confidence in my hit rate with mirrorless over the guesswork with my DSLR. I used to be ok with higher ISOs on my DSLR because it was all I knew but comparing shots at the same iso values it’s insane how much cleaner those shots are with newer full frame mirrorless. Having said that though, my R6 II nowhere feels as good in the hand as any of my old 5D cameras did, they just made mirrorless a tad too small for my grip unless I’m adding a grip or going for an R3/R1, which I’m not. Those cameras just feel at home in my hands and it definitely makes a mental difference in the process but I will take mirrorless over DSLR any day for the advancements and how much video I also shoot these days. But if I was just going into the wilderness to shoot some landscape for a weekend? I’d have no problem taking just a DSLR if that was my only option
In reviewing my own older images, I gotta agree. I shoulda never sold my Canon 5D. I 'moved to Fuji mirrorless years ago, and love using the optical viewfinder on the X-pro 2, but there is just something richer about those older pics.
I have 1 DSLR left with 2 mirrorless cameras. To be honest I don't even notice the EVF. If anything OVFs perform worse with flare and also the lack of manual focus assist options.
I have recently been enjoying using my Canon EOS20D that I bought 20 years ago last month! I used that camera until about 2015 when I then 'upgraded' it for a newer Canon DSLR, but I like the size and feeling in the hand of the 20D. It's simple, it's chunky and it really does get the job done. Sure it's not the best in low light or at high ISO, but for every day photos it really is fine with an 8MP sensor. Batteries are readily available and it takes up to an 8GB card. Shooting in RAW mode I get about 800 shots! The only thing that has 'broke' is the rubber cover for the ports on the left hand side, I still have both bits so the ports are still protected, I have been looking for a replacement port cover but no joy so far. Would you class this 20 year old DSLR as a ''Vintage" digital camera? I think so!!
Greatest shortcomings of DSLRs is the (lack of) lens calibration. Older Nikons (at least some of them) only have one correction point (only the D780 got two point correction…shame on Nikon), some Canons have two (W-T) (or none). I’ve had 9 DSLRs over the years and still have two D750s for wedding photography, and every single lens (brand and 3rd party) had to be calibrated to every camera body for perfect AF. My Z 6 doesn’t need any calibration, I can trust the AF much more (in good to okayish lighting conditions). For me (cheaper) DSLR lens + MILC is the way to go 🤘🏼
Popup flashes are not unique to older cameras though. They also have never really been entirely useful. If flash photography is something you want/need to do, pick up a 15 year old flash, those still work great.
I bought my used canon 1d for 140GBP ,which still using ccd and i love how it capture the image , sometimes more favourable than the canon 5D3 when i still uaing those years The 1D have a white balance and dof priority mode which can do auto caulculate F stop setting by measure near and far point you want to in focus and vola 😂 both missing in newer model which is sad Only problem is hard to find a battery and charger for it
Here's a quick one just getting my thoughts out there while purging my camera collection. I love old DSLRs man.
I still have a real nostalgic love for the Canon EOS 350D, which was my first ever DSLR. A tiny part of me is tempted to pick another one up one of these days (although I shoot with a Nikon D610 nowadays) because I genuinely think it was responsible for some of the best photos I ever made. A fantastic little workhorse camera
stress to make sure it's CCD 10 mega pixel and not cmos, you have to really check with canon
When are you going to do a cross over with camera conspiracies guy? He'll hate your cameras and it will make a great script!
to give people some context, 4K UHD is ONLY 8.3 MEGAPIXELS
That's 8M full color triplet pixels though. DSLR pixels are one color measured and two colors interpol..ished. (and then humans cant see color detail so it's fine again)
And most images on the Internet are under 2 megapixels.
People are going too hard on the pixel chase but I bet you most of them do not use me than 6 mp for delivery.
@ I think high-pixel photography won’t reveal its value until 10, maybe 20 years from now. I have to facelift an old website, but those digital images were too small to display properly on a high resolution monitors, AI restoration can only do so much at this point. So get high res images if storage isn’t an issue.
@@haeikou huh, don't think I actually realized this.
@@MiniTruckMatt Look at how describe EVFs and camera displays as "3 million, uh, pixels" when they are 1280x960x3. That's where it breaks down. Also why "6MP is enough" turned into everything having 18 to 24 megapixels, thanks for coming to my tedx talk
Problem is that any time a reasonably popular UA-camr suggests a decent affordable older camera, the price immediately triples wherever you go. We need some sort of secret society! 😁😁
I wish they recommend the Sony A900 and A850 so I could get rid of them.
TUREEEEE
Underrated comment
he just had a video going over cameras hes selling, so of course hes gonna use his platform to promote n fire up the market so he can make his buck...
@@NinnyHorseI don't see how him basically saying "this camera is cool but not worth keeping for me so I'll sell it" would lead to the prices going up significantly lol
I recently bought my first 'serious' camera, a canon 5D mark 2 along with a plastic fantastic 50mm F/1.8. And I absolutely love it. It's bulky, heavy, shutter is loud, and it has a learning curve as compared to shooting with smartphone but the images it produces are absolutely awesome. The experience of shooting with a heavy brick with OVF and the beautiful images make me want to use it constantly. Highly recommend it to everyone!
Despite having newer and “better” cameras the Canon 5Dii is still the camera I use when asked to do portraits.
i just ordered one on ebay for £80, looking forward to using it, i've used the mark i before so hopefully this is just even better
I got a 5D Mark I for $100 a couple of years ago. Other than my EOS 620, my most entertaining camera to shoot with. jpegs out of it have so much charm. The camera is only about shooting pictures and nothing else. My EOS RP feels more like using a smartphone sometimes lol.
I owned a canon R5.. but there a times a clicked with my 5dmark 3 .. there is something about DSLR the simplicity of DSLR that i can't let go.
I advise you to buy a Canon EF 40mm F2.8 lens if possible. This is a very good glass. The sharpness is already at 2.8, has smooth calm edges, compactness, convenient focal length for the human eye, you can shoot even landscapes, even portraits. I highly recommend it!
As a mirrorless owner, I purchased a DSRL a few months ago and I have been blown away! Built like a tank, surprisingly fast, I love the controls, and lastly, I love that OVF!!! People love rangefinder cameras and pay thousands for a "street photography camera" but a DSLR with an OVF is perfect for that as well imo
I bet you that if 5 mainstream UA-camrs start walking around with one you'll see prices triple! It's all about promoting new gear right now and people happily hand over their money to switch to a new cam every year! All my gear are from the 2012-18 era and I don't plan on upgrading anytime soon!
@@nicolasguillenc that's awesome man, shoot whatever inspires you!! Sometimes what works for everyone else just doesn't click with you, and that's all cool
Which model was it ?
Depends what you are doing in the streets. Rangefinder, if used properly, is not blocking your left eye. For some of us it means safe framing while walking. And framelines gives you extra capabilities for fast and precise framing (cropping is for losers :) ). DSLR is nothing but tunnel vision. Yet, if no money for digital rangefinder, the Ricoh GRD, GR will do. Different shooting technique, but very effective on the streets. If you are into it :) . But overal DSLR is better tool for photos. OVF has no lag and else, battery lasts weeks. And AF is much more predictable, without useless complications. Just more needs to be known to be able to use it effectively.
Absolutely love my Nikon D200 and Olympus E1. I feel the photos they take have much more character than the new cameras
More character in what way?
@@SomeUnremarkableGuy The image can laugh, cry, anger, disgust, fear and inside out
I got the D200 and D300 at a fleamarket for €100.
All my old Nikkor MF lenses can be used, what's not to love?
D200 aka old reliable 🤣
Agreed - OVFs beat EVFs for photography every day. EVFs for videography are very useful, but they're quite soulless for photography in my experience
It's a reason why I just don't want to go mirrorless. I really don't mesh with EVFs very well. Admitedly, I've never tried a really high-end one; but those I've tried (or owned in the case of the Sony a6000) just didn't do it for me at all.
Depends on the work you do. For example Olympus and OM Systems are the best for wedding photographer like me. Because my cameras are set up to display the image for 0.3 seconds after I take it. This is a big help in avoiding mistakes. Weddings there are no do overs and they can be very stressful at times.
From a pragmatic standpoint, nothing beats an EVF with instant feedback to your exposure compensation dial. It’s just a tool and all that matters are the resulting prints.
Yep, the optical viewfinder is what I like the most about these older cameras. Kind-of the only reason I am still using Pentax cameras. And they make some nice optical viewfinders.
My issue with OFV is that I still can't take pictures that looks like what I see through it, idk why, when I look on the OFV I see what I want but when I took it's always different, the light that shades, the color, everything, maybe I still need to learn something but don't know what
@@MidNightBuoy That's when understanding the camera and its settings comes into place more... makes you think a little more, that is true. But I do enjoy them more than EVF.
Excellent program. Ex pro here-I made all my money shooting for big companies with a 12 megapixel DSLR - the amazing Nikon D3. Genuinely waterproof too.
I love my Nikon D200. It takes the pictures I have in my mind. The photos look better than the reality. The focus is super fast and I have it set up to focus on what's closest. It bothers me to have out of focus things in front of my subject. I loved my Canon 5D, fast focus too, but it always focused behind the subject. I've always wanted a Nikon D810. There's something magical about the way that sensor renders landscapes. I recently purchased an Olympus refurb. and I have to admit, I love it. Getting older, had to lighten the load.
Yes I love my Nikon DSLRs, but my recently bought used Z5 has better colour science than I thought it would. I bought a Nikkor 28mm f3.5 Ai last week and was blown away with how it renders on the Z5. Most reviewers say the D3X is a really bad camera, but I've had mine nearly 6 years and I love it. The D200 is great too. 😊
I recently bought a DSLR after using a film SLR for my whole life because digital was a little too expensive back in 2007 for me to get into. I got a T5i and the kit lens for $200 and I'm getting some really nice shots on it. I'm picking up some cheap lenses after the holidays and I couldn't be happier. I even think my mom is buying me the Canon 50mm f1.8 lens for Christmas, even. It's amazing to me how cheap this all was for the power my 14 year old camera still has.
I have a T3i with the 50mm 1.8 and I still get some great shots with it. Even old entry level DSLRs will produce way better pictures than phones if used well (but of course phones are more convenient).
The biggest mistake is to assume mirrorles are BETTER than (D)SLR, they are simply DIFFERENT, they have, as you mentioned at the end of the video, Disadvantages and Advantages each over the other system, to make the roundup complete also Rangefinder in comparison, EVF and OVF.
I'm lucky i have not to crawl through 100+ cameras, but still 30+ (most anlog from Minox to Linhof) is really enough.
Thankfully I picked up a few second-hand DSLRs 'before it was cool', and I managed to grow my collection without breaking the bank too much. It all started with a Nikon D200, which was my first foray into DSLRs, coming from a Nikon Coolpix 8800, a bridge camera. Now I also have a D700, a D2Hs, a Canon 40D, a Fujifilm S5 Pro, an Olympus E-1, E-300, E-420, and it's really difficult to choose a favourite. The colours and mood I get from the E-1 and the Fuji S5 Pro are something else, but so are certain results from the Nikon D700 and D2Hs, which I'm told resemble film photos. As you say, these are different tools that can each inspire in different ways. I tend to go with my mood and the day's general mood. You know? Today's a 'Nikon D200' kind of day, and I know that the results I get will reflect, with their colours and atmosphere, the mood I was feeling. Cheers! //Rick
Preach it brother. DSLR are my favorite style. Keep going back to my original Pentax K10d. Wonderful DSLR bult like a tank and has lasted over 14 years! Thanks for sharing!
Pentax K10 was one of the last commercial ccd cameras before the cmos sensors with all their image processing took over
Also : having cheaper and less fragile gear will set you free. Your camera won't be that precious thing you only take out for certain occasions, but a reliable tool you can throw in a backpack each time you go somewhere.
Someone has to make this point: mirrorless are not more fragile than DSLRs, if anything they are more reliable.
DSLRs feel tough because they are large and heavy, but wrapping fragile precision mechanical contraptions in a big box doesn't take away the fact that they're fragile.
Mirror linkages break, phase detect sensors and secondary mirrors go out of alignment. On mirrorless the only moving part is the mechanical shutter, and some even got rid of that.
@@dixinggao7178 I see your point but I also see the fact that mirrorless cameras are often not weather-sealed and do not possess anything to protect the sensor when you change your lens. Plus, DSLR being cheap makes you feel like it's not a problem if they get a few scratches.
@@antoineminjoz8318 most mid-range and higher end mirrorless cameras today are weather sealed. Canon's entire FF line get weather sealing, plus the APS-C flagship R7; Sony's entire current Alpha line has it*; Nikon's entire FF line plus the Z50/II has it.
*Only the latest version of a given product line is considered. My local Sony website still lists several older A6x00 series cameras, of which the A6100 isn't sealed. ZV-E series aren't "Alpha", but the E1 has sealing as well.
Admittedly the entry fee for DSLR weather sealing is cheaper than a mirrorless, but we're comparing used vs new at this point.
As for the exposed sensor, I was uncomfortable with it at first, but it's not as dangerous as it seems. The sensors aren't fully exposed, manufacturers always glue a piece of optical glass on top of sensor actual. Which is why you can clean "sensors" in the field with some properly sized swabs, it's just a piece of glass. I've done it a couple of times and it's surprisingly easy to do. It does become problematic if you want to swap lens in the field, but some mirrorless cameras allow you to drop the shutter at shut down, acting as a make shift dust cover.
Definitely not disagreeing with the last point. Having a less valuable camera does bring peace of mind. I recently chipped the paint on my Z8 and was really bummed out by it.
@@antoineminjoz8318 AFAIK all full frame mirrorless available new today have some level of weather sealing, even the EOS RP. Some higher end APS-C cameras get it as well (EOS R7, Z50/II, some A6x00).
Getting a weather sealed DSLR is admittedly cheaper, but we're comparing used vs new at this point.
Exposed sensor seem nerve-wracking, but it's not as vulnerable as it seems. There's a piece of optical glass on top of the actual CFAs and CMOS, which are well protected. You can clean the "sensor" (protective glass) in the field with properly sized swabs. Surprisingly easy to do.
Definitely don't disagree with the last point, having cheaper gear that you care less about does bring peace of mind. I recently chipped the paint on my Z8, really bummed out by it.
I like optical viewfinder over EVF, anything battery dependent can be a problem
Teslas, for example !
@@timothykieper Agree! My next project is to put peddles on EVs.
I have an old Pentax K5 IIs (that, due to a nearby vineyard fire, the camera and my work got published in some bigger name publications) that I absolutely adore. It's not a CCD sensor, but it DOES work phenomenally with my old film camera lenses. Shooting that camera is absolutely a happy place for me.
... But it still feels like a modern upgrade cause I shoot way more film than digital 😅
That 16mp sensor is insane, really really good.
The "S" version of the K5ii is insanely good for a 12 yo camera
@@snappiness agreed. I think it was one of the first to go without an AA filter.. I love the trendsetting nature of Pentax
Still loving my D700. Still an amazing camera even if only 12 mp.
One thing that earlier DSLRs with crop sensors, like the Nikon D40 and D80, offered was their relatively compact bodies and lighter weight, especially compared to the "flagship" models like the D3, or even the weight of the D700. Now that I don't HAVE to choose one of the old DSLRs I find myself more likely to pick up my smaller D80 and take it with me on an excursion or holiday.
Yes D700 is a massive brick, it certainly makes me feel more PRO everytime I take it in my hand. Then I realize it's only PRO-sumer camera and go back to my D40
Wow, Snappy! I thought I needed professional help for owning 18-ish cameras. Against 120 cameras that you have, I feel like a toddler. Great video! You spoke a lot of truth!
@@Mostlyphotography83 haha, happy to make you look sane anytime 🤣
I imported a Nikon Df from Japan a month ago, and bought some AF-D lenses on ebay for it. I'm absolutely loving it.
Try the original 24-120 AF-D lens. I love the range and while it’s a screw drive focus motor it’s still fast enough. Image quality is great and it makes a nice, one lens solution for a minimalist kit.
@jayabramson6702 I have the 24-120 f4 AF-S that normally lives on my D780. It's a great lens but really big and heavy to carry around all day. For the Df I think a better standard zoom is the 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 D
@ I was referring to the older f/3.5-5.6. It’s not nearly as heavy as the f/4 version. The zoom range is more versatile than the 28-80.
I keep using my K1 markII it’s effortless use of the vintage lenses and new lenses makes it special.
I'm taking a Nikon D90 on holiday this week, rather than anything newer, because I just love the quality of the pictures (and it handles low-light in auto way better than anything I can try to figure out, manually)!
Oops, I bought a k-1 yesterday 🙈
lol same, got a screaming deal on a mark ii and a 77 limited to go with it
@@incohesiveglue that's a heck of deal in its own right. Rock on
How is the result ?
Started with film slr's. (yeah I feel old). Then my first dslr was the Canon EOS 450D, after that the 7D, and then lastly the 5Dmkii. They were all great and taught me so much, but I went mirrorless and have not looked back other than for nostalgic reasons. Mostly I miss my 5Dmkii. Got a Minolta 7D a few years back, and have a pretty ok collection of slr's. The Minolta produces great images, but the convenience and IQ of mirrorless full frame paired with old glass is hard to beat. That's another tip - buy and adapt old lenses if you've got a mirrorless camera and like the vintage look.
Great video!! I shoot on both mirrorless and DSLR systems. But lately, I've been gravitating toward my Nikon D300 as an everyday camera. It's been so much fun to use with a manual 28mm lens for street photography. Plus the camera is built like a tank!
I stumbled upon your channel not too long ago and I really enjoyed your videos on old cameras and your discussions around it. I also learned some things too from your Haul videos. haha!
Til now, I'm still using my Nikon D750, which is a 10 year old camera this year, for my work and leisure. There's definitely a charm of using an optical viewfinder and I feel like I'm more connected with my camera by it when I'm shooting. I'm not hating on mirrorless camera btw, I kinda need one for my work to perform faster and I'm aiming for a Nikon Z. And I agree, a DSLR is still a great choice to learn full Manual photography today on a budget and for its controls and handling.
I'll definitely keep this D750 forever tho. There are a lot of F Mount Lenses that has character and affordable too!
I'm a semi professional and STILL have a 5Dii in my camera bag as my trusted backup body 😊... its reliable and just keeps going and going & deliver VERY good quality photos if you know how to handle it properly when shooting
I have and use a Pentax K-5, it has 16.3 MP and it is the only camera I'll ever need. I also have and use a Pentax K-110D, it still works and only has like six MP. 📷📷📷📷📷
My Nikon D750 is my main DSLR. I bought a Canon 5D Classic 4 yrs ago & the output of the 5d is still amazing!
I still have my 2009 Pentax K20D, and used it just last week. It has a Katzeye split image and microprism ring focusing screen with the high brightness option, and a Pentax Magnifier Eyecup that increases viewfinder magnification by 1.18 times; I'm sure you've already guessed it's set up for manual focus lenses. The camera certainly gives a different rendering to my K3 and K3iii.
I use a Nikon D40x with an 18 70 afs and a Nikon D40 with a 18 55 VR lens. I love them both. CCD sensor cameras.
That's a beautiful sensor. Same on as the D50 and D70, I believe.
@@milesian1 they say that all 4 of these have the same sensor in them. I had 3 of them, and they had slightly different output, subtle but noticeable.
Judging by the comments, this video brings pure snappiness. All I can add is a heartfelt hear, hear!
Dang! I hope I can shake your hand one day dude!! I couldn't agree more & love that you are helping so many people hear these ideas!!
Picked up an old 6D this year as an entry way into full frame. Zero regrets, I often pick it over my newer bodies if fast autofocus isn't of concern to me
I still have 3 DSLRs alongside my mirrorless, and I use them just as much. The simplicity is nice and with Magic Lantern they are beasts. And yes, the optical viewfinder just can't be beat
I've gotten into photography over the past two years and my current collection is: Nikon D200, Nikon D7100 and a Panasonic Lumiux G2 because I wanted to try mirrorless and the Micro4/3 system was cheap enough for me to "get my feet wet" with. I still find myself going out with the D200 and 7100 far more often than the G2 because I really like the process of finding a shot, lining it up with the viewfinder and then making sure I have the image framed perfectly before I take the shot.
There's something kinda therapeutic about looking through an optical viewfinder and seeing exactly what the lens/sensor is seeing as opposed to an electronic viewfinder or just using the back screen as with the G2.
I have several mirrorless cameras but recently got a Pentax K-x. OVF, 12Mp, a jillion K-mount lenses, and Shake Reduction. And mine is lime green. What's not to love?
Name the jillion lenses please!!!
@@XXX-vy6xv I think it is a typo: should be killion; j is next to k on the keyboard. 🙂
I recently picked up a Sigma SD15 and I'm enjoying the change in my process from using modern hardware
A Nikon D700 and a 50mm F1.8 can be had for well under $500 USD -- that's the world we live in. I love my modern Nikon mirrorless kit for work, but if I was shooting solely for fun? There's almost no casual shooting scenario I couldn't accomplish with a D700; portraits, landscapes, lifestyle, even some amount of action/sports. It's 12MP of pure Nikon goodness, vintage 2008.
agree. I just bought a D700 with only 15k shutter count, a 50 1.4D and a 28mm 2.8D for 400€. Amazing colors/"rendering", even for night photography up to iso 6400.
And even the D800 is cheap, and it's a brick powerhouse like the D700 but higher megapixels and dynamic range for landscape or such. I've never used the d700 but I do have the 5D original with 12.7mp and it still packs a punch despite the extra years older.
This video popped up at an interesting time. I was going to sell ALL of my Canon DSLR's and lenses and switch to Olympus mirrorless. (Don't get me started on micro 4/3 quality.....it's there.)
I bought an Olympus OM D EM-1mirrorless camera and some lenses, which is an amazing piece of technology, but I just can't make myself break away from DSLR's with optical viewfinders. The technology in this Olympus is astonishing for it's age! The body has 5 stop image stabilization, and when used with a lens with image stabilization, the results are phenomenal!
But for some reason, I just can't make the switch. I will continue to build a micro 4/3 system for some specific jobs I do, but I don't think I can part with all of the Canon DSLR gear I have.
Micro 4/3 is more than capable of producing incredible results, but I prefer less technology from DSLR's of days gone past. I have a Canon 5D Mark IV, and I set it to the most basic settings possible.....either aperture priority or manual mode, and I use a center focus point and do the "focus/recompose" method.
I have a Canon 10D and 20D (6 and 8 megapixel respectively), and I used to shoot weddings with those cameras. Higher megapixels are nice, but not a necessity.
Thanks for posting!!
I'm still using a Pentax K5 to this day. I use iPhone for video so with the camera market having shifted towards vlogging I really want a camera focussed on stills and the K5 still produces great photos. The viewfinder is another reason I stick with it, as you suggest in the video.
@@classicaloracle smartphones for video are super good. Most things people want to film for stuff like UA-cam anyway can look great on smartphones.
@@snappiness What I really want to know is which camera would replace my K5 from the modern crop of products. After the Pentax I find the menus on my wife's Fuji counterintuitive and the build quality is not as good as the K5. However, I also don't want to live in the past if sensors to make DSLRs are no longer going to progress and thereby production will cease.
My main concerns are viewfinder quality and battery life with mirrorless. The rear screens on most cameras don't come close to phone quality - well you know the issues!
I own 2 top mirrorless cameras the R6 and R5, however, I prefer my 5D Mark IV which I will never get rid of. To this day my best photos were taken with an 8mp DSLR. So I agree with you 100%.
When everyone was shooting film the CCD sensors made a more familiar look similar to film making it easy for photographers to transition to digital.
I have owned or used literally 100s of cameras over the years (work in a camera shop for 10+ years). Despite I love my A7III for regular assignment stuff, my old trusty Leica M9 with CCD and Nikon Df with optical viewfinder are by far my fav cameras. Love the ''problems'' they give me, and indeed therefore boost the way I look without coming back with 1000s of images, but rather a few I am happy with.
I like both. I love being able to preview my image as I'm taking a picture on a mirrorless viewfinder and I love the charm and familiarity of an optical viewfinder. For me the main point is that these cameras became capable of easily taking beautiful images about 20 years ago. I held out for the first 5 years of digital because CCD sensors did _not_ look like or act like film. But as the tech came along, they became capable of making beautiful images of their own. Now, many of those fully evolved cameras are practically being given away as people upgrade for features many barely use. And these wonderful cameras are inexpensive and the barrier to trying them out is very low.
It actually reminds me of that time I was holding out. I was buying film cameras for next to nothing. I bought a Pentax 6x7 in great working order with a 105 f2.4 for about $120 which I still have and use. And Mamiya TLRs with big lens sets for about the same. Who will ever want to use these things, the sellers were thinking.
These DSLRs that blew people's minds in 2010 didn't get worse over time. Pros were using them to take incredible pictures then and there's nothing stopping anyone getting the same kind of images out of them now.
Shooting with an OVF really connects you to the scene you’re looking over. Also the more tactile the ergonomics of DSLRs/SLRs give me greater connection with the images I create, I feel I’m making the picture not the camera
Great video, I have an old Nikon D200 with an entry level lens and I have lots of fun with it. It is glitchy and makes you slow down and just enjoy taking pics.
I recently picked up a Nikon d300 with battery grip for just under 100 pounds (~130 USD) and I love the thing. This is coming mostly from film and borrowed digital stuff. Took it on a trip and got some truly stunning pics with it. It does show it's age but it's built like a tank and 12mpx is plenty for my hobby uses
just bought a 1d mark ii n and i am having a blast. the colors, the feels in my hand. everything is so different from my little m50
Loving my new to me Nikon D700, it makes a nice companion for my 10 year old D7100 that I bought new. No need for mirrorless while one or both still work.
I've had my Canon EOS 40d since new in 2008, still works well. I added an EOS M to shoot video with but still use the 40d quite a bit. They can be had dirt cheap now for what they are.
Is today 'Use Your Old Camera Day'? Robin Wong just uploaded a video on the same topic about an hour before you. Weird
Get a Canon 5D classic, It does everything great, it's only true weakness is not good dynamic range in landscapes but that can be overcome with bracketing and the use of grad filters. The sensor on the 5D classic is amazing.
I have a Nikon Z50 and I do love it.... But I will never give up my D500 nor mi D750. You said it, there is something romantic looking and compose through a real view finder!!!!! I am 65, and still love to use my trusty Nikon FG with Black and White film Photography, than I digitize the negatives with my D750 and a macro lens, my Nikkor 60mm f2.8 macro from the 90's... What a magnificent feeling....😍🤩🤪
DSLRs are brilliant. I have picked up a used D3 and D90 and they work incredibly well considering the age of those cameras.
Have had many mirrorless cameras over there years. But I’m never quite happy with the results and all ways end up grabbing my old canon 40d! Amazing camera
My Sony a7RII is the camera I usually bring with me when I want to shoot some birds, or some indoors shots in low light, but... I got my hands on an unused, in box, Minolta 7D (the plastic protector were still on the screen *high pitch screams of delight*) a couple of years ago and I love it. It's technically lacking compared to the Sony, but I'm having a lot more fun shooting with my Minolta. The colours are great, usually looks allmost perfect straight from the camera. It also feels like an analog slr when I'm using it, with great controls and a screen so lacking that I usually don't bother using it, so I don't get to see the photos untill I get home.
I recently bought an old 6D classic for ~$150
The 6D isn’t really that old… I just upgraded from mine. Its weakest point is the AF.
Dang $150 is a solid deal. They typically range $350-$450 depending on condition! Howd you managed that? Nice find
The colour science on the 6D is something else - don't know what they changed from 5D II but they nailed it on the 6D. Miss mine sometimes.
@@tomperry9034 not to mention you have the ability to shoot at wild ISO settings and actually get amazing results
@@nikobuerk346 true, even at 25.600 ISO, i made 19cmx13cm prints and they still look VERY good. I still have the 6D but besides low light/high iso, in normal/good light MUCH MORE prefer the 5D1, 5DII or Nikon D700 (this also excels for night photography, up to iso 6400). ALL of these have MUCH better color than the 6D, and more importantly, a distinct "rendering" and "feel" to the pictures.
Annnd if you feel like you need to upgrade it’s sometimes best to grab your old camera for a few days.
That really helps to appreciate what you got😅
Love your videos! I still like to use my old Canon 1Ds M2 once in a while. I bought it second hand in 2010. I just love how it feels in my hands, I love the heavy weight and the huge optical viewfinder. It's a beauty!. And even though it's not a CCD sensor, the camera was released in 2004 and the photos have some magical look that I don't find in my modern mirrorless Canon. Thanks for your content! ☀
I love old DSLRs ! That's why I have one for everyday of the month. 31 DSLRs. My favorites are the Nikon D300 and Pentax K5. The real reason I have so many is that they are cheap. I shoot a hell of a lot and I don't want to ware out the shutters. (250 to 350 shots a day) I have newer, higher MP DSLRs Nikon D7100 and Pentax K3 but their images use up a lot of space on my computer. For what I do with my images 12 and 16 MP is just fine. I don't think I could stand an electronical viewfinder. I started out with a Pentax K1000 back in 1977, and optical viewfinders are all I know and want. I prefer the look of the output I get from my old cameras. It may sound crazy but the image from a D300 looks better to me than one from a D7100.
I just bought a Fuji S5 Pro and a Tamron 15-30 f/2.8. Still wrapping my head around proper exposure (the metering system is a little weird) and finding colour settings I like, but I'm really enjoying the learning process so far
Canon 5D with some old Super Takumar M42 mounts lenses…. Sweet sweet setup for pocket money. :)
I like the argument and points you made. I think old DSLR's are great for beginners. However, my big reason to move to mirror less was the size reduction and I do like the overall improvement in image quality. There is a vibrancy and a higher level of detail with my mirror less that I could never achieve with my old DSLR..which makes cause it's newer but besides that point. I do miss the optical viewfinder but I feel the tradeoff in image quality and size reduction was worth it. For someone with a newer camera I can't see too much of point in grabbing an old DSLR besides not being worried about it getting broken or stolen
The issue of image quality is quite debatable. You can read the comments of Nigel Danson's comparison between a Nikon Z7 and a Nikon D200.
I actually recently brought a Sony A99V which is an SLT (single lens translucent) camera so it’s kind of a cross between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera
I brought it since it had a full frame 24 megapixel sensor and it uses sony a mount so I can get quite a lot of cheap lenses for it and I also love the screen since it can move in lots of directions and it also has GPS tagging, which is a nice feature (V model only)
I have also used my grandfather‘s old Camera (his current one is a Sony A300) which was a Minolta Dynax 7D and my A99 reminds me quite a lot of that Camera since they have a very similar atmosphere to them
(metal body, lots of buttons, locking dials, beautiful looking)
And I really do love that 7D although it has some limitations for being such an old Camera
(it has a CCD sensor so it has pretty bad noise at anything above 400 ISO and to make it worse it’s an APS-C sized sensor so worse noise)
I bought a Canon 5D from 2005, best decision ever. I carry it around everywhere. Today I shot with it in the subway and it was a JOY to use.
I picked up a K10D after I saw a video of yours on one. It's a great camera and it produces some lovely images.
I still shoot with my canon 6D mk1. I never really understood what the mirrorless hubbub was about. You can make a smaller camera…but they make them bigger anyway because they’re more comfortable to hold. Optical viewfinders are better on batteries. You have more dedicated buttons with a DSLR. If we like cameras that get out of the way, a DSLR is just as good and sometimes limiting your options on purpose inspires creativity. Try shooting everything with just 1 fixed focal length lens for a while.
Having used an R6 and 6D, the images from them aren't very different but the accuracy of autofocus and even moreso light metering is a big boost to speed. But I also use a 5D classic and the images from even it are superb. 6D is even better specs and lowlight and has wifi for transfering to your phone. Throw a 40mm 2.8 on that thing and just use the hell outta it, it's so good. Faithful -2 contrast is my favorite look as it's simply true-to-life as you saw it. I'll edit the raw if I want to spice it up for print.
Still on my PENTAX KIII and still happy, it is the pic not the camera.
another thing to keep in mind, part of the change in colors on older vs newer cameras may be due to the different dyes used in the older color filter arrays, they may let in a slightly different amount of light to each channel.
I got a Sony A100 already, now youre making me look at other Sony DSLR models... 😁
just picked up a Fuji S5 pro and a 50 f1.8 to fiddle with, it'll be a nice addition to my primary shooter of the much newer GFX 50s, excited to have the freedom to go between a CCD APS-C DSLR and a way more modern medium format mirrorless setup for whatever I'm feeling
i own three mirrorless, full frame,sony cameras for work. I love them. But i also love the sony a99, their older slt, so much i just went and bought my second one .
I really like the waist level finders on my TLRs Rollieflex and Yashica 124 and analogue film.
My old Canon SL2 has a optical viewfinder. It can also shoot in live mode like a mirrorless without viewfinder. Of course I have my M6 mark II that I still say is the best Under $1000 mirrorless camera. The SL2 is the camera I got when I learned real photography.
The 5D Mark III is a beast of a camera, 22mp FF can't be compared to stuff from 2005 and the amount of trial and error using the 20 year old camera is going to frustrate and possibly put off a new photographer. At least with the 5D III it has a pretty decent AF along with bells and whistles that are sought after these days. I know you're a vintage/retro camera fan but a lot of people get into photography these days because the camera assists and helps them learn.
I would argue the 6D as well. Focusing not so much as way less points, but the center point is super accurate and sensitive compared to the older cameras, and iso performance is fantastic. The same year as the 5D3 and 5dsr.
For photographers that don't want to or need to do much post-production the older DSLRs are really great. I use the latest and greatest (Nikon Z8) for my work, but recently picked up a D80 for $69 (chuckle). During some recent headshot sessions I grabbed the D80 with an old 28-105 Nikkor zoom and took a few shots. One just happened to make the cut as the client's favorite, and I had no problem delivering it to her. And since the resolution wasn't there to do a lot of work on it, the retouching was quick and easy. From looking closely at the files I'd compare the resolution to fairly high resolution 35mm film scans or slightly better.
In short, you will not have the space for editing that a larger file gives you, but it is still an advantage in this case.
And your testimony shows that a good photo, even if it was taken with a mid-range DSLR camera almost 20 years ago, is still a good photo.
I'd argue that for the novel photographer, a camera that is too old it can have frustrating quirks like having to buy special cards, the batteries that are dscontinued or too old-looking menus. I think there's a sweet spot around the early 2010's with cameras like Canon 6D where they feel modern and familiar yet they are quite affordable
Been with Canon EOS 1300D for 7-8 years. Wanted to change it and move to mirrorless or medium format, but they're so expensive! I wish my photography would have paid me something to upgrade. Yet, 1300D still serves my needs with a proper combination of lens.
One thing drawing me towards old DSLRs is how bulky and heavy some of them are, the shutter sound and sound of the mirror slap. I shoot a mirrorless compact with my vintage lenses and i miss the feeling of having something mechanical and solid in my hands. I still get that feeling with my film SLRs, but shooting on film is a whole different thing.
I always say that modern mirror cameras have an improved cell phone photography look. They are undoubtedly sharper or generate a sharpening effect and it seems to me that the software is perhaps doing too many things there. When I use an old DSLR camera, for example D700 or D3 but even some first mirrors like the EM-5, the images look much more natural to me, I mean, what I see in the photograph is very similar to what I was seeing with my own eyes. The same thing happens with the "science of color", there are Sony cameras with CCD that have a fairly faithful color science but then, you take an APSC for example an A6000 and from a blue sky it makes a blue sky as if you had put a polarizer , (not to mention skin tones). Luckily there are many good old cameras available with optics that are also great, many with the precious 3D effect that today is almost impossible to see in low-mid range lenses.
Those of us who have an old DSLR may as well hang onto it, since its resale value is trivial. I've had my D200 for 11 years now and can think of no reason to not keep using it. Its color just hits me in the right place and though the files are "small," I can do pretty much any size I want with Gigapixel. A new Nikon mirrorless would be great fun, don't get me wrong. But absent pro-type assignments, the 20 year old D200 will do nicely.
I have been looking for a Canon 6d MK2. Nice option for an entry into full frame photogrpahy. On the down side, seems the optical view finder is one of the common first things to get corrupted on any model.
Thanks for the video. Down here in the very bright southwestern US, electronic screens can be difficult to see. I always have a selection of older DSLRs around for just this reason. So much easier to compose, not to mention being a true view of the scenes. Mirrorless is great in lower light, but give me an optical in the blazing sun.
Very true. I love the exposure preview so I can fiddle with the compensation as desired, plus the very accurate metering, but the optical is fantastic as well, for different reasons. In full sun even a viewfinder is very dim when your eyes are adjusted for full sun, and it takes a second to really see what you're looking at even without glare. Both are ideal for different reasons. I've got an R6 and love it, but still like using even my ancient DSLR's like the 2005 5D from time to time. Maybe I ought to pick up a cheap 5dsr or something.. er, one day, for landscape stuff. Although live view fine focus adjust might show the DSLR problems again, but it's cheap for 50mp.
I recently discovered that my digital cameras from around 2010 don't age very well. Many lenses show AF issues and some material starts to deteriorate - like rubber on zoom rings and plastic bezels around the front lens. To be more exact, I have issues with Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 and Nikon 18-135 DX lens. Nikon D7000 has issues with card reader and Nikon D80 shutter probably died - camera shows Err on the screen.
It doesn't mean they were not well made -they served it's purpose. However, one should still be careful to test several functions prior buying such an old digital camera. Film cameras from 70s aged better IMO :)
Still on my 6D. Just got an SL1 for 50 bucks. And I still have an analog Canon EF camera. The image are still beautiful. DSLRs deserve more hype.
2005 is when I started my dslr career. Back then these things were magical. Very few today have ever experienced the magic in real time back in the day
I follow your train of thought, although I don't think I's go back as far as the 10mp cameras you showed. Like the guy who won that photo competition, I think something like a Canon 6d or 5d mkiii is the sweet spot. Fantastic image quality, great manual handling and pretty low cost. In the UK a 6d from MPB starts at just over £200, and 5d mkiii under £300. In many respects the 6d is the better option as it's slightly lighter and less likely to have ben flogged half to death by a pro. A lot of camera for the money.
If I'm going to be focusing on a matte screen, I'd rather go medium format or large format.
Experience the best of the best if you're going to go backwards, and there's little that's better than focusing on a huge focusing screen, like a 6x7 format or 4x5 Graflex.
Decade, or even a few years more, is still very competitive as far as sensor performance goes, but beyond that low-light performance starts taking quite a hit. The D90 is my oldest that I'd still rate as good enough with a fast prime. The old school big prism viewfinder is definitely a pleasure to use - something Nikon sadly dropped from later models in both the DX and FX line that all give 70% reduced view.
For sure I love the concept of being able to see what the lens sees.
I recently had to fall back to shooting a dslr for a period while my mirrorless camera went out for repairs, had to relearn the muscle memory for it. While it certainly did the job, there are just some things inherently mirrorless is better at, some is newer technology and some is just advancing times, but in my portraiture should I choose to blow out the background at f1.2, I have confidence in my hit rate with mirrorless over the guesswork with my DSLR. I used to be ok with higher ISOs on my DSLR because it was all I knew but comparing shots at the same iso values it’s insane how much cleaner those shots are with newer full frame mirrorless. Having said that though, my R6 II nowhere feels as good in the hand as any of my old 5D cameras did, they just made mirrorless a tad too small for my grip unless I’m adding a grip or going for an R3/R1, which I’m not. Those cameras just feel at home in my hands and it definitely makes a mental difference in the process but I will take mirrorless over DSLR any day for the advancements and how much video I also shoot these days. But if I was just going into the wilderness to shoot some landscape for a weekend? I’d have no problem taking just a DSLR if that was my only option
In reviewing my own older images, I gotta agree. I shoulda never sold my Canon 5D. I 'moved to Fuji mirrorless years ago, and love using the optical viewfinder on the X-pro 2, but there is just something richer about those older pics.
I have 1 DSLR left with 2 mirrorless cameras. To be honest I don't even notice the EVF. If anything OVFs perform worse with flare and also the lack of manual focus assist options.
I have recently been enjoying using my Canon EOS20D that I bought 20 years ago last month! I used that camera until about 2015 when I then 'upgraded' it for a newer Canon DSLR, but I like the size and feeling in the hand of the 20D. It's simple, it's chunky and it really does get the job done. Sure it's not the best in low light or at high ISO, but for every day photos it really is fine with an 8MP sensor.
Batteries are readily available and it takes up to an 8GB card. Shooting in RAW mode I get about 800 shots!
The only thing that has 'broke' is the rubber cover for the ports on the left hand side, I still have both bits so the ports are still protected, I have been looking for a replacement port cover but no joy so far.
Would you class this 20 year old DSLR as a ''Vintage" digital camera? I think so!!
Greatest shortcomings of DSLRs is the (lack of) lens calibration. Older Nikons (at least some of them) only have one correction point (only the D780 got two point correction…shame on Nikon), some Canons have two (W-T) (or none). I’ve had 9 DSLRs over the years and still have two D750s for wedding photography, and every single lens (brand and 3rd party) had to be calibrated to every camera body for perfect AF. My Z 6 doesn’t need any calibration, I can trust the AF much more (in good to okayish lighting conditions). For me (cheaper) DSLR lens + MILC is the way to go 🤘🏼
Still love my Nikon D750. The other thing it has you didn’t mention is the pop up flash. Always handy for a little fill light when the light drops.
Popup flashes are not unique to older cameras though. They also have never really been entirely useful. If flash photography is something you want/need to do, pick up a 15 year old flash, those still work great.
I bought a Nikon D80 as my first camera because of your videos, and my upgrade plan is a D500.
I hear great things about the D500, and it's really affordable nowadays!
@@snappiness I'd have gone for it first, but it was like $500 for just a body compared to $150 for the D80 with kit lens, charger, and battery.
@@JessicaKStark right, and now you can just upgrade a body and keep all the same lenses. Makes sense to me.
I bought my used canon 1d for 140GBP ,which still using ccd and i love how it capture the image , sometimes more favourable than the canon 5D3 when i still uaing those years
The 1D have a white balance and dof priority mode which can do auto caulculate F stop setting by measure near and far point you want to in focus and vola 😂 both missing in newer model which is sad
Only problem is hard to find a battery and charger for it