Do you still care?

[Cattykit]

I'm talking about all those charts and comparisons.
Back in the day, I did care about those for they were good indicators of differences that were noticeable in real-life.
In recent years, I stopped caring and when I do, it's only for the purpose of arguing over which is better or not though I know there's no point. Unlike before, such differences you get to notice in those charts and comparisons don't really reveal real-life differences. I'm not saying there's no difference. It is that such differences are now very minimal between brands and cameras.
Well, pixelpeeping is not fun anymore...

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

yes i think it only matters before and right after you buy something. you have to justify it all. ive participated in enough 7d vs 5d2 threads it's not even funny.

but seriously a month later after getting comfortable with the 7d i never looked back.... ever.

 

[996GT2]

I'm talking about all those charts and comparisons.
Back in the day, I did care about those for they were good indicators of differences that were noticeable in real-life.
In recent years, I stopped caring and when I do, it's only for the purpose of arguing over which is better or not though I know there's no point. Unlike before, such differences you get to notice in those charts and comparisons don't really reveal real-life differences. I'm not saying there's no difference. It is that such differences are now very minimal between brands and cameras.
Well, pixelpeeping is not fun anymore...

Pixel-peeping with cameras isn't as fun anymore.

But there's always pixel-peeping with lenses to take up the slack

 

[angry hampster]

I agree with 996. At this point, any DSLR made in the last 5 years is a wonderfully capable camera at ISO 800 or lower. Newer ones/better ones are great up to ISO 6400 and beyond.

I'm a professional, and my main camera is a five year old model. No one knows that by the pics I take.

 

[arrfep]

I agree with what's been said before. It makes being the "camera recommender guy" MUCH easier. People know I shoot, so ever week it seems like someone is picking my brain, debating of the minutiae of five or six different models.

I tell them that in terms of image quality, parity's been pretty much reached amongst anything under $1k. I tell them to get whatever's cheapest, and send them on their way.

Me, personally... Once there's a D700 style body with a FF sensor with the D3S/D5100 high ISO, and D7000 DR, I should be happy with it for a very long time.

 

[Gintaras]

I agree with 996. At this point, any DSLR made in the last 5 years is a wonderfully capable camera at ISO 800 or lower. Newer ones/better ones are great up to ISO 6400 and beyond.

I'm a professional, and my main camera is a five year old model. No one knows that by the pics I take.

It depends in who's hand camera is, some can take better photos with P&S/advanced P&S than others with DSLR or even Pro-level DSLR cameras, see for yourself:

http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/ChallengesFinished.aspx

Another thing I've noticed, that those, who all the time argue about cameras, specs, rarely you can see any photos taken by these people. I call those people - photo engineers, of course, most them are Cannikons...

 

[angry hampster]

It depends in who's hand camera is, some can take better photos with P&S/advanced P&S than others with DSLR or even Pro-level DSLR cameras, see for yourself:

http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/ChallengesFinished.aspx

The vast majority of photos on there were taken with a DSLR, so I'm not sure what you're trying to show me.

 

[speedy2]

Same here. Depends on the person shooting and how well they know their gear. I've personally taken crap shots with an XT a cheap lens. And I've taken a few stunning shots with a $30 8 year old Canon A80 that I bought off ebay. If people want to argue for the sake of arguing, I'm out of the conversation. It's pointless. Like angry hampster, anything made in the last 5 years is going to be more than plenty for most if they know what they're doing.

 

[angry hampster]

Same here. Depends on the person shooting and how well they know their gear. I've personally taken crap shots with an XT a cheap lens. And I've taken a few stunning shots with a $30 8 year old Canon A80 that I bought off ebay. If people want to argue for the sake of arguing, I'm out of the conversation. It's pointless. Like angry hampster, anything made in the last 5 years is going to be more than plenty for most if they know what they're doing.

In the end it's all about composition and lighting, regardless of camera. From time to time I do feel short-handed when using my 5D because it's so slow, but I'm nowhere near the point of wanting another camera.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Pixel-peeping with cameras isn't as fun anymore.

But there's always pixel-peeping with lenses to take up the slack

 

[speedy2]

In the end it's all about composition and lighting, regardless of camera. From time to time I do feel short-handed when using my 5D because it's so slow, but I'm nowhere near the point of wanting another camera.

Exactly. With such sophisticated DSLR's available at low prices, everyone is getting one and claiming to be a "pro." Then, when they don't get the results they expect...because they are not a pro...they are then quick to bash whatever DSLR they bought.

 

[Gintaras]

Exactly. With such sophisticated DSLR's available at low prices, everyone is getting one and claiming to be a "pro." Then, when they don't get the results they expect...because they are not a pro...they are then quick to bash whatever DSLR they bought.

More than agree...
I'm new to DSLR and photo is just a hobby.
If someone asks advice about camera, I do suggest for newbies(as myself) advanced P&S or entry level DSLR. And no reason to buy DSLR at all, if someone wants to use it in Auto mode only. It takes time to learn to use camera, takes time to use lenses too.

Pro photographer can get very good photos using P&S or entry level DSLR, but no way a newbie could get a good photos using pro-level camera
There's no instant success...