Moore and Murphy are in cahoots

[mcbob]

Cameras are getting cheaper and better at an exponential rate. However, is the rate of improvement now such that there's little hope whatsoever for a small independent producer to buy a camera with any certainty that it won't be completely obsolete within the year? Is the increasing rate of tech turnover squeezing out the smaller pudgy bearded camera guy?

Minor whiny personal anecdote, got shot down on three consecutive job bids because my AF100 wasn't considered good enough (despite it probably being more than good enough for the intended content), yet the budgets weren't large enough to justify renting (let alone buying) anything more capable. I don't suck at the "shooting stuff" part of this job, but am rapidly overwhelmed with how to rectify the rest of it.

 

[morgan_moore]

Not at all, a fat codec 4k cam is pretty much good for ever.

AF100 etc have been just a compromise since day one.

S

 

[mcbob]

Forever isn't nearly as long as it used to be, though

 

[DBP]

I do think that the rapid upgrading on camera on specs has unfairly phased out some of the older ones. While the af100, GH2, 5D, 7D etc... are obviously inferior to new tech, I think the differences for most applications are way exaggerated. They seem huge to us pixel peepers but well produced material on those older cameras still holds up as far as I'm concerned.

 

[David W. Jones]

This may not be viable in all situations but, I think the key here is in having clientele that select you for your abilities, not for your camera. In this situation you generally then select the camera which best suits the job at hand within the given budget. Sometimes you just have to grit your teeth and turn down this type client that wants you to shoot on a decked out Alexa, but only wants to pay for a DVX100.

 

[morgan_moore]

Forever isn't nearly as long as it used to be, though

Playing my old tape. 2002-8 I upgraded stills cams every year because the cams were crap. Then the nikon d3 came out and was pretty competent. Forever has for me and my stills been 6 years now.

Id get 6 years out of a f55

S

 

[Andrius Simutis]

Cameras are getting cheaper and better at an exponential rate. However, is the rate of improvement now such that there's little hope whatsoever for a small independent producer to buy a camera with any certainty that it won't be completely obsolete within the year? Is the increasing rate of tech turnover squeezing out the smaller pudgy bearded camera guy?

I think we need to keep a little perspective here. It's true that these cameras are packing in more specs at lower prices, so in theory they're obsolete sooner, but really they keep on chugging and making good images. The other thing to remember is how much we had to invest in good cameras before. The cost of a Digibeta camera would take years to pay off, while most of these new HD and 4K cams pay for themselves before the year is out since we're investing less in them.

 

[mcbob]

Id get 6 years out of a f55

S

I don't doubt that... if an F55 with accessories were anywhere near the average small producer's cam budget, I'd have one yesterday.

Of course it isn't, so we make do with compromise cameras that outside clients and producers increasingly don't want to compromise upon, and day rates in my market usually just aren't worth renting to accommodate. They definitely aren't high enough to pay for a new camera every 2 years. And while I'd love to pick and choose clients (well, I do to some degree), there simply aren't enough in this market with that mindset, because they're all budget-strapped too. fWhatever.

Suppose I just get mopey and fatalistic when I have a slow week.