It wasn't a bad article as such you can read it here...
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/jaccuse.shtml
But on a personal take I found myself strangely embracing the "good enough" approach to starting with a new DSLR system. Despite some AF and hot shoe issues I'm liking the D90 in a way that it's really a very good match for what I wanted. I could bleat out that I think Sony should have done a D90 long ago with their own version, and I think they could have..and unlike the A580 it probably would be enough to hit the spot for OVF fans too.
Interesting to see the new K-30 from Pentax with we hope a cured AF system and sealing and a 100% VF which is great to see some effort here. I've moved on from that and questionable looks aside it should be decent.
Back to good enough. Some folks have this new camera take where they crave the latest sensor and will overlook other areas such as functionality and handling just to get their paws on the latest sensor or roughly translated more pixels. I've never been pixel driven I think the argument for resolution being an issue, has for the most part become a non issue. Today I could have for instance bought a D3200 body only for just under £500. Instead I ordered another D90 body only for a nice bargain of £450. That means the D90 has cost not that much more than the K-x and Km5d did when I got them.
Good enough is a bargain hunters dream. 12mp CMOS is probably for most good enough in terms of high ISO and DR. I really can't say I'm impressed with the constant drive for more resolution 24mp is way overkill for my needs. Indeed I said once the 6mp CCD was mostly good enough for the tasks I have, and in a lot of ways it still is.
Marketing is a curious thing because a lot of buyers will splash out on a D3200 to get their paws on the 24mp sensor. How many actually exploit that is yet to be seen, a minority I would think. The other reason for ignoring the D3200 is the basic stuff that is missing. Suddenly my Metz 58 AF-2 is no use to me for HSS, it can act as a master flash but the onboard unit of the Nikon budget camera cannot. Too many limitations with that body for my uses..not to mention AF motors and other stuff.
One thing I learnt with cameras trying various different ones and makers is that in a lot of ways you can get more then you need. I did toy with getting a D300s, but is it really worth another £550 on top of the D90 to get the better build, same IQ (if not a tad worse), better AF buffer etc. IMO I could not justify that outlay on a body that is a bit out of date. The D90 is out of date but bargain priced out of date!
Of course most buyers will swoon with big pixel numbers and improved video functions, but if that is the path of the camera industry you wonder where they will go next? 24mp APS-C so what next how to impress the buying audience yet another time..in some ways the camera industry is quite sad really constantly looking for updates and improvements to sensors. Sometimes worthwhile, but did anyone hold off on buying a 35mm emulsion because a new one would be on the way in a few years?
Technology may be interesting, but ultimately can prove a distraction longer term. I've spent long enough looking at all this stuff, now maybe I should take some photos
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
I used to read photo magazines to gain knowledge and yes the odd time gear reviews (right back to film era stuff) now we mostly spend out time looking at sensor scores and studio scenes to pixel peep the latest sensor technology. I suppose I've been as guilty as any on this one, but am I the only one starting to tire of the relentless pursuit of the next technology improvement? I appreciate it's a different ball game v 35mm SLR's you got an SLR and you did not have any IQ debates, it was purely on handling and features/build etc. People used to keep their 35mm SLR's for ages..now a DSLR is almost disposable when the next model comes out.
I intend to thrash the life out of the 2 D90's and whilst observing new models..ignore them for years to come!