| No. > Unless you're printing A3 pages, getting gigantic pictures, or cropping aggressively, D70s can still hold up pretty well You even qualified that later with "if there's good enough light" and "unless you're chasing something moving". No, a D70 won't work well for wedding photography. Yes, people shot weddings with much slower film. They don't anymore because, like the D70, slow film is obsolete. People shot weddings with manual focus lenses too and the D70 is awful for MF lenses from the tiny viewfinder to the lack of support for non-CPU lenses. When the D70 was a current product some people did (make no mistake the D70 was never marketed as a pro body) simply because the D70 was on par with its contemporaries. > Nikon F mount is being deprecated in favor of Z because of mirrorless geometries Even within the scope of the F mount the D70 is obsolete — it's incompatible with new E and AF-P lenses. > A wedding is more forgiving Wedding photography is about the most technically challenging, least forgiving (low light, constant motion, spontaneous behavior) type of photography out there. The point you were responding to still stands – older digital photographic equipment is obsolete in a professional context while having some utility for hobbyists. Nobody's taking a D1 out to shoot sports these days. In fact most people didn't when it was new because Nikon's autofocus was so far behind Canon's. |
No.
> You even qualified that later with "if there's good enough light" and "unless you're chasing something moving". No, a D70 won't work well for wedding photography.
I didn't intend to say "You can shoot weddings with a D70s". I just wanted to say, a D70s can take beautiful photos, even today, with today's standards, that's all. Even Nikon didn't position D70s for that kind of action when it was brand new.
> People shot weddings with manual focus lenses too and the D70 is awful for MF lenses from the tiny viewfinder to the lack of support for non-CPU lenses.
As a person who shot MF on both film and D70s, I tend to disagree, but that's not a hill I'd prefer to die on, at least within the borders of this comment box.
> Even within the scope of the F mount the D70 is obsolete — it's incompatible with new E and AF-P lenses.
I think being able to select between this much [0] of lenses is enough for most people.
> Wedding photography is about the most technically challenging, least forgiving (low light, constant motion, spontaneous behavior) type of photography out there.
Sorry, no. I shoot at tango nights. You have much more freedom in weddings. You can use flash, come close, people expect you, etc. A "low light" wedding situation is "what you can expect in a good tango night". You can't use flash, use lenses slower than f/2.2 (or more specifically ~t/2.5), because even a latest generation sensor will just choke, you can't use big lenses and be a distracting element, or come close for any reason. So, no. A wedding is not a piece of cake, but much easier from a technical point of view. Weddings have their problems like the distance/area you have the cover, the equipment you have to carry on you, duration, and storage and energy logistics, I agree, but it's not as challenging in terms of light or camera capabilities.
> ...older digital photographic equipment is obsolete in a professional context while having some utility for hobbyists.
I'd rather rephrase this. Newer photographic equipment is much more capable and makes professionals' life much, much easier. Obsolescence is something different in my eyes, and it's not the same as "not as useful today as of yesterday". Even an analog Pentax MF body is not obsolete in today's photographic world, even for professionals. It might not be their everyday body, but's it's neither useless, nor obsolete.
[0]: https://www.lensora.com/lensesfor.asp?camera=nikon-d70s