Remember when you could spot a "serious" photographer by the motor drive hanging off their Nikon F3? Or when the difference between ISO 800 and ISO 1600 capability could make or break a camera purchase decision? If you're nodding along, you've witnessed some interesting technological shifts in photographic history that completely obliterated features that once defined camera excellence.
The photography industry loves to talk about "revolutionary" advances, but rarely acknowledges the graveyard of features left behind. Whether minor conveniences that disappeared quietly or headline specifications, they're all now faint memories of a different time. Today, they're as relevant to modern photography as a carburetor is to an electric car. photography has evolved beyond the mechanical constraints that once defined it.
1. DX Code Reading Contacts: The Last Gasp of Analog Automation
The Promise of Automatic Film Recognition
In the mid-1980s, Kodak introduced the DX encoding system—a series of metallic patches on 35mm film canisters that cameras could read to automatically set ISO, number of exposures, and exposure latitude. For photographers accustomed to manually setting film speed dials and forgetting what film they'd loaded, this represented the cutting edge of camera automation and convenience. I distinctly remember how magical it felt to load a roll and watch the roll's stats automatically appear on the top LCD.
The DX code system used a binary pattern of conductive and non-conductive patches that camera contacts could read. The pattern encoded not just ISO speed (from 25 to 5000), but also the number of exposures (12, 20, 24, or 36) and even exposure tolerance information that sophisticated cameras could use for exposure calculations.
Why It Mattered Then
Before DX codes, loading a new roll of film required manually setting the ISO dial and critically, remembering to change it when switching film types. Shoot a roll of ISO 100 daylight film with your camera set to ISO 400, and you'd get consistently underexposed images. Professional photographers often used tape and permanent markers to track film types, especially when carrying multiple camera bodies loaded with different films or, if you were doing well, swappable medium format backs.
Combined with an electronic interface, a camera could automatically adjust not just ISO settings but also flash exposure compensation based on film characteristics. This level of automation was genuinely revolutionary for its time.
Professional cameras like the Nikon F4 and Canon EOS-1 incorporated DX reading into sophisticated exposure systems. The Nikon F4's system could actually adjust its exposure calculations based on the film's latitude information encoded in the DX pattern—a level of film-specific optimization that seemed almost magical to photographers accustomed to one-size-fits-all metering.
The Digital Death Blow
Digital sensors made the entire concept of film identification obsolete overnight. When ISO became an electronic setting that could be changed for every single frame, the need to automatically identify film characteristics simply vanished. Modern cameras don't need to read anything—they already know every relevant parameter because the photographer sets them electronically.
What's particularly interesting is how thoroughly this feature disappeared. Unlike some obsolete camera features that evolved into digital equivalents, DX code reading has no modern analog. Digital cameras don't need to identify anything about their "film" because there is no film—just electronic sensors with programmable sensitivity (gain).
2. Cable Release Threaded Socket: The Mechanical Connection Era
The Shake-Free Imperative
The threaded cable release socket—typically found on the shutter button or camera body—was photography's solution to camera shake during long exposures. These mechanical connections allowed photographers to trigger the shutter without physically touching the camera, essential for sharp images during exposures measured in seconds or minutes.
The Professional Standard
For landscape and architectural photographers, the cable release was as essential as a tripod. Night photography, long exposure work, and macro photography all demanded shake-free shutter activation. The threading was standardized across most of the industry, creating a universal ecosystem of accessories. Pneumatic releases, electronic releases, and even timer-activated releases all connected through this same mechanical interface. Studio photographers often used long pneumatic releases that allowed them to trigger cameras from across the room without any electrical connection.
Electronic Evolution and Wireless Revolution
The transition away from mechanical cable releases began with electronic releases in high-end cameras during the 1980s. Cameras began to offer electronic release sockets alongside traditional threaded connections, providing the best of both worlds.
But the real death knell came with wireless technology and smartphone integration. Modern cameras offer multiple wireless triggering options: infrared remotes, radio frequency triggers, Wi-Fi connections, and smartphone apps. The Canon EOS R5, for example, can be triggered via the Canon Camera Connect app from anywhere with an internet connection—a capability that makes mechanical cable releases seem prehistoric. Apps are so advanced that I'll frequently put a second camera in a spot I can't reach during a concert and use a smartphone app to control every function in real-time.
Today's wireless triggers offer capabilities that mechanical releases never could: interval timing, bracketing sequences, focus stacking automation, and even artificial intelligence-driven triggering based on subject recognition. The humble cable release socket became a victim of technological overreach—why have a simple mechanical connection when you can have intelligent wireless control?
3. Motor Drive: The Ultimate Status Symbol
The Manual Advance Era
To understand the significance of motor drives, imagine taking action photographs while manually advancing film between every single shot. This was reality for photographers through the 1970s. Professional sports photographers would develop elaborate shooting techniques to minimize the time spent winding film, including specialized grips and advance techniques that could reduce the cycle time between shots.
The film advance mechanism in manual cameras required significant force—you weren't just moving film, but also cocking the shutter mechanism and advancing the frame counter. A typical manual advance took 0.5 to 1 second of photographer attention, during which the viewfinder was blocked and the shooting eye had to look away from the subject.
Motor Drive as Professional Necessity
Nikon's F-series cameras pioneered professional motor drive systems. The first motor drives appeared in the 1970s and could shoot at several frames per second—revolutionary for their time. But more importantly, it kept the photographer's eye on the viewfinder and hands on the camera controls. This wasn't just convenience; it was the difference between capturing decisive moments and missing them entirely.
The motor drive market became intensely competitive. Canon's A-1 with Motor Drive offered 5 fps, while the professional F3 with MD-4 could achieve 6 fps. These weren't just technical specifications—they represented real competitive advantages for photographers covering sports, news, and wildlife.
Professional photographers often invested more in motor drive attachments than in lenses. The psychological impact was equally important—the rapid-fire sound of a motor drive announced professional intent in an era when amateur photographers were limited to manual advance. Using a motor drive, I shot my Canon EOS 1V at 10 fps, running through a roll of 36 exposures in less than four seconds. No matter how fast digital cameras get, I don't think anything will ever be as wildly impressive as that.
The Silent Digital Revolution
Digital cameras eliminated the entire concept of film advance, making motor drives instantly obsolete. Modern cameras can capture 20+ frames per second without any mechanical film transport mechanism. Motor drives were such an essential professional feature that their complete disappearance seems impossible, yet digital cameras simply made the underlying mechanism unnecessary. There's no digital equivalent to a motor drive because digital cameras don't need to transport anything between shots.
4. Mirror Lockup: Solving Vibration in the Analog Age
The Mirror Slap Problem
Single-lens reflex cameras faced a fundamental mechanical challenge: the mirror that allows viewfinder composition must flip up during exposure, creating vibration that could compromise image sharpness. This "mirror slap" was most problematic during exposures between 1/15 and 1 second—long enough for vibration to blur the image, but too short for the vibrations to dampen naturally.
Professional cameras addressed this with mirror lockup functionality. Advanced 35mm SLRs and most medium format SLRs offered mirror pre-release mechanisms that allowed photographers to flip the mirror up, wait for vibrations to settle, then trigger the shutter with minimal additional vibration. The characteristic "kerchunk" of my Mamiya 645AFD was supremely satisfying, but if I needed to shoot anything with a slower shutter speed, it was a real hindrance without locking the mirror.
Technical Implementation and Professional Adoption
Mirror lockup wasn't just about reducing vibration—it was about predictable image quality in critical applications. Macro photographers working at high magnifications couldn't tolerate any camera movement. Architectural photographers shooting with tilt-shift lenses needed absolute sharpness across the frame. Hasselblad's 500 series cameras offered elegant mechanical mirror lockup through the film advance mechanism. Even amateur cameras like the Canon AE-1 Program offered mirror lockup.
Mirrorless Eliminates the Problem
Mirrorless cameras solved the mirror slap problem by eliminating mirrors entirely. Without a mechanical mirror to create vibrations, the fundamental technical challenge simply disappeared. Electronic viewfinders replaced optical viewfinders, and electronic first curtain shutters eliminated most mechanical movement during exposure, provided you could hold the camera steady.
5. Film Reminder Holders: Analog Memory Aids
The Memory Problem
Film photography presented a constant information management challenge: what film is currently loaded in the camera? Professional photographers often carried multiple camera bodies loaded with different films—color negative, color slide, black and white, different ISO ratings, different brands with distinct characteristics. Mixing these up wasn't just inconvenient; it could ruin entire shooting sessions.
Camera manufacturers responded with film reminder systems—typically small clips or holders on the camera back where photographers could store part of the film box or a handwritten note. These weren't aftermarket accessories; they were built-in features on cameras from Nikon, Canon, Leica, and virtually every serious camera manufacturer. You simply ripped off a bit of the box the film came in and shoved it in that little holder. If you wanted, you could write a note yourself and add a bit more info.
The Mamiya RB67 system included removable film backs with built-in memo holders—essential when photographers might have six or more different film backs ready for different shooting situations. The film reminder wasn't just about memory; it was about workflow organization in an era when changing film meant changing the fundamental characteristics of the imaging system and when you couldn't see the film inside the camera.
Digital's Information Revolution
Digital photography didn't just eliminate the need for film reminders—it created an unprecedented information recording system. EXIF data automatically captures not just "film" sensitivity (ISO), but also lens focal length, aperture, shutter speed, white balance, metering mode, focus points used, and dozens of other parameters that film photographers could only dream of tracking automatically. Modern cameras go far beyond basic EXIF data. GPS coordinates, copyright information, and even voice memos can be embedded in or with image files. The simple film reminder holder has been replaced by a comprehensive metadata system that provides far more information than any analog system could manage.
6. Megapixel Count Wars: When More Always Seemed Better
The Resolution Race Begins
The early digital camera era was defined by megapixel count as the primary marketing differentiator. When consumer digital cameras emerged in the late 1990s, resolution was genuinely limiting. The first commercially successful digital cameras offered just a few megapixels—barely sufficient for email sharing and small prints.
The progression seemed inevitable: more megapixels meant better image quality. Camera manufacturers competed aggressively on resolution specifications. The jump from 6 megapixels to 8 megapixels to 12 megapixels represented significant improvements in print quality and cropping flexibility. Marketing departments made megapixel count the headline specification, often at the expense of other image quality factors.
The Professional Tipping Point
Professional adoption of digital photography accelerated when cameras reached the 11-16 megapixel range around 2005-2007. The Canon EOS 5D (12.8 MP) and Nikon D200 (10.2 MP) offered sufficient resolution for most professional applications while maintaining the lens ecosystems photographers already owned. But the megapixel race created distortions in the market. Manufacturers prioritized resolution over dynamic range, noise performance, and color accuracy. Consumers learned to evaluate cameras primarily by megapixel count, often choosing inferior cameras with higher resolutions over superior cameras with lower resolutions. The camera industry recognized this problem but couldn't escape the marketing momentum. Even when 24+ megapixel cameras became common, manufacturers continued emphasizing resolution increases, despite diminishing returns for most photographers.
Resolution Sufficiency and the Post-Megapixel Era
Somewhere around 20-24 megapixels, the practical benefits of additional resolution began diminishing for most applications. Print sizes that would benefit from 40+ megapixel resolution are beyond what most photographers ever produce. The storage, processing, and workflow implications of ultra-high resolution began outweighing the benefits. Granted, there are other benefits, such as cropping for better composition.
Modern camera development has largely moved beyond megapixel competition. Current high-resolution flagships from Sony, Canon, and Nikon hover around 45-60 megapixels, while other factors, such as dynamic range, noise performance, autofocus speed, and video capabilities, have received renewed attention.
The megapixel wars ended not because manufacturers stopped pursuing resolution, but because resolution ceased being the limiting factor in image quality for most applications. The marketing focus has shifted to burst rates, artificial intelligence, autofocus capabilities, and computational photography benefits that provide more meaningful improvements.
7. Maximum ISO Numbers: The High Sensitivity Holy Grail
The Film Speed Ceiling
Film photography imposed absolute limits on sensitivity to light. Professional films typically topped out around ISO 400 for optimal quality, with ISO 800 and 1600 films representing significant compromises in grain structure and color accuracy. ISO 3200 was the absolute max. Push processing could extend effective sensitivity, but at severe quality costs.
Camera manufacturers promoted their cameras' ability to handle high ISO films as a major specification. "Usable to ISO 1600!" was a legitimate selling point when most competing cameras struggled with ISO 400. The mechanical and electronic precision required to properly expose high-speed films was a genuine technical achievement. The Sony a7S was a revelation when it was released.
Digital's Early ISO Limitations
Early digital cameras initially performed worse than film at high sensitivities. CCD sensors produced significant noise at ISO 800, making film cameras superior for low-light work. The transition from CCD to CMOS sensors, combined with improved signal processing, gradually shifted this balance.
When digital cameras began outperforming film at high ISO, manufacturers resumed the sensitivity specification war. The ability to shoot clean images at ISO 3200, then 6400, then 12800 became major marketing differentiators. Professional photographers who had been limited to ISO 1600 film suddenly had access to unprecedented low-light capabilities. I distinctly remember going out one night with my original Canon 6D set to ISO 102400 just because I could.
Computational Photography and the New Reality
Modern cameras routinely deliver relatively clean images at ISO 6400 and usable results at ISO 25600 or higher. These capabilities would have been incomprehensible to film photographers.
But more importantly, computational photography has begun making specific ISO numbers less relevant. AI-powered denoising and advanced processing algorithms can produce clean images from previously unusable high-ISO captures. The iPhone's Night Mode demonstrates how computational approaches can achieve results that exceed what traditional high-ISO sensitivity would provide.
Maximum ISO specifications are becoming as irrelevant as maximum megapixel counts. When cameras can produce clean images at sensitivities that exceed most practical shooting requirements, the specification becomes a checkbox rather than a meaningful differentiator.
The Broader Implications: What Obsolescence Teaches Us
Technology Cycles and Feature Evolution
The obsolescence of these seven features reveals patterns that extend beyond photography. Technologies don't just improve incrementally—they can eliminate entire categories of problems. The most profound technological advances don't make existing solutions better; they make existing problems irrelevant. This pattern repeats throughout technology history. Digital music didn't improve cassette tapes; it eliminated the need for physical media. GPS navigation didn't create better paper maps; it made map reading skills largely unnecessary. Similarly, digital photography didn't just improve film photography—it eliminated the mechanical constraints that defined analog imaging.
The Marketing Persistence Problem
What's particularly interesting is how marketing departments struggle to adapt when foundational differentiators disappear. Camera manufacturers continue to emphasize specifications that matter less and less, creating artificial distinctions in markets where basic functionality has been commoditized. The current emphasis on video features, computational photography, and artificial intelligence capabilities represents the industry's search for new differentiators. But as these features also become standardized, manufacturers will face the same marketing challenges that the obsolete features once presented.
Professional vs. Consumer Impact
The obsolescence of these features affected professional and amateur photographers differently. Motor drives, mirror lockup, and cable release sockets were primarily professional concerns—features that separated serious equipment from consumer gear. Their disappearance democratized capabilities that were once expensive options.
Conversely, features like DX code reading and film reminder holders were more universal concerns. Their obsolescence simplified photography for everyone, removing complexity rather than redistributing professional capabilities.
Conclusion: The Invisible Revolution
The seven features examined here represent more than historical curiosities—they illustrate how completely digital technology has transformed photography. These weren't minor conveniences that gradually improved; they were fundamental necessities that became instantly irrelevant. Perhaps most remarkably, their disappearance happened without replacement. Digital cameras don't have "improved" versions of motor drives or DX code readers—they simply don't need them. This is technological progress in its purest form: problems solved so completely that the solutions themselves become unnecessary.
On the high resolution front, one has to consider DIFFRACTION. You get a 60 mp camera and all of a sudden your images at f/11 are equivalent to half the resolution!
It's physics and you can't avoid it. Same goes for crop cameras with resolutions over 20 megapixels - you sacrifice a lot of aperture range. I would strongly encourage people to do their own tests, the result will astonish them.
Essentially with FF cameras over 45 megapixels you have to limit yourself under f/9 if you want to maintain full resolution.
My Sony A7III still serves me well in quality. I think I'll upgrade it with version V though, to limit technical problems (I had problems with the half press of the shutter button for focus).
I think I will use that one with no problem for the next 8 years or so.
Luckily no more 2 or 3 year upgrades needed for me with these higher prices.
That's exactly the kind of approach that makes sense in today's market! The a7 III is still an incredibly capable camera (one of my favorites, in fact). I think we've reached a point where cameras have become so capable that the limiting factor is usually the photographer, not the gear. Eight years is a reasonable lifespan for a camera that still meets your needs.
Agreed.
I bought a Z7 about six years ago and eventually decided I could do with a second body, (possibly) a Z8 but in real life, I didn't need any more than the Z7 has to offer so instead I bought another (used) Z7.
I can see the two of them lasting me for many years to come.
Back when I was using film, it's speed rating was called ASA (not ISO). I know the difference which is none but ASA was the designation.
One thing to consider about using an app to trigger your camera is the fact that this doesn’t work well for those of us who do star trail and night time photography. Turning on a phone or tablet instantly ruins night vision. A mechanical or electronic release is superior in this situation and always will be.
The anti-resolution folks seem to always ignore the same thing: cropping. It can really help.
I borrowed the king of mirror slap once, the Pentax 67. Unreal cam, but you really needed to tripod mount it and lock up the 100 sq ft mirror. ;-)
I have lived through all of this over the film in the 70's when you had to either have two cameras one with daytime film and one with nighttime or load the film for your time of day and then when another time of day came you back rolled the film with maybe only 10 captures out of 24, the lucky thing was when sending to Kodak by mail you got a credit coupon to send with a future roll as a credit paying for processing . The one thing photographers today with film do not do is have a log book of all settings for each image taken, like my Canon Ftb which had a built in light meter I did not need that info for the log but the Aperture you had to look at before the next capture all in a small ring memo pad then transfer to a big log book. Oh! and to be sure you got a good capture you did what would be called today as bracketing and HDR is yes one or two EV up and down. Another thing you can also increase the film speed for night shots and had to add that info to the roll when developed, I tried once when sailing the north Atlantic on a aircraft carrier to capture aircraft like the F-14 with its green positional lights and the blue lights on the refueling aircraft all flying through the Aurora Borealis great to see but not easy to get a capture.
The one thing that made the A7M3 great for astro/night capture was ISO Invariance meaning basically that you could use a low ISO but in post software all you have to do is increase exposure as many as 5 stops to brighten the image but with way less noise, back in the day before noise reduction software, also in Lrc you can edit and get and image brighter but can then covert to another form and reedit again for a even brighter image. I found out about this when using a 10mm f/5.6 vs a 12mm f/4 just playing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=d8QV00mkJW4
One interesting thing with Sony Mod 2's and beyond is "Bright Monitoring" few owners know about even pros, is great for framing at night or even finding a subject that is far off - used it while hunting and in the deep woods after tracking a downed deer and dragging out between saplings and trees you forget your way and stopping and turning on you see like color night vision without even taking a capture just on and off or even checking a noise in the low light and iron sights if a deer was near and where, before night vision was available.
1. Camera Vivitar Vivicam 8300s 8MP, saw and captured faces in oil of USS Arizona in 2006 years before a person became some what famous for an image of the faces in the oil.
2. using Voigtlander 10mm f/5.6 and Sony A7s
3. A second edit after increasing exposure another few EV's
4. Film image using time release also editing in digital SW of a old 80's camping trip with the best popup camper an Apache all plastic fiber with window air mounted up front under slide out, after a day in Disney and air on high came back that night with water running down the sides with inside freezing - memories to keep and share in the film days.
I was disappointed that I could not use my screw in cable release when I went to a k5. It just felt right. And I would still like that because it's a lot easier to carry one of those little things than hook up a remote receiver, checking first that I've got the right one.