Accurate Analogy?

MichiDigger · Feb 3, 2020

Several years ago, I got very heavily into photography. I read books. I watched videos. I made it my business to learn photography as well as I could. I purchased an entry-level DSLR, a Nikon D-5100. It would be comparable to a new detectorist buying a Garrett Ace 200. I practiced and continue to learn.

I eventually got to the point where I started producing really good photographs, if I say so myself. When showing my photographs I would frequently get the comment, “Wow! You must have a really nice camera!”

I would just chuckled and agree. What people don’t realize is that you can take a professional photographer with a very inexpensive camera and they will consistently produce a better product than a beginner with the most expensive camera. Many people simply cannot appreciate the fact that quality results are often a product of many years of learning, research and practice.

It seems to me that the same principles hold true with detecting. Most machines essentially do the same thing and it really falls down to the experience level and personal preference of the individual user. Would you agree?

MotorPro · Feb 4, 2020

a garrett 200 is closer to a point and shoot but the theory is correct

MichiDigger · Feb 4, 2020

MotorPro said:
a garrett 200 is closer to a point and shoot but the theory is correct

Lol. You’re probably right.

DbblTap · Feb 5, 2020

I do agree with what you said. I have cheap MD and I have expensive ones but every MD is still valuable to be because of what they can do where others don't.
Right tool in the right hand.

Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk

Beachhunter · Feb 5, 2020

Accurate.

aeds151 · Feb 5, 2020

You are probably correct but as a beginner using an analog machine and researching the “new” technology that is out now, I cant help but wonder what I have missed in the ground and, most importantly, the stuff that I would have liked to miss that I have dug up (trash) if I upgrade to an advanced machine.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MichiDigger · Feb 5, 2020

DbblTap said:
I do agree with what you said. I have cheap MD and I have expensive ones but every MD is still valuable to be because of what they can do where others don't.
Right tool in the right hand.

Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk

My point exactly. Knowledgeable user + basic machine = good results. Inexperienced user + top machine = worse results. Knowledgeable user + top machine = consistently good results.

MichiDigger · Feb 5, 2020

aeds151 said:
You are probably correct but as a beginner using an analog machine and researching the “new” technology that is out now, I cant help but wonder what I have missed in the ground and, most importantly, the stuff that I would have liked to miss that I have dug up (trash) if I upgrade to an advanced machine.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I completely understand. I always caution new people to ANY endeavor to start inexpensively to make sure it’s something they’ll be interested in for the long haul. Learn the tool(s) you have very well and then upgrade, if desired. Also, unless you become a ‘pro’ with the machine you have you won’t really know if you’re using it to it’s full capability. Missed good targets may also be the result of inexperience, poor technique, etc. A $2,500 machine is only as good as who is swinging it - they won’t find things that aren’t there. Happy hunting!

aeds151 · Feb 5, 2020

That makes sense. I will swing the analog for a bit then look at the Nox 800 if I want to upgrade.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MichiDigger · Feb 5, 2020

aeds151 said:
That makes sense. I will swing the analog for a bit then look at the Nox 800 if I want to upgrade.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ve been out of the hobby for about a decade. Not due to lack of interest or enthusiasm - just had zero time. Going to order a new machine and I’m about 98% sure it’ll be a Nox 600. Jealous of you because I currently have NO detector. Lol.

beest · Feb 5, 2020

MichiDigger said:
Many people simply cannot appreciate the fact that quality results are often a product of many years of learning, research and practice.

This i agree. A car also drives as good or bad as the chauffeur does.
Still need good gear to be good though. Can't reach higher levels then the gear can.

Btw, digital camera's still can't compete with old analog camera's. Clear if you know that analog films are to be compared with about 300 megapixels. The point is that digital camera's achieve enough nowadays for most purposes. But still not reach analog levels.
If you don't believe me then ask a professional photographer which is that experienced that he worked with both.

aeds151 said:
That makes sense. I will swing the analog for a bit then look at the Nox 800 if I want to upgrade.

You can nott compare photography with metal detectors on this subject.

Digital camera's capture really digital, were analog camera's really capture analog. Giving different sources for start.

The difference between an analog or a digital metal detector is in it's box. The coil still works analog on both. So the source is the same, where only its processing differs.

MichiDigger · Feb 5, 2020

beest said:
This i agree. A car also drives as good or bad as the chauffeur does.
Still need good gear to be good though. Can't reach higher levels then the gear can.

Btw, digital camera's still can't compete with old analog camera's. Clear if you know that analog films are to be compared with about 300 megapixels. The point is that digital camera's achieve enough nowadays for most purposes. But still not reach analog levels.
If you don't believe me then ask a professional photographer which is that experienced that he worked with both.

You can nott compare photography with metal detectors on this subject.

Digital camera's capture really digital, were analog camera's really capture analog. Giving different sources for start.

The difference between an analog or a digital metal detector is in it's box. The coil still works analog on both. So the source is the same, where only its processing differs.

Very well said

metaladdict · Feb 5, 2020

No way an Ace is gonna work well in saltwater.

IDXMonster · Feb 5, 2020

MichiDigger said:
My point exactly. Knowledgeable user + basic machine = good results. Inexperienced user + top machine = worse results. Knowledgeable user + top machine = consistently good results.

Accurate here with no doubt. And the theory holds to true to a point, and that point is the actual technical abilities of the individual machines in question. This is why I enjoy machinery...it does what I tell it to, right or wrong. A Chevette in the hands of a pro racer has its moments, but give the racer a CORVETTE....you get the idea.

MichiDigger · Feb 6, 2020

IDXMonster said:
Accurate here with no doubt. And the theory holds to true to a point, and that point is the actual technical abilities of the individual machines in question. This is why I enjoy machinery...it does what I tell it to, right or wrong. A Chevette in the hands of a pro racer has its moments, but give the racer a CORVETTE....you get the idea.

Also very true!

seagullplayer · Feb 6, 2020

No matter the hobby, if someone wants something they will justify getting it.

Some will even justify "needing" it.

If there wasn't passion involved it wouldn't be half as fun.
And there is too much work involved to do it and not have fun at it.

Being a hobby it doesn't have to make logical sense.
You hear people bragging up the newest bell or whistle in the latest version of whatever machine.
Then the most consistent advise you hear is you got to "dig it all".
Some can not see the irony it that. But that's ok it's a hobby. :lol:

How many times do you read someone new asking about getting a first machine and they set a budget of $200 or less.
Half the advise is to save a little more and buy some machine at 2-3x the price.
And there is always that one guy that reminds the OP to be sure an budge for a $150 pin pointer and $70 for a digging tool. :laughing:

I mean no disrespect, shoot I just bought a new machine and owned a perfectly good one. But the hottest new thing is only the hottest new thing till the next one comes around.

But that's half the fun.

DaviDs · Feb 6, 2020

MichiDigger said:
It seems to me that the same principles hold true with detecting. Most machines essentially do the same thing and it really falls down to the experience level and personal preference of the individual user. Would you agree?

metaladdict said:
No way an Ace is gonna work well in saltwater.

The premise of what you said is correct, but in practice, I disagree. Modern tech has taken up the slack for the skill required with many of the machines made prior to 2000.

Think about it, the experienced users knew how to tweak their machines for each ground condition and could discern eroneous signals from seemingly identical sounding good targets.

Fast forward to today. Modern machines, like the NOX 600 that you are considering, have software with advanced processors that quickly adapt to changing conditions and make the tweaks that only experienced users knew how to do. If a novice followed the manufacturer instructions on proper swing technique and settings, how much advantage will an experienced user have over the novice???

If you do a seeded test, the novice and the experienced guy are going to be almost identical. That is because both know there is a target and will swing until their machine picks up the signal.

Now in real life, the experienced guy recalls patterns in a beach and recognizes target placement and what may or may not be buried in the nearby area. THis could yield more and/or better finds than the novice. Then again, because targets are lost at random, the novice might unknowingly wander right to spot of a treasure chest, lol.

MichiDigger · Feb 6, 2020

DaviDs said:
The premise of what you said is correct, but in practice, I disagree. Modern tech has taken up the slack for the skill required with many of the machines made prior to 2000.

Think about it, the experienced users knew how to tweak their machines for each ground condition and could discern eroneous signals from seemingly identical sounding good targets.

Fast forward to today. Modern machines, like the NOX 600 that you are considering, have software with advanced processors that quickly adapt to changing conditions and make the tweaks that only experienced users knew how to do. If a novice followed the manufacturer instructions on proper swing technique and settings, how much advantage will an experienced user have over the novice???

If you do a seeded test, the novice and the experienced guy are going to be almost identical. That is because both know there is a target and will swing until their machine picks up the signal.

Now in real life, the experienced guy recalls patterns in a beach and recognizes target placement and what may or may not be buried in the nearby area. THis could yield more and/or better finds than the novice. Then again, because targets are lost at random, the novice might unknowingly wander right to spot of a treasure chest, lol.

You do have a point. Maybe I need to change my thinking...

Accurate Analogy?

MichiDigger

Full Member

MotorPro

Junior Member

MichiDigger

Full Member

DbblTap

Elite Member

Beachhunter

Elite Member

aeds151

Senior Member

MichiDigger

Full Member

MichiDigger

Full Member

aeds151

Senior Member

MichiDigger

Full Member

beest

Elite Member

MichiDigger

Full Member

metaladdict

Elite Member

IDXMonster

Elite Member

MichiDigger

Full Member

seagullplayer

Junior Member

DaviDs

MichiDigger

Full Member

Similar threads