Photography or measurebation?

[ponder]

I get the impression that many people just buy new cameras to get the latest & greatest. Forever chasing a couple more pixels or higher iso etc. And they stick mostly to Canon & Nikon.

It's almost as if they revel more in the technicalities of their gear than actually taking photos and if you don't have X Y or Z you are at a disadvantage. Yet there are photographers out there running around with couple of consumer cameras around their necks taking photos for international media (wish I can remember his name).

If you are going to be taking pictures of people most of the time why not rather use a Fujifilm dSLR or a Hassleblad, why this insistence on Canon & Nikon?

You can give a good photographer a 20yr old camera he will still give you better photos than joe soap with the latest & greatest technology.

Is it still about photography these days or about the kit?

Majority of discussions out there are about kit, not about technique or people posting images. Nothing I enjoy more than browsing through good pictures, either online or in books.

 

[EchoZA]

I have 3 x PENTAX SLR's and if it was not for the price of film and the developing and printing costs... I would still use them DSLR has just made more of an economical sense too me, especially since it is a hobby and not a proffesion!

 

[Pixual]

You are correct. For many its about the gear, not the picture. I have been guilty of this in the past, but now I don't care about gear that much any more.

In the future the DSLR will become passé.

 

[bwana]

This should be interesting.

 

[EchoZA]

This seems to be the future of DSLR

http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/tiny-spy-camera-looks-like-a-dslr-20-01-2011/

 

[dj_jyno]

why this insistence on Canon & Nikon?

I've also noticed this recently. When you enter a photographic equipment retailer, they usually have two prominent SLR choices - Canon or Nikon, with Sony stuck somewhere in a dark corner. I don't actually remember when last I saw a Pentax DSLR on the shelves.

Is it still about photography these days or about the kit?

That's pretty much it.

Majority of discussions out there are about kit, not about technique or people posting images. Nothing I enjoy more than browsing through good pictures, either online or in books.

I've seen some amazing photos taken with run of the mill point-and-shoot cameras.

I have 3 x PENTAX SLR's and if it was not for the price of film and the developing and printing costs... I would still use them DSLR has just made more of an economical sense too me, especially since it is a hobby and not a proffesion!

My dad still has a Pentax K1000. It's really unfortunate that film development is so expensive, since that camera takes great photos.

I'm not ashamed to say that I use a Canon Powershot A75. Colour reproduction is spot on, and it has full manual controls when you need it. Sure, you won't be able to enlarge its photos to A3 or bigger, but for normal sized photos you can't really tell that it wasn't taken with a top-of-the-range DSLR. That's all I really need in a camera.

Now I just need to work on my photos...

 

[bwana]

You are correct. For many its about the gear, not the picture. I have been guilty of this in the past, but now I don't care about gear that much any more.

In the future the DSLR will become passé.

So? Surely It's their hobby so can't they do with it as they please?

Some people like tinkering with cars, others like to drive.

 

[Quantum Theory]

So? Surely It's their hobby so can't they do with it as they please?

Some people like tinkering with cars, others like to drive.

True... but it's difficult to comprehend how some people can spend so much, to do so little.

 

[bwana]

True... but it's difficult to comprehend how some people can spend so much, to do so little.

Tbh I don't believe you can learn to be a great photographer, its something you've either got or not. Maybe the trivialities make being good more interesting?

 

[Milano]

Reminds me of that that recent photo comp thread. The photographer won with some picture of a guy lying next to a loaf of bread. There are people that get 100x better pics with a cellphone and some post-processing like:
http://www.systemshock.co.za/forums/index.php/topic/28105-my-photos/page__hl__cellphone__st__20
So it's often more about the eye than the equipment. But I guess if a person has the eye then why not get the best equipment?

 

[Dolby]

I've never actually got that impression about photography, funny enough.

When it comes to stereo or multi channel audio (my other passion), I often get the impression - but not photography.

Maybe its because with audio, the cheap, mid level and end do the same - but more expensive does the same better. In photography cheap often won't do the exact same?

I've got a bridge camera and I'd get the best camera I could afford

For example bulb mode - or high shutter speeds - or depth of field - or pure detail

 

[ponder]

I have been guilty of this in the past, but now I don't care about gear that much any more.

In the future the DSLR will become passé.

Buying good glass can be seen as an investment as you can keep it for a very long time but getting the next new body that comes out every time is just...

I already like these large sensor cameras with interchangable lenses from Olympus, Panasonic & Sony.

 

[ponder]

Tbh I don't believe you can learn to be a great photographer, its something you've either got or not. Maybe the trivialities make being good more interesting?

I agree, it's the same as with painting, dancing etc etc etc. You might be able to learn & progress to a certain level but you will never be great at it.

 

[Positively Negative]

I just put the camera on "auto" and it works fine.

yeah i used to do the same blindly but then i finally sat down and read up on aperture,shutter speed etc and the quality of my shots increased so much.
When i used to snap away on auto i would sometimes be dissapointed but that's all changed on manual.
I've been bitten badly and i so want a dslr now....i'm not too worried if it's the latest and greatest.i just know it will produce better shots on higher iso etc than my current bridge.

 

[koffiejunkie]

I get the impression that many people just buy new cameras to get the latest & greatest. Forever chasing a couple more pixels or higher iso etc. And they stick mostly to Canon & Nikon.

I'll say without shame that I'm willing to replace my camera for no other reason than better high-ISO/low light performance. The overwhelming majority of my shooting happens in pretty atrocious lighting conditions.

Majority of discussions out there are about kit, not about technique or people posting images. Nothing I enjoy more than browsing through good pictures, either online or in books.

I really tried Thanks to the three who took part...

I have 3 x PENTAX SLR's and if it was not for the price of film and the developing and printing costs... I would still use them DSLR has just made more of an economical sense too me, especially since it is a hobby and not a proffesion!

I hear ya. I've been perving over a Canon 3 or 1n lately but I just don't see it getting enough use to justify the expense. The places where I use film, those cameras offer me nothing over my 500N except the ability to use my N3 remote.

I've also noticed this recently. When you enter a photographic equipment retailer, they usually have two prominent SLR choices - Canon or Nikon, with Sony stuck somewhere in a dark corner. I don't actually remember when last I saw a Pentax DSLR on the shelves.

That's a shame, isn't it? Then again, I blame Pentax's shoddy marketing for that. Their DSLRs are dynamite but no one knows about it. And they can be pretty difficult to get hold of.

My dad still has a Pentax K1000. It's really unfortunate that film development is so expensive, since that camera takes great photos.

I still have mine too. A K1000 SE nogal!

Tbh I don't believe you can learn to be a great photographer, its something you've either got or not. Maybe the trivialities make being good more interesting?

I agree although I believe actually taking the trouble to get to know their cameras intemately would help even the most talentless take better pictures. I took some pictures recently (for my own sake) at one of our company events. The girl from marketing was walking around with her Sony A900 and 70-200mm f/2.8 (sweet kit!). I don't know what her pictures look like, but judging by the questions she asked me after seeing mine I have a pretty good idea. She wanted to know how I get focus and exposure correct on the faces (when just about everything else is pitch black darkness) with and without flash. I didn't tell her how. I just showed her how to get it out of fully automatic AF and what the different AF and metering modes does. She got it. I bet she's reading the manual now

 

[noxibox]

Yet there are photographers out there running around with couple of consumer cameras around their necks taking photos for international media

What do you mean by a consumer camera?

You can give a good photographer a 20yr old camera he will still give you better photos than joe soap with the latest & greatest technology.

Maybe so, but that does not mean a particular feature can't help. Is autofocus still controversial? It most certainly was a couple of decades ago.

I don't think gear discussions are new. They used to happen in magazines, less interactively obviously, long before the web existed.

And as a rule professionals use as much equipment as they need to get the job done. If that's a very expensive camera with an even more expensive lens and enough lights to illuminate a large city then so be it.

The fact is that Nikon and Canon are the two well-known easily available makes.

 

[Pixual]

Good photography is a craft, which is a mixture of science and skill. You can make good pictures with any equipment, but if you have the right equipment you can make great pictures. Unfortunately too many people forget the purpose of the equipment in their quest to have the best.

In my experience of having used Nikon, Leica, Canon and a few other brands, Nikon is leading the way, which is why they are predominant in the marketplace. Sony usurped the old Minolta brand and have been making inroads, but they simply don't have the range of lenses and accessories that Nikon and Canon have, therefore they aren't taken as seriously by serious photographers. That is not to say that their equipment is no good. It just isn't as good as the other two big brands.

What I see happening in the world of photography nowadays is a move towards HD video, which is why you are seeing it appearing in all the new DSLR's. Eventually the form factor of cameras will change and we will see a move away from optical view finders, mirrors and suchlike. I think the 35mm system of lenses will stay the same, but the old mirror slappers will go away fairly soon.

 

[bwana]

II agree although I believe actually taking the trouble to get to know their cameras intemately would help even the most talentless take better pictures.

There's a difference between being a proficient photographer and a great one. All the intimate camera knowledge possible is still no substitute for a good eye and a good sense of timing.

What do you mean by a consumer camera?

In Canon speak that would generally be anything from the XXXXD/XXXD range. The XXD series is generally regarded as advanced amateur/prosumer while the 7D/5D's are "premium" with the 1D's topping out at Professional.

 

[undesign]

Tbh I don't believe you can learn to be a great photographer, its something you've either got or not. Maybe the trivialities make being good more interesting?

Very true Bwana. I'm not a naturally gifted or great photographer, but the technicalities interest me. New gear interests me. Reading about it interests me. In the end it makes me a better photographer, albeit within my own natural limitations.

 

[koffiejunkie]

There's a difference between being a proficient photographer and a great one. All the intimate camera knowledge possible is still no substitute for a good eye and a good sense of timing.

Just to be clear, I didn't suggest anything to the contrary.