« Random Excellence: Matthew Girard | Main | Thank You, United Kingdom! »

Monday, 13 August 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Outstanding guidance, Mike.

This is a subject on which I've also given some thought. I would be very tempted to recommend that someone consider starting with a fixed-lens digicam or, better, one of the high-quality compacts (ex: Sony RX100) we're seeing today. It's making less and less sense to screw around with accessory lenses and lens systems any more. If you're a hobbyist and basically just snapping your family and personal mementos the most important factor is to have a camera -- any damn camera -- that you've mastered and that you feel comfortable having with you in a variety of situations.

Your last paragraph merits emphasis: "Ignore what other people think of your camera, or think of you for using it. It's not a contest. This is easy to forget online, in the"social" world of comparing toys."

At what point is it okay to accept my friend's limitations and seek an additional friend who does things the first cannot?

You said it brudder, and you know I had those Contaxes myself, including that frustrating 85mm that wouldn't focus close enough, loved that camera system...

But for me, it was the Hasselblad...every pro had one, everyone learned to load the backs by the time they were on the job for two weeks, every one learned their quirks, I even know their sounds...I still won't sell mine today....was watching a movie on TV the other night, and it showed a kid taking a picture of a sunset with a Mamiya twin-lens, and when he fired the shutter, it made the Hasselblad sound! Had to laugh, totally recognizable....

But how can anyone love and learn a modern digital, when they're made for a two year life, and they don't even work all the same between models of the same marque? I have no love for digital equipment, and look at each as disposable, and it's frustrating when it's not intuitive, because it IS only going to be for a two year life...you need time to "sleep with it"...

Ah, my first love was a Nikon FM2n. It was the perfect mix for me. Eventually I upgraded to the FM3a but I couldn't get into the needle match meter so the FM2n remained my main body until well into the digital onslaught. Incidentally, I still have the FM2n and the lenses, bellows, motor drive ....

The camera that is my "friend" is the Canon 5D I've been using for six years. But I'm tired of carrying that much weight, especially the weight of the lenses, when I travel, so my new friend is an OM-D.

But the camera I love is the Olympus OM-2n. I don't shoot much film these days, for practical reasons, but I still have an OM and love to just handle it now and then.

I don't think one can love a camera without loving a lens (at least one) that pairs with it. Foremost for me, I need to see well with the camera, and the viewfinder and lens obviously provide the means to do so. If I can't see (and focus) well on the subject, then none of the other camera features or characteristics matter.

The learning and using suggestion apply equally well to the lens (and of course the camera/lens 'marriage') as to the camera itself.

Very timely post ... I've just bought a Sony RX100 and the metering is [very?] different to my Canon S95.

I've decided I need to take my new camera on several outings, purely to come to grips with the metering.

I've also realised I would prefer the camera makers to spend less time on their gee-whiz "matrix" metering mode and think about a simpler but more effective "expose for the highlights" mode. This is what we really need in a digital camera. Even just some "blinkies" on the primary shooting screen would help.

Good post, and I agree that there is no substitute for spending time with a camera. Still, when I read the earlier post I realized it has been a long time since I loved a camera. I think the last was a Sony 828 back around 2004. My current camera is doing a great job for me and my pictures have never been better, but I don't love it any more than I love the minivan that gets me to locations.

In a way that may be a good thing. Cameras to me have become a means to an end - making pictures - rather than objects of desire in themselves.

Excellent and timely post. All useful, but I feel this bit is especially worth remembering:
"Ignore what other people think of your camera, or think of you for using it. It's not a contest. This is easy to forget online, in the "social" world of comparing toys. But you can do great work with a "good enough" camera."

Very wise advice; and very timely for me.

I've loved two cameras in forty years, and right now I'm working to become familiar with the replacement for the second of those two. I keep telling myself that change is good...

our timing was syncronized. I was "playing" with the menu's of my Oly P-3 just before I clicked on your article. The camera is a joy to hold but Oly menu's make my head hurt. I am trying to love this camera!
but in actuality I do love my Pentax K5 and I think I am going to spend more quality time with it.

@ Sven W:

Olympus Pens with EV-2 viewfinders (and maybe some other brands) have this. You can set blinkies in the viewfinder--even on the LCD if you use that. You can then adjust to expose for the highlights manually.

You can also go into the menu (somewhere--can't recall right now in spite of daily use of an EP-3) and set the type of exposure for highlights. Unfortunately that is only spot mode, if I recall correctly, and isn't really necessary for anything I do.

As you can imagine, good exposure is quick and easy if you simply set blinkies where you want from 0-255 and add or subtract exposure as needed while watching through the EVF. Blowing highlights accidentally is pretty much a thing of the past as is unintentional underexposure. Wanna use ETTR without blowing highlights the way ETTR is supposed to be used? Easy.

That's all good.

But there is a kind of special exception, I call the "project camera". Cameras that work underwater or attach to telescopes or microscopes being obvious examples. Sometimes "project cameras" are less exotic, and are picked for some mundane reason (they can be mounted in some little cubby hole, they support some lens you want to use, etc.)

As a musician, I often think of cameras the same way I think of different basses: All do most things well, but when it comes down to the fine points, they have their foibles and you learn to 'workaround', and it's no problem.

I often see this in the various internet photo forums: The pixel-counters scream like stuck pigs over slight hiccups that real photographers (or experienced non-pros) barely notice and go right on to make fabulous photos, much to the p-c's disbelief.

Also like musical instruments: It's the artist, NOT the instrument. And every great player I know, yep, they play all the time, and know that axe inside and out. There's no substitute for the time you spend with your bass, or your camera.

I almost agree with you, but not quite. I certainly agree with the "using it" part, but question the "learning it" part. Modern digital cameras have millions of potential setups (all the menu options multiplied together) but most are not necessary for daily use - only maybe a half-dozen. The rest should be considered "set and forget" options.
I take a new camera and sit down with the manual to learn the controls and options, then do a prelim setup for my usage. Then I use it for a couple of weeks with those settings. After I am familiar with it, I tweak the settings and rarely touch them again, unless they are something I need only occasionally like the remote flash settings, for which I use the manual when I need it.
One way to look at all the options is to put them into categories - esp the "film" type settings. Having spent much of my film time using only 1-2 films, I pretty much set up the camera in a way that looks good to me and forget it. I do leave one option - ISO.
The other category is "operational" where you set the programmable buttons and dials the way you like them. Here my usual option is only exposure compensation.
Then I go shoot pictures. When I frame the scene and take the picture, I know what to expect every time.

Brilliant. I particularly like the "if they are moaning they need to work harder" maxim and will tell myself that when I hear myself bleating on about something not being right.

"Dry practice": twin friends of mine got one camera (to share!) from an aunt when we were kids in the fifties. "You'll get a roll of film next week, now you do some dry practice first." she said. Minutes after she left we were off to the camera shop to buy a roll of film. You should have seen her face when she returned back with a roll of film the following week

With digital, "dry practice" becomes very realistic. I have made hundreds of self portraits with a remote release trying out different lighting set ups before making pictures of my real subjects. What a boon!

Cameras I've LOVED: Pentax *ist DS & Panasonic GF1.
Both for their simplicity in use. I understood their limitations, and they got out of my way while I took the picture. All I need is a modern sensor, I don't need/want any of these new technologies the manufacturers put in the cameras these days.

I too have used the 5D since it came out. I know how to do everything I want with it, and what it can't do. I have learned how to get the best out of it, both photographing and in post. My photos now are therefore better tjan they used to be, and probanly better than they would be if I had switched to a more up to date model. It was more expensive than I would have liked at the time, but if you have to work to get something you make sure you use it, and positive reinforcement will convince you you love it too. In short, I agree with your post on all levels.

I also use the Contax 139Q. Great camera all around, easy to use. Just sometimes when I go for a long trekking far away from battery stores I take Yashica FX-3, a sibling with mechanical shutter.

Certainly right about learning how a camera works; however, I kinda think the camera you use should also fit the job or, even, your mood. If I know I need results, I use my Canon 7D - I know it well. However, my favourite and preferred camera is an OM1 and this is the camera I reach for when I want to really enjoy my photography.

Ah, the Contax 139 quartz! I've still got mine with a Zeiss Planar 1.7/50 attached. Despite it being small and light, I never much cared for this camera's ergonomics - lack of a moulded grip gives me hand-cramp.
Still love it, though.

Yeah, when I got my K-5, I admit it took me a while to do anything but point it and shoot on P.

But then I realised what the INFO button on the back does. It gives you short cuts with little informative icons to all the most used menu items, even showing me which wheel to use. Fully customisable, of course.

So instead of leaving the rear LCD on the exposure settings summary screen (nice in itself), I started calling on the INFO button and screen. No more need to navigate menus, all the things I want most often are right there. Nice.

The E-PL2 is starting to endear itself to me as well. I admit I skipped the handbook and was initially a bit bushed (for a few days), but then I realised that pressing the edges of the main wheel brought everything up. No more problems after that.

I think these two cameras are my long term loves. Different in purpose but complementary.

OTOH, I never got to grips with my Canon 40D. There were times I was utterly baffled. I had engaged a mode or function and I just couldn't get out of it, no matter what I did. All the buttons were the same size and shape and in odd positions. No, nice pics and reliable exposures, but get thee away from me, hussy! So I sold it on.

Loved the post Mike. I had the Contax 139 and used it as my only camera for several years. Backpacked it around Asia and Africa with the 35 and 135 lenses - all I needed really. The electrics finally died on me in Morroco after one rainstorm too many. Trying to love the Olympus OMD the same way, but there is something about simplicity that we have lost. Agree that it does not matter what other people think but that is not easy. Sold the D700 for the Olympus and somewhere in the back of my mind I know that 'people' think that makes me less of a photographer. Made a resolution not to buy anymore cameras, forget about Photokina, new releases, pre releases and just take some pictures.

Without intentionally drawing any parallels with a woman, if you want to really love a camera - and want to imagine that she it loves you back - take it to Paris.

Travel is a distilled form of the the point you make about using a camera for a project. By their nature, travels have a finite length, so you have to get to grips quickly with your equipment (often I find there is a weird anthropomorphic sensation of 'we're in this together, bud'). And packing light is always advantageous, so the temptation to reach for another camera if things aren't working out isn't there.

I will forever associate New York with the Epson R-D1 I used on my first time in the city. My Leica M6 will always remind me of Lisbon. Mamiya 6 - Florence. Xpan - Peru. Leica CL - China. And my Contax 139? Paris.

I concur today’s cameras are overcomplicated and burdened with useless features. If I could have a tailor-made camera, it would be completely stripped of distractions like scene modes, face detection, art filters or whatever. And it wouldn’t have video either. On the other hand, it would have advanced exposure modes. (Maybe it should do without the P mode.) My tailor-made camera would provide control of white balance and metering, AF and AE lock and would photograph both raw and JPEG. And maybe DNG. In other words, it would be simple to use, minimalist, completely oriented towards photography and capable of the highest image quality. That’s all that is required for serious photography. Despite all marketing implying the opposite, simplicity is not a bad thing. I understand gadget freaks largely outnumber serious photographers, so the camera I described will never happen outside niche manufacturing. (I think I may have described the Leica M9 unintentionally...) Which is a shame.
You hit the mark once again, Mike. Now let’s have more of those beginner- and intermediate-oriented articles, please!

Japanese are excellent at making and marketing cameras.
What they do not know how to do, is how to write simple softwares due to completely different logic in their culture.
Try to make automatic translation from anything written in Japanese and you will find that in English, or any other western language, make no sense.
Most of their instruction books often also make not much sense.
Many TOP readers complained about the illogical, for non Japanese, menu entries.
But they are stubborn and will never accept to let anybody else to write a simple, easy to operate, software for their cameras.
At this stage, since cameras have almost reached their top in terms of hardware quality, I believe there is room for someone to hacker, legally, their software, at least for popular cameras, and sell the application just like it is done for smart phones-cameras.

In the old days it used to be said that amateurs (sent a film for processing and it had beach balls at each end and Christmas trees in the middle) subsidised film prices for the serious photographer.

So it is with dilettantes (DPReview seems to be where they gather to exchange tribal bragging noises), they keep on the upgrade or latest model treadmill and obsess about minor equipment properties, unaware that their problem is they simply do not know how to use their camera properly.

Even a dilettante will agree with you but they will be wondering which *new* camera they should be buying to start to learn thoroughly.

Kerrumbs - an hour after writing of my lovely K-5, I read that it's discontinued (PentaxForums). Only last week it was described as "venerable" after only two years on the market!

I stay faithful to my loves ;-) but PhotoKina had better be good.

The only thing I disagree with, Mike, is that the 139 is/was "nothing special". Difficult to explain why I think it's special but I bought mine after having compared it to the competition of the day and decided it was the best ergonomically. Maybe nothing special in terms of specification but it felt right. The layout was perfect. Everything is just in the right place. Some don't like the shutter speed dial on the left but it seems logical to me. The meter button and AE lock on the front. The fact that you don't have to turn it on.

I still have my original one plus half-a-dozen more. Wouldn't want to be without one.

My new friend is also an OMD. Oly finally has a sensor that can compete with the big dogs. I'm not having as hard a time with the menus as I thought. Don't do movies so the red button is doing ISO duty. That decision also cuts down on the very real chance I accidently push the red one instead of #2 nearby (which which is designated to magnify with adapted lenses.)

This post just reminds me about how many (film) cameras I own-all of them are a joy to use, all of them have their our peculiarities...but at the end of the day, I always return (over and over again) to my beloved Canon AE-1. So simple to use, yet so difficult to describe what and why makes this camera so special.

Great article.

Makes me wonder, though: how long does it take to learn to love a camera, to know its foibles and work with it daily? Is it apparent at 10 minutes, 10 days or 10 months? What about the mythical "10,000 hours" - or call it 10k shutter-exposures for all the difference? And how does that stack up against the industry's next model coming out a mere 6 months later?

"...crusty old club members..."


Sometimes I think to myself, and even say out loud;

'I know too much to take good pictures'

Sigh ... I know this must be true, but it's difficult to do ! I bought a D7000 in November, have Thom Hogan's extensive guide and keep meaning to customize it. But I haven't finished selling off my Minolta lenses, so still use my A700 now & then. And I use my NEX when I want to travel light. I've been thinking that I really need to settle on a camera, but with the convenience of ILCs on the one hand and the capabilities of a DSLR on the other (I use a 70-200/2.8 and rely on its fast AF for low light events frequently), it's hard to decide which way to go. I've been leaning toward the DSLR (with an RX100 when I want to go really light) but a compact ILC is still very compelling. (sigh again)

Perhaps another tip might be: Don't be afraid to experiment and to do things contrary to Internet wisdom.

E.g., in days of yore, one used aperture to control depth of field. Nowadays that's frowned upon by the Internet, which forbids small apertures for fear of “diffraction.” But just because the Internet says you can't do that, doesn't mean you can't do that.

(Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure, 3rd ed., even has a two-page sidebar on the topic: “Almost weekly, I receive e-mails from students at my online school, as well as from readers of my books, who are concerned about shooting pictures at apertures of f/16 or f/22. … Shooting at f/22 can be a great idea, and any worries about loss of sharpness and contrast are just as overblown as the Y2K fears were!”)

And don't be afraid to use a feature just because the Internet tells you “real photographers” don't do that. Auto ISO, automatic metering modes, autofocus, etc., are great features you shouldn't fear. If you don't want to use them, that's fine, of course, but don't avoid them just because of the urban legends that professionals don't use them.

Bang on once again.

And the life cycle point is valid and unavoidable during a time of technological transition, though we are certainly getting to the point where a 5D Mark II is simply not significantly inferior to the Mark III. I feel we will get back to cameras we love as the technology settles down a bit. Heck, I cannot bring myself to sell off my EP-1, 17mm lens and optical finder, even though the technology has long since moved on. I just like the shiny little retro bugger.

I wish somebody would design a professional digital camera without the option of shooting JPEG, this would simplify the camera`s setting and get rid of the clutter on the menu pages.

That photo of the Contax made me remember how much I wish for TWO lugs, so that I could attach a neck strap and wear my camera like I did my 35mm's. With my P& S, I have to open the case and slip the camera out (dropped it once), then try and get my picture. Compare that to grabbing your camera down on your chest, and get your picture!

@ Tim: "Makes me wonder, though: how long does it take to learn to love a camera, ..."

You comment reminded me of a point I meant to make in my earlier remarks. Contrary to Mike's title: don't "love" your camera. That's where men (in particular) run into trouble, they begin to fetishize the gadget and then lose sight of why they have the camera. (Sane) Surgeons don't love their instruments. They master them.

Learn to MASTER your camera to get it out of your way. Learn to LOVE PHOTOGRAPHY, the creation that the gadget helps to facilitate.

Agreed: One of the best things you can do when you get a new camera is stop looking at new models as they come out and just use the one you have to make images. Buy it as though you don't have the option to replace it down the road. Never expect a camera to satisfy every desire you have in a camera - there are always compromises.

And avoid forums :)

The industry is making it very hard to get familiar with a camera when new products are released every few months it seems, especially the m43 cameras which seem to be bombarding the market at a furious rate...too much temptation for too many people. I think a lot of people dump a camera before they are truly familiar with it.

I still shoot with my Nikon D50, it's my only DSLR, and really only use 2 lenses with it (a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the 50mm 1.8d). The D50 is like a comfortable pair of old shoes, it just feels right.

When I want to shoot film it's my Nikon FE with a 50.

I love both of these cameras for the same reason: they are extremely simple and feel great in my hands.

But it has been very difficult resisting the temptation to get into a newer model.

Good article Mike.

I think the key is using a camera for something that matters to you - then you can focus on the work and not the latest and greatest.

To Mitia - my 'first love' is my Zeiss Ikon, but my Canon AE-1 (bought new for me by my grandfather) is about to be slightly refurbished with new light seals and battery door.

To Tim - I htink it takes working with it in a situation where it is secondary and so you come to rely on it, rather than use it for it's sake. A bit like an old spousal relationship, the trust is implicit in everything you do. It isn't based on 6 month, or even 3 year, model cycles!

An undercurrent here may be the notion of photographing for the subjects sake and not the sake of 'photography'. Worth reading David Hurn on this.



The most tiresome thing about internet gear forums is the offhand dismissal of a camera by people that have never used one based on a couple of negative reviews, a comparison of the spec sheet, or worse - a five minute "play" in the store without even reading the manual.

Some cameras make you work harder, but I honestly think that sometimes makes you a better photographer. I have always driven a stick shift, but spent a couple of years driving an auto. I know I am a much better driver with a stick because it forces me to think ahead instead of just "pointing and squirting".

I can't wait for your (and Ctein's) assessment of the E-M5 camera. I really would like to know how much it has progressed from the first generation of m43 cameras like your GF1 or Ctein's E-P1, and how much of the progress is relevant in real day to day use. I still like and use my trusty E-P1, but the E-M5's siren call is proving to be hard to ignore; every blog I open these days is full of people who have moved to the OM-D.

"""There are two main ways you do that. One is by learning it. That means understanding all the controls and settings, and practicing camera-handling. The other is by using it for real work: meaning, spending a lot of time taking a lot of pictures in situations where the camera is not the important thing, the pictures are the important thing.
The best way to learn to love a camera is to use it for something important to you."""

My world has changed, as it is wont to do over the passage of 40 or more years.
Now at age 66 find purchasing any new camera simply doesn't satisfy. Have spent in excess of C$25,000 buying and selling all forms
of digital photo capture devices. NONE of them were satisfying to me.
My Nikon F100 with a 50 mm lens sits here, with a roll of slide film inside, and it will take maybe six months to use that roll. Have a cheap digital point and shoot, and it too will sit for months unused.

At some point Mike, you should explore why readers no longer use cameras
for whatever reason.
Loss of pleasure, loss of meaning or
just unable to comprehend cameras that evolved
to be now a complicated computers,
that just happens to take a photographs.

I might add many of my friends neither have computers, nor anything digital, and struggle to find places that will process their E-6 and C41 films...

I have a Cannon Rebel SXi and a Powershot SX120. That is sufficient for me. I'm no gearhead though I love to read about the new stuff. The thing is, I still wish the Rebel was as non complex as my old Pentax K-1000 whose simplicity is beautiful.

Although this post is immediately gratifying to read I find it hard to endorse upon reflection.

I am a dilettante (by definition) and like nothing more than to switch cameras for the uniquely seductive charms one might have over another. Who doesn't like a new to fettle now and again? To have a modest portfolio of old film cameras feels to this enthusiast like I'm winning in life.

And so to read "...the pictures are the important thing." I disagree.

It assumes that getting better is the ultimate thing. Improving, always improving as if many of us here are working on a portfolio of work that will somehow be relevant in the future. Perhaps discovered a la Vivien Maier after we're gone.

I suspect Vivien enjoyed the pursuit of photography. If you read this blog it's a safe assumption we all do and pursue it for the varied pleasures we're all to familiar with; the gear, the pursuit, the tactile satisfaction of a well damped lens...

Sometimes I get great images, other times not but in both cases I've delighted in the process-end result be damned. Shackling myself to "one camera, one lens" smacks of a hairshirt aceticism for vanity's sake. Cerebrally appealing but c'mon, get over yourself. :)

I've reached the point of loving my 5D. I've had it since summer 2008. I know it like the back of my hand. I have a hard time imagining myself shooting a different camera. Sure, an OM-D would be nice, but would it feel right? Do I want to abandon my beloved Canon gear? Do I really want a camera with video capability?

Maybe I should be excited about what's new in the world of cameras, but I have little desire to upgrade. Lenses? Absolutely, but the body? No, the 5D is my camera. I'll keep it in my bag until it can't be repaired anymore. I guess that's true love.

I think an important thing is also to spend some money on camera servicing because it helps put more trust into the camera. If it's been serviced, then supposedly it is more dependable.

Thanks, Mike

One of the most important lessons I ever learned was to stick with one body, one lens, one film, one soup, one paper, until you see how each moving part works together.

Once you can make them all dance, then start changing if you need to -- one bit at a time.

I love to read about and compare gear like everyone else. Sometimes, though, when I am working and looking at what is in front, and how the light strikes and what better perspective I could get by moving I forget about the camera and I am "in the zone." My camera is just an extension of my arms, not to be noticed, just used. These are my most satisfying moments.

A good post, as always, and a provocative one. Reading others' comments on this subject was especially interesting! Seems many still have fond memories, and even left-over longings, for their "first love," although it's clear most have moved on to a newer one. It's refreshing to see Aaron admit his promiscuity. And Ken Tanaka makes me question whether I'm into photography, or merely have a camera festish (perhaps a little of both?). My first camera (after a frustrating Box Brownie and a wretched Argus C3) was a Minolta SRT-101. Out of necessity, I did exactly what you suggest in the post. I knew that camera so well that it disappeared when I was shooting. I went through a series of cameras over the years, including Minolta XKs and XK Motors, the Contax RTS (maybe the finest ergonomics of its time), and finally settled in Nikon-land. No snobbery, no better statistics or specifications -- just the most natural, most comfortable, most correct ergonomics for my hands, my brain, and my eye. Loved the F3HP, but really fell for the F4! I still think it was my favorite of the Nikon bodies in the film days. I recently ditched most of my film gear (Pentax 6x7, Hassy, most of the Nikons) once I realized I'd never be gong back to that medium. Digital is just too good, too immediate, too convenient for me to ever shoot film again. But I don't seem to fit into the "DSLRs are too big" school of thought, do I've never really been that attracted by the Compacts, EVILs, ILCs, m4/3s, or whatever. And the handful that I've tried are just too small and awkward in my hands. In fact, I find the D3 family of Nikons much more comfortable to use and to carry than even the APS-C Nikons (e.g., D300), and they balance better with most of the lenses I use. My current "loves" are a pair D3s bodies. Every capability that I use or need is second nature to me. I know when I need it, and I know where to find it and how to set it. Those cameras also disappear when I'm shooting. The rest of the features (e.g., video) I simply ignore (although I am aware of their presence, 'cause I did read the entire manual). And for quick snaps when I'm just walking around, I am very happy with the Nikon V1. (Oh, wait -- that's a different post isn't it?)

So you used a Contax 139Q all through photo school? Somehow I was under the impression you were in photo school pre 1980s, that is an 80s camera isn't it?

Mike --

An extraordinarily useful and insightful piece. In my film days, the cameras were simpler, i had more time and i knew them better. First was the Nikon F, then (for 23 years!) the FM, an F100, and, finally, a deeply enjoyed FM3a. Save possibly some F100 custom settings, i knew each thoroughly. Come the D80 and -- many more shutter depressions -- but in 4 years never really knew it. Now my 2 year old D7k; i need to do your exercises.

-- gary ray

Thanks for validating my OCD. I always thought I was a little nuts for forcing myself to learn every function and control of my camera when I first got it 6 or 7 years ago (Canon 5D).

Now, it feels like a well worn pair of gloves or a nicely broken in pair of work boots. And even if its getting a little long in the tooth (at least in the digital world), its still my go to camera because I'm intimately familiar with its performance envelope and what it can do well and, as importantly, what it can't do. In other words, I'm generally pretty sure if I'm going to get the shot or not before lifting the viewfinder to my eye.
Ken Rahaim

My big love was ... the Nikon FM2 with Kodachrome ... just 10 perfect years of pleasure ... and the good part ... the Nikkor lenses are still excellent on digital Nikons and my M43s :)

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007