« Print Sale Wrap-Up | Main | Bad PR »

Wednesday, 22 May 2019

Comments

Is it necessary to use and understand all the functions of these cameras? Does anyone know and use all of Photoshop? I don’t, and I have lots of fun with it. I even have a little affection for it.

Well put me in the contrarian pile I guess. Fun for me is learning to use my tools, whether it’s the stick shift in my pickup, a carefully honed chisel in my shop, my Canon 5D2, or photoshop. There is real joy in mastering the tool and getting a product that I can be proud of. Yes I reallly do have more fun if it takes me an hour to process a shot to my desired result compared to a 30 second Camera raw - print sequence.

There seems to be all kinds of “fun” feelings attributed to photography. I’d say it’s a very elusive thing to define exactly. It’s a feeling that one gets when it comes. Sometimes you can try to plan on it happening, Still, the capturing of a visual moment in time and then seeing that moment preserved could be the basis for all that elaborates. There are fun things in complexity, as well as simplicity. There are even just fun feelings from handling and operating the machines. The experiences are endless, open to those who can find their own moments of “fun”, and go from there. If we wail about over technological advances, then maybe our fun stopped before that happened. You just have to backtrack a bit or take another tack to find it again.

For me, the "fun" is seeing something that makes me want to make a picture of, then doing just that. It's similar to how I look at cars. The fun part of a car is being able to transport myself to places, and the car itself matters little as long as it is reliable. I got into photography in 2000 and used a Pentax K1000. I've owned and used 5 cameras since then (2 film and 3 digital) but no matter how numerous and complex the features and settings on a camera became, it had very little effect on how I took pictures because I still shoot the same way I did with the K1000. I set the camera to center-weighted average and manual exposure, and ignore any features or configurations I don't need or want. The abundance of configurations would only be a problem if you had to deal with them before every shot.

I have not felt any attachment to a particular camera. It is just a tool for me and not a precious toy that'll somehow make picture-taking fun. Digital cameras are more than good enough now and have been so for many years. If there comes a time when taking pictures isn't fun anymore, I'll admit that I am the problem, not the camera.

S'funny. I find photography fun regardless of what camera I use.

As for camera complexity. Turn the dial to 'A' and have done with it if you don't like complicated.

Unfortunatly, I think one of the problems with designing a "simple" camera is one of the applications of the 80/20 rule - wherein 80% of users only use 20% of a device's (or software's) features. The problem is, they often use a different 20%.

Speaking for myself, my ideal camera would have:


  • IBIS

  • a small sensor (I backpack, so light weight is important)

  • interchangable lenses

  • fully articulating screen (see above re: backpacking)

  • weather sealing

  • high ISO capability

  • some kind of viewfinder (though it can be EVF)

  • knobs and dials for the usual adjustments

  • good autofocus

  • some kind of smart program mode

  • ...

The trouble is finding a simple camera that has a big enough market. Apple runs into this problem too - usually their products have a big enough market, but it's not hard to find a litany of complaints about things their products are missing.

That said, if somebody wanted to try this in cameras at a reasonable price point (under 2k, say?), I'd be on board.

I have the ultimate simple picture-taking camera: A Kodak Pocket Instamatic 60 about 40 years old. Point, focus, and shoot. Focus isn't particularly necessary outdoors unless up close. Getting the media for the camera and pictures out to look at are another matter.
Terry, WD4AON

Talk about your 1 gb second hand CF, yes it is hard to come by in those days. In one forum someone told a specific MP3 player which has a 4g card inside. Still remember rush to get it to destroy it for the card inside ...

Looking at those 2gb card for my upcoming back, thinking it might need old cf card ... found this good old 4gb card again. Good old days when a GAS can be easily fixed.

(It turns out my 2012 map has a FireWire 800 hole that can upgrade the back to support latest cf card. In fact my 2017 mbp apple still sell FireWire adapter (need 2). Hence no need of old card. Well, all is not needed in any case. )

Btw whilst waiting for the back (va, k, ar... usps :-(), I found out it is just fun to look at the bright mirror of the elf and click the 203fe. Need a sunglasses and a ear plug I supposed. My wife did shout “I thought you have sold that camera”. Guess you can’t hide a hassey.

Just came here to say: The M10-p definitely is a fun camera. Just pushing the shutter release feels nice. There's not much to learn: just the same basics of shutter, aperture, and ISO, and focus; you can shoot in RAW and full resolution, and there's really not that much to manage.

Leica's prices are high because they seem to figure out what will be fun for a particular group of people, make exactly that in exactly the number of copies as there exist people who will want it (or fewer), and sell it to them. Sometimes it's embarrassing, as in the latest Lenny Kravitz special, which tarts up 125 copies of the M Monochrome[242] with pseudo "vegan" lizardskin, tosses two very nice lenses into the package and raises about 3M EUR while sweeping the last of the old sensor monochromes off the inventory shelves. Every one was sold by the time of the announcement.

Relevant to this discussion are the M-D and M10-D, which pare things down to a lens, an M body with no LCD, and no menus. No buttons but the shutter. On mine, the controls on the body are shutter speed and ISO on top, with an exposure compensation dial on the back.

https://flic.kr/p/2g2xbjB

The lens I use most out front is the one I have had since the M8, a nice small 28/2.8 https://flic.kr/p/2g2x6Fj . It also works well with a 24/2.8 that I have had almost as long https://flic.kr/p/2g2xaFY , but for that an external viewfinder (optical or electronic) is a good idea.

In use it is an M-7 (which had aperture priority). Adjustable ISO came along at some point. The pictures are on the chip at the end of the day and they generally come out, just as they did if you were careful in the film days. That's all. And it is really nothing to worry about. My roll of film currently has about 1500 exposures on it. I'll need to insert a new roll soon, or erase and reuse the old one. Because Leica hasn't made very many of either of these models, the used price is about the same as the new price.

Perhaps there is something like the traditional rule in design where of the three most important qualities, only two at a time are possible. Here they are Fun, Quality, and Cheap.

Fun + Quality --> not Cheap.
Fun + Cheap --> Quality only in the eye of the beholder
Quality + Cheap ..> not gonna be Fun, because it has to cram in all the stuff that millions Must Have.


The comments to this entry are closed.

Portals




Stats


Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007