Faithful Owners

[BernardLanguillier]

I have not considered any.  At this point in my career I wanted to focus 100% of my energy and time on the artistic aspects of the medium, not on the gear itself.  I am not against upgrading or buying stuff so I may upgrade again in the future. I just don't have any desire to do so right now. I am perfectly happy with the gear I have. 

The root of this decision was the realization that the limiting factor is me, not my gear.

Our understanding of the way things work differs a bit it seems. I don't see this as a linear pipe like process where the weakest link determines fully the output, to me it is a process that is both parallel and intertwined:
- parallel: all the factors affect the output, not just the one that is weaker compared to the reasonable average relative to the other ones,
- intertwined: these factor interact with each other, better or different equipment can help unlock vision and move forward out of a deadlock for example.

So to me there is a need to work on skills, vision,... and equipment.

Cheers,
Bernard

[alainbriot]

Our understanding of the way things work differs a bit it seems. I don't see this as a linear pipe like process where the weakest link determines fully the output, to me it is a process that is both parallel and intertwined:
- parallel: all the factors affect the output, not just the one that is weaker compared to the reasonable average relative to the other ones,
- intertwined: these factor interact with each other, better or different equipment can help unlock vision and move forward out of a deadlock for example.

So to me there is a need to work on skills, vision,... and equipment.

Cheers,
Bernard

I agree that all the elements involved have an effect on the images we create, be it gear, skills, artistic intent, vision, etc.

In my personal situation I had just worked on gear a little too much.  It was time to give it a break. 

There is no right and wrong approach to this.  What matters is creating the images you want to create.  In my instance the images I had in my head could not be created by getting a different or a newer camera.  I had tried them all.  The way to create them was to find a new artistic approach.

[BernardLanguillier]

Agreed Alain,

Thanks.

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Bernard,

Yes, but I have skipped over Sony E-system for quiet a number of years , until it reached the feature set I wanted. At that stage I made a complete gear change.

I wanted the following feautures:

• Be able to use tilt with a wide range of focal lengths.
  
• Be able to use shifts with wide angles
• Have EVF, for accurate focusing
• Have on sensor Phase Detection for fast focus acquisition
• Have electronic first shutter curtain for low vibrations

Canon and Nikon used to have TS-lenses for a long time, but Minolta/Sony never had a T&S lens. The first generation of the A7R lacked some features. Waiting on the A7rII was a long wait. I guess I would prefer a more advanced model than the A7rII. But the A7rII was good enough. I have been over spending on gear, so GAS needs to stand back for a while.

Best regards
Erik

The fact that it is also the latest generation of SLR is a coincidence I guess?

Cheers,
Bernard

[kencameron]

...yesterday I say a guy in the suburbs of Montpellier on one of those fat-wheeled bikes with 120mm or so wide tyres. I thought they were meant for snow...

They are also good for sand (beaches at low tide), and work well on any kind of dirt, as long as you aren't in a hurry.

[DennisWilliams]

I was just wondering: does anybody here actually use the same camera that they were using five years ago, not just as a lowly 'back-up' but as the main deal?

I suppose I'm interested in finding out whether people are more concerned with fashion, imaginary/real visible improvement in their photographs or just suffer from a surfeit of funds in the bank. (In the case of the latter, I'm just the guy to help you spend it in a somewhat more humanitarian direction!)

Rob C

I am using the same camera model  I was using 5 years ago. The same one from 20 years ago. For all professional work.  The last duplicate body  (i have several) was purchased about 2008. I still focus and set all exposures manually. As a  compromise  to what is now considered normal time frames for delivery / media usage, and because I believe  for current usage it just makes sense,  I scan  my originals and proceed  from there.

I do not see it as faithful. I consider it pragmatic.
dw

[alainbriot]

I do not see it as faithful. I consider it pragmatic.
dw

Pragmatic. I find that insightful in the context of this discussion.  Can you expand on that and explain what you mean by it?  Thank you.

[DennisWilliams]

Pragmatic. I find that insightful in the context of this discussion.  Can you expand on that and explain what you mean by it?  Thank you.

In my mind-  we do not share this with clients before that date lol- artistically  and commercially I was hitting my stride late 1990's  and by 2006 I had fully transitioned to  scanning everything for consumption. I had to reinvent  how I created originals  knowing they would be scanned and potentially viewed at the pixel level.  Since then there  hasn't been a hiccup.

There was no mathematically logical  formula to justify stopping what was working so effectively-  for not only me but others as well-  and switch to a  process in its infancy and hope it plays out and I can duplicate my output within a completely digital workspace.

But if I failed in the transition mid-career wouldn't I be the schmuck? I had what I wanted and what I needed. Certainly if I was involved in a discipline such as shooting NFL Football my perspectives and the benefits of changing to a 1DxMkll or D5 would be immediate but then I would not have been shooting manual MF film in the first place.

I believe sticking with what I knew and can do-  like the old dinosaur I was accused of being in 2010-  was  the logical move for me. As it has turned out, there has been a continuing respect  for  film in the right hands and I have never seen any   job loss over the years due to my equipment or the time frame required  to do my job.

There has been no  romanticism for my equipment over those years-  I just want to record what I want to record. I shot  Mamiyas, 'Blads, and assorted 645's before I settled on the Pentax system because it fit in my hand and simply just worked. 

For all the wonderful devices currently  available,  different is not always better  and I do not need different for its own sake or to be  energized or entertained. I do not doubt that at some point  I will buy a digital rig and do what I can with it... though  not till I have retired and there are no expectations.

[Jim Pascoe]

Is the 5Ds quieter than the 5d-II?
I was shooting some concert photos, by invitation but still sensitive about the noise disturbing the paying audience. I swear my friend's 5D-II sounded louder from the other side of the room than the Pentax pressed against my face...

The 5Ds is MUCH quieter than the 5DII. I have frequently used them together for weddings recently and the difference is very obvious.

Jim

[N80]

For me, the primary drive to upgrade was low light (high ISO) capability of current cameras like the D750. That, in my opinion, is a real advancement and not fluff. I love the fluff too though.