We all say it's not the tools, it's what you do with the tools.
That's true to a point, but dumbing down in all areas goes from a safe flight to a crash.
Sure I can shoot with a D70, or a D90, or a d anything. I can go from 8x8 or 12x12 reflectors to small flexible fill, from kinos to hand held light panels, from profoto, to flashguns, from REDs to sony handicams.
I can use small metal pics stands instead of c's, c stands instead of rollers and I may get away with it, but when you takes 10% away from every function you'll have 1/2 the image.
I'm not going to dance around this and say a cell phone is good "sometimes". It's only good because it's the only camera your carrying, even if a smart phone has 40mpx, it's still limited and honestly I've never understood "stealth" photography.
I shot this photo with one head, a medium bounce and a 5d2 and a much smaller crew that most. It's pretty, it worked though I had half a room of equipment and didn't use it all, I did use what I needed.
This was a much different genre. I shot have this project with my producer/partner, me and essentially two bodies two lenses, though the main imagery way a Nikon and a 200 F2, not really a lens you hide with.
Either way, I didn't care if people knew I was working because we negotiated permission, had a goal and was clear of our intent and even if I didn't have permission I wouldn't let a something stop me from getting the image I wanted.
I don't look for situations where I'm not noticed. It's too limiting. If I go to a concert and they don't allow cameras, I don't shoot, because if I wanted to shoot, I'd get press admission or secure a contract.
I'm not saying street photography is bad (though I must admit a lot of it I find way too much alike) but I can't imagine trying to be invisible.
There is some great street photography, though a lot of it seems to be awkward, but regardless A mobile phone to me is not a camera, I don't even think it's a very good phone, but that's my view, 25 trillion people feel different.
For this image I had press credentials and was commissioned to shoot this athlete though I refused to stay in the press section, because that's an awful place to work.
It's a long story of how i got this position, took a lot of heat, even was surrounded by security, but I made this image because this was the exact place I planned to shoot.
This is not an instigram style photograph where I got lucky, because I wasn't paid to get lucky. (thank God).
But bottom line to me is to get the photograph I want, not what I'm allowed. If people get upset because I'm carrying a professional camera, tough, that's not the biggest issue in life and usually not a crime and yes I've had people confront me in all sorts of ways when I'm working.
Like the old Joke of Jesus and St. Peter Playing golf. The bottom line is do you want to play golf or do you want to f__k around?
The Nikon DF, I don't understand the uproar. It looks like a Nikon camera, which is kind of the point and the only issue I have with it is it's less of a working tool than I would like for the money.
My 5d2 will do what this camera will, my 1dx will smoke it and a d800 is the same price, so before I bought this camera, I'd at least want a few more mega pixels, a bottom grip with larger batteries and probably video function.
IMO
BC
J,
Smart phones make images which can be instantly sent on in a single gesture. They are a wonderful "photo-sketch" tool, exactly like a pencil sketch compared to an oil painting. Look at the pix I sent in from the Paris photo show, you instantly understand what things look like.
The big PROBLEM with digital photography is THE COMPUTER. Spooling stuff over to a dedicated machine, wading through it, sharpening, retouching, Adobe products have an interface only a product manager can love. I'd say that if someone put a zoom camera in a Nokia 1020, or in an iPad, or made a phone version of the interchangeable lens Panasonic GM1 or even the Sony RX100, then a bunch of people would go out with an iPad and that phone, and do projects with them - the trendy Paris photo magazines I see in the kiosks now are all Instagram or blurrycam and look like a Lomo was used, not even an iPhone.
Aside from the fashion magazines and the big news glossies, most of the published pics I see -press or web - could be done with anything, including a $500 30x super-zoom camera which nobody on this forum would even notice in a shop.
As you know, I have the greatest respect for the tools of the trade, and the craft which people like you bring with them. However, just like most pop songs were once mixed to be heard on a transistor radio, most publications now expect low-fi because that's the trend.
Last, not least, I have a D4 and an iPhone. The D4 creates a problem anywhere I go. I have had people run after me in central Paris shouting that I was forbidden from photographing their building. I was stopped by security guards from photographing the Louvre pyramid. The iPhone gets me a picture without problems from the rent-a-cops. I worked for many years as a professional journalist, and I often prefer to gather my material without fuss - of course there are cases when you are expected to make a show of photographing - eg. at events, but in the main I'd say that the phone or compact is well accepted and suitable in many cases where the big cam cannot go.
Edmund