Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: tom b on August 29, 2015, 05:03:10 pm
-
My first camera was a Pentax Spotmatic F in 1975. It was good enough then and all my subsequent cameras have been good enough.
I loved my Leica FC film camera, but I needed a wide angle lens. The solution was very expensive and impractical.
I replaced my Leica with a Nikon FE, a very nice camera, but after the Leica click there was this clunk!
I'm enjoying my Panasonic GX7 with a Lumix 14mm fixed lens at the moment.
LuLa has a serious camera specifications base, however does the enjoyment or not of using a camera contribute to your use of that camera. I've got three good cameras that I regret buying because they drive me crazy!
Cheers,
-
Having a set of buttons and UI system that makes me constantly feel that "they did not even try to make it a pleasure to use".
My otherwise excellent RX100M2 is in this cathegory.
h
-
I keep saying - ergonomics, and pleasing work flow, matter hugely.
I like my Canon small DSLRs (60D, 6D, and now 7D2) - the optical viewfinders are nice and bright, the grip is great, the weight with L bracket is appropriate for someone who uses longer and heavier lenses handheld, the controls are reasonably convenient. I grew up with the 35mm SLR form factor and like it, though I can't believe how small the (admittedly small) old reliable Mamiya-Sekor M42-mount SLR feels now. Lastly, I have gotten accustomed to Lightroom.
I have the Sigma DP Merrill fixed lens cameras, and although they are much lighter, I find I use them less. They were hard to hold until I got an L bracket-grip for them. I like optical viewfinders better than LCDs when I shoot off tripod - I have a hard time steadying the camera if it isn't jammed into my face. Last but not least, the Sigma software is a PITA. So, though the files are wonderful, the cameras get used when I just want a lightweight fixed lens camera.
-
Camera love or hate is, for me, a digital age concept.
Pre-d, and once I was able to buy my first real camera (with interchangeable lens facility) I loved them all (almost - see below!). Why? They were simple enough for me to understand within five minutes of picking them up (except for the 500 Series, whose FM hinted at so many ways of jamming it that I held off loading it for a day at least!).
Along with the Nikon F came the sense of security associated with feeling that one held the best tool available to do the job. And it didn't get old and retired in five minutes. When I bought the F2 it wasn't to replace the F: it was to provide a second 135 format security option to the business. Both cameras continued to be used side by side, with no preferences felt towards either, other than that the more rounded edges of the F2 were kinder on long shoots.
The FM came in because of one factor: a slightly higher flash synch. for out-of-studio needs. Tom b remarks on the cheapness feel of the FE: compared with the F and F2, the FM was, as I've mentioned several times, the camera equivalent of a sardine can, and I have no reason to imagine the FE to have been any different. Nikon never sold those other bodies as anything but what they were: basic tools. You wanted the cream, you had to bleed for the F or F2 etc. I hated my FM and FM2 bodies, especially because I felt Nikon should have already had higher flash synch. in its flagships. But hey, Leica was worse, and didn't even let you frame accurately! I never bought any M bodies because of that, and the R6, beautiful as it was, and the only one to tempt me from Nikon in the slightest, couldn't give 100% viewing in the prism. Kiss of death in a format where every little mm of format mattered.
But the 135 format gave freedom just as long as I stayed at 50mm max. focal length. Any longer, and I might as well have swapped over to the 120 format because I required a tripod.
With 120, the best I ever had was the Hasselblad 500 series. Square, I never had to spoil the flow by going from horizontal to vertical: it was all available on every frame. My biggest camera regret ever has been trading the sytem away to go 6x7; I wish every day that I still had it. I also loved the Rollei TLR except for one thing: I couldn't put other lenses on it, and had no intention of buying either the Wide or Tele versions – might as well have a 'blad!
So much for the technical/practical. Spiritually, and boy, does photography depend on that! - I felt myself to be two, absolutely different, photographers simply by virtue of the chosen format.
Digital cameras. Only owned two: D200 and D700. They both do whatever I need, but feel too heavy (perhaps it's just that I'm a helluva lot older and physically weaker now) and not really an organic part of the creative process. I always feel uncomfortable when people rabbit on with the word 'organic', but somehow, it seems to me to fit my feeling quite accurately, at least in this context.
Dream cameras, the ones I think I'd love?
a. Hasselblad 500 Series with 6x6 digital back:
b. Nikon F2 with D700 wizardry inside. AND split-image screen!
I'n neither need nor want more.
Rob
-
I met mine through Ashley Madison........
-
The FM came in because of one factor: a slightly higher flash synch. for out-of-studio needs. Tom b remarks on the cheapness feel of the FE: compared with the F and F2, the FM was, as I've mentioned several times, the camera equivalent of a sardine can ...
Are you forgetting the in-between, the Nikkormat (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikkormat/html/history.htm)(or, for the Japanese market the otherwise identical Nikomat) (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikkormat/nikomat/index.htm) ? Loved the form and feel of those, but the best of all was an FM with a Pentax 67 adapter - see attached.
-
"Tom b remarks on the cheapness feel of the FE", no it was just that it was a SLR camera after the Leica.
My post is really a reflection on my past mistakes, I've bought cameras based on specs and glowing reviews.
Cheers,
-
Are you forgetting the in-between, the Nikkormat (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikkormat/html/history.htm)(or, for the Japanese market the otherwise identical Nikomat) (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikkormat/nikomat/index.htm) ? Loved the form and feel of those, but the best of all was an FM with a Pentax 67 adapter - see attached.
But Manoli, why would you do that?
There's no point: lenses are designed to optimize over the area they have to cover, which is why lenses for the 135 format are usually so good. Lenses for MF are designed to cover that 120 area, and the compromises made to suit.
You can't scale up in the expectation that cutting a central 36mm x 24mm section out of a larger format will give you the same quality as does a lens designed to cover that specific 135 format. Doesn't work like that.
I tried it with Nikon and Hasselblad, and there was no contest; the 135mm Nikkor beat the 150 Sonnar. Period. But, using the full 135 area and trying to compete with using the full 120 area would have reversed the result.
Apart from that, the added weight...
Rob
-
"Tom b remarks on the cheapness feel of the FE", no it was just that it was a SLR camera after the Leica.
My post is really a reflection on my past mistakes, I've bought cameras based on specs and glowing reviews.
Cheers,
Perhaps I read you Leica bit too quickly: what's an FC? I knew very well about M and R lines, but never heard of FC.
Rob
-
Hi,
Image quality is priority number one. For me, price is second and usability distant third.
Best regards
Erik
My first camera was a Pentax Spotmatic F in 1975. It was good enough then and all my subsequent cameras have been good enough.
I loved my Leica FC film camera, but I needed a wide angle lens. The solution was very expensive and impractical.
I replaced my Leica with a Nikon FE, a very nice camera, but after the Leica click there was this clunk!
I'm enjoying my Panasonic GX7 with a Lumix 14mm fixed lens at the moment.
LuLa has a serious camera specifications base, however does the enjoyment or not of using a camera contribute to your use of that camera. I've got three good cameras that I regret buying because they drive me crazy!
Cheers,
-
Keith -
Tried to respond to your post, but lost the message because I'd apparently 'timed-out' whatever the hell that is.
Too discouraging to fight.
Rob
-
But Manoli, why would you do that? [...]
Apart from that, the added weight...
Rob,
I should have inserted one of those yellow faces!
It was meant to be read as something along the lines of 'from the sublime to the ridiculous'.
It wasn't just the added weight, it was also the almost impossible balance. I never owned one ( either FM or adapter) but once seen and held, never to be forgotten.
M
Edit:
But I did own and use a Nikkormat EL - 'twas my intro to Nikon after the original Pentax Spotmatic - yes, fond memories, particularly with that Nikkor 105mm
-
Hi Rob, probably safer to type your message into Word or similar and then copy and paste to LuLa. Avoids timeouts.
I'm not sure what you meant by Too discouraging to fight?
Keith
Hi Keith,
Oh, just against the electronic world, I meant! I stopped fighting some of the people in it when I abandoned the forum world the last time, as you know.
I have never felt any interest in all the social media around me; neither Twit, Flik, Face, Insta nor anything else. I live divorced from all of it. Didn't feel the need before it existed and even less so today! I keep getting Linkedin mails too, despite having never done anything more sinister than be named in its archives by somebody we both knew from QT.
;-)
Rob
-
Hey Rob,
The Leica CL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_CL) was a collaboration between Minolta and Leica. The camera was designed by Leica. The body was made by Minolta with 40mm and 90mm lenses made by Leica. It had a M mount, it was slightly smaller and was from what I remember the first Leica to have a built in light meter, though it was a spot meter.
I think that's why I'm enjoying my GX7, it's about the same size, it takes Leica designed Lumix primes, and is a "left eye" design. In the age of the Internet it takes a very pretty image.
Cheers,
-
Hi Rob, probably safer to type your message into Word or similar and then copy and paste to LuLa. Avoids timeouts...
On my Mac, when writing a longish post, I frequently do this: Command-A (Select All) then Cmd-C (Copy All). That way, if timed out, I can simply do Cmd-V (Insert All). In other words, just two keyboard shortcuts.
-
Hey Rob,
The Leica CL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_CL) was a collaboration between Minolta and Leica. The camera was designed by Leica. The body was made by Minolta with 40mm and 90mm lenses made by Leica. It had a M mount, it was slightly smaller and was from what I remember the first Leica to have a built in light meter, though it was a spot meter.
I think that's why I'm enjoying my GX7, it's about the same size, it takes Leica designed Lumix primes, and is a "left eye" design. In the age of the Internet it takes a very pretty image.
Cheers,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnN9LMvjM7Y
If you haven't seen this, do! The guy still uses an R...
-
Keith, Slobodan,
I'd started to do that, write apart from the site, before I took a vacation; trouble is, I forgot these sporting moments of rest happen outwith netball, or whatever... ;-)
Rob
-
On my Mac, when writing a longish post, I frequently do this: Command-A (Select All) then Cmd-C (Copy All). That way, if timed out, I can simply do Cmd-V (Insert All). In other words, just two keyboard shortcuts.
I'm sure somewhere there is the ability to change the time that you remain logged in, but I can't seem to find it, perhaps the mods have been busy interfering with the settings.
-
For me a camera has to be fun to use. All else comes after that. Sometimes "fun to use" means a complex gizmo, if that complexity is in service of an overall well-thought-out design. Sometimes it means a camera that limits choice, provided the fixed parameters are smart ones, in service of simplicity. I can't think of any camera I've actually hated, though some have provoked annoyance often enough to be sold or more likely given away.
I still love my Leica M2 and Contax Aria. Electronic cameras are, so far, about short-term alliances sometimes inspiring fondness but not really love.
-Dave-
-
As long as the results are great and reasonably easy to achieve, I don't see myself hating a camera.
The only camera I used I truly hated was the Mamiya ZD, but the key reason was a wrong set of expectations relative to the intended usage of the camera.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
My all time used camera has to be the Olympus OM-1n. My parents bought it to use for research (microscopy) as well as family photos before I was born. They gave it to me when I first started to get interested in photography, and it taught me not to spray and pray when they made me pay for development and prints.
Fast forward to today and it's still my favorite 35mm camera. Even my Nikon FM2, which is superior on paper, doesn't give me the same feel.
But since I bought a Bronica ETRS kit a couple years ago I got hooked on medium format. The huge viewfinder and negatives are so good I can't stop shooting film with it even today that it's VERY expensive (the only lab in my city develops at 6€/ea, 40cent per frame).
-
I don't see how love or hate could pertain to a camera or any tool. Those are pretty harsh extremes.
I own several systems and each has their advantages and disadvantages and I try to choose the right system for the right environment... sometimes I even choose correctly. :)
-
I don't see how love or hate could pertain to a camera or any tool. Those are pretty harsh extremes.
I own several systems and each has their advantages and disadvantages and I try to choose the right system for the right environment... sometimes I even choose correctly. :)
I certainly did hate some cameras, almost every 4x5 that I was forced to use. I found nothing thrilling about upside down imagery, have little affection for tripods, and of the smaller ones, the Mamiya TLR with a 180mm set fitted was about as awful as it got for me. The only reason I bought the combo was because at that period, I couldn't afford a 'blad, and the Mamiya complemented my Rollei TLR. The 180mm was actually a pretty nice lens, but that red line that slid up and down the finder to 'indicate' the top of the frame... my blood pressure is rising as I write!
Rob
-
I can't really remember all THAT well more than a few minutes back, but I think Rob's right, all the love/hate stuff seems to me very modern.
My theory is that since digital cameras are all so excellent these days, there's nothing much to review, so you're down to "I cannot program the wheel on the bottom of the body to control ISO, and so I hate this camera with passion of a 1000 blazing suns is sort of the order of the day. Hyperbole has to substitute for substance, since the substance is all "great camera, takes awesome photos, basically no problems"
Remember when reviews were "film impossible to load", "tears film to bits if you get it wrong, and sometimes if you don't", "mounting lens without cocking the shutter wedges lens irrevocably into the wrong place", "leaks light all over the place" and so on? Now it's complaints out illogical menu layouts.
-
Remember when reviews were "film impossible to load", "tears film to bits if you get it wrong, and sometimes if you don't", "mounting lens without cocking the shutter wedges lens irrevocably into the wrong place", "leaks light all over the place" and so on? Now it's complaints out illogical menu layouts.
Oh god, reminds me of this Russian camera I have called Mir. It's a copy of the Zorki, which itself is a copy of the Leica (though Russians forgot quite a few things while copying stuff, so they are very different). It does look nice, but if you set the shutter speed before cocking the shutter, it will ruin the gears and possibly even tear apart the shutter curtain.
Speaking of Russian cameras that will make you cry like a baby when you mess up, the Kiev 88 is another one of those. The very first models had a metal shutter curtain, which works nice until that fatal moment it moves a few microns too much and gets stuck in the curtain guides, bending the thin metal and making it useless and unrepairable without a complete replacement of the whole thing. You can get it replaced with a cloth shutter curtain, or get it fixed by Arax, but you will be better off using it as a boat anchor or lifting weight and getting yourself a used Hasselblad.
-
I certainly did hate some cameras, almost every 4x5 that I was forced to use. I found nothing thrilling about upside down imagery, have little affection for tripods
I think I'm everything you hate! Since I first learned to use a technical camera many years ago I have had a (qualified) hatred for all normal cameras without movements. Even shift lenses frustrate me with their limitations now!
And the more automatic/program/ultra-clever features any camera has the more furious I get with it. The first camera I really hated was the first Nikon film SLR I owned with auto-focus. I recently sold an A7r (Mk 1) with very little use because I hated it so much - and yes, I agree the sensor is excellent.
I think I'm falling in love with my Fuji GF670W, though. Oh dear - and I'm not even 60 yet (sob...)... :'(
-
I have never hated cameras, but the polaroid back on Mamiyas and Hassys we used to check flash exposures with did get its share of hateful thoughts! Namely film was always stuck (did not use it often enough) when the chemicals dried on the rollers. Open, throw away almost unused pack of film, disassemble the back and wash under warm water in the toilet wash basin, dry out and reload with fresh pack of 8 exposures. Took at least 15 minutes every time. I bless the engineers every time I shoot with flash with digital and just check the LCD and histogram...
-
I think I'm everything you hate! Since I first learned to use a technical camera many years ago I have had a (qualified) hatred for all normal cameras without movements. Even shift lenses frustrate me with their limitations now!
And the more automatic/program/ultra-clever features any camera has the more furious I get with it. The first camera I really hated was the first Nikon film SLR I owned with auto-focus. I recently sold an A7r (Mk 1) with very little use because I hated it so much - and yes, I agree the sensor is excellent.
I think I'm falling in love with my Fuji GF670W, though. Oh dear - and I'm not even 60 yet (sob...)... :'(
Nope, don't jump to that conclusion, at least not yet! ;-)
I never had af until I was forced to make a swap from my first-and-last zoom which left me with only the option of going for an af 2.8/180 Nikkor (too complicated a tale to tell here). As it was only the least worst option and a focal length that didn't really have a purpose at the time, I have hardly used it since new, and only for a single shot with af.
Af always felt like an imposition, and then a while ago, I realised that manual focussing had become very difficult due to an eye problem getting worse. So, I bought a new af 1.8/50 G Nikkor and learned how to use af. It's a mixed blessing, and has to be switched back to manual when I shoot reflections in windows, where the real subject of interest might be partially hidden behind other reflections or even real objects behind the window. Then there's no substitute for the human touch. Perhaps one day eye-detection will enable that fine degree of accuracy; I suppose it'll be after I've traded this life for the next. My sense of timing was never very hot, as I hope the next life won't be either!
Big Fujis had a great reputation for their optics in the day! Don't complain about not being 60; once you are you come to realise too many things best left neglected.
Rob C