Buying the wrong camera
Discussion
This weekend I had a friend here with a new product range and he wanted to take photos in and on my car to give a good background. The product is motoring orientated so the classic car was an obvious choice. He has a lovely Leica D series with an f1.7 lens, but when he started snapping away I pointed out that he needed to think about the DOF, for example did he want the steering wheel in or out of focus? He had no idea of how to even turn the camera from auto to AF. For several years he has always said how he had a better camera than me, and I was in agreement - mine is a Canon S110. Theoretically it is better but we all know that it is the person behind the camera that counts more than the camera itself. During the 24 Hour race I had two of the people staying here with Nikon SLRs, and both were the same. They all seem to think that splashing the cash will give them a much better photo even if they have not the slightest idea what to do with the camera. In both cases my trusty old D3 came into play with lenses from 10/24 to 200/400 and people asked if I could copy my photos to a USB key, their own photos being rubbish. It is so hard to refuse, and even the gentlest instruction seems to be met with a blank stare. Just why on earth do they waste their money like that?
Because photography is easy isn't it ? Look at all the instagrammers, just point and shoot...viola, a masterpiece
Anyone can point and click but taking a great photo that's really appealing isn't easy at all. For many, newer / more expensive gear makes them better in their heads but then they're mostly disappointed.
Buying a Ferrari won't make me a better driver overnight...
Anyone can point and click but taking a great photo that's really appealing isn't easy at all. For many, newer / more expensive gear makes them better in their heads but then they're mostly disappointed.
Buying a Ferrari won't make me a better driver overnight...
It's probably always been like that - buying shiny things for the brand, to look good etc. I have nice Siemens kitchen appliances but don't do any proper cooking.
Photography used to be a subject that people learned from the ground up, back in the days of manual everything, doing your own d&p etc - they learned by doing. You had to know some science to do it. Now technology has removed much of the need for people to understand what they're doing. Which is good but also bad if you see what I mean.
Photography used to be a subject that people learned from the ground up, back in the days of manual everything, doing your own d&p etc - they learned by doing. You had to know some science to do it. Now technology has removed much of the need for people to understand what they're doing. Which is good but also bad if you see what I mean.
I was at a wedding (as a guest, but with my camera) last year when I noticed that everyone's camera was better than mine.
I really enjoy photography so like to take the time to learn the ins and outs. I'm a deeply average photographer, but I enjoy getting better at it. I've had some good results at previous weddings so figured this another opportunity to learn a little more.
When I noticed that everyone's camera was better than mine, I kind of gave up. I took a few shots but nowhere near as many as I had at previous weddings. There were so many other DSLR's there I felt I didn't want to add to the mass of picture taking - other's would probably be doing it better.
Skip forwards a couple days later, I log into Facebook and there's the other guests pictures making an appearance. And they were... well, they were s
te. No composition, orientations may as well have been upside down, weird focus on anything other than the subjects, shooting direct into great beaming lights etc.
I'm not trying to st on anyone's hobby here. Everyone starts off somewhere and if you can afford to get started with an expensive camera, all power to you. But it was a stark reminder to not write yourself off just because someone else has better equipment.
I really enjoy photography so like to take the time to learn the ins and outs. I'm a deeply average photographer, but I enjoy getting better at it. I've had some good results at previous weddings so figured this another opportunity to learn a little more.
When I noticed that everyone's camera was better than mine, I kind of gave up. I took a few shots but nowhere near as many as I had at previous weddings. There were so many other DSLR's there I felt I didn't want to add to the mass of picture taking - other's would probably be doing it better.
Skip forwards a couple days later, I log into Facebook and there's the other guests pictures making an appearance. And they were... well, they were s
te. No composition, orientations may as well have been upside down, weird focus on anything other than the subjects, shooting direct into great beaming lights etc.I'm not trying to s
t on anyone's hobby here. Everyone starts off somewhere and if you can afford to get started with an expensive camera, all power to you. But it was a stark reminder to not write yourself off just because someone else has better equipment.Used to see it a lot on track days. 'All the gear and no idea'.
The only thing I'd disagree with from the above is the pub/grand piano. Even if you can't play at all, just hitting random notes will sound a world better than a pub nag.
BTW, and seriously O/T - top tip, if you don't play a note and find yourself sitting in front of a piano, just stick to the black notes and you'll fool quite a few.
The only thing I'd disagree with from the above is the pub/grand piano. Even if you can't play at all, just hitting random notes will sound a world better than a pub nag.
BTW, and seriously O/T - top tip, if you don't play a note and find yourself sitting in front of a piano, just stick to the black notes and you'll fool quite a few.
...and yet.
From a different perspective the automation features modern (amateur) cameras have probably resulted in many vastly superior images being made. Simple things like facial recognition and ensuring the focus is on the eyes.
"Sports mode" automatically selecting a quick shutter speed to freeze the action.
"Landscape" mode choosing a tiny aperture and so on.
I'm old enough to know all about the trade offs between ISO/Aperture/Shutter speed but you can definitely argue that the onboard computer does an infinitely better job of that stuff than almost all photographers.
I have all the gear and plenty of idea (technical knowledge) but some of the guys on here take better pictures than I ever will because it is the indefinable art of composition that is the most important aspect of photography, coupled with patience (waiting for the light) and then, and only then, the technical competence to execute the image you have in your imagination.
From a different perspective the automation features modern (amateur) cameras have probably resulted in many vastly superior images being made. Simple things like facial recognition and ensuring the focus is on the eyes.
"Sports mode" automatically selecting a quick shutter speed to freeze the action.
"Landscape" mode choosing a tiny aperture and so on.
I'm old enough to know all about the trade offs between ISO/Aperture/Shutter speed but you can definitely argue that the onboard computer does an infinitely better job of that stuff than almost all photographers.
I have all the gear and plenty of idea (technical knowledge) but some of the guys on here take better pictures than I ever will because it is the indefinable art of composition that is the most important aspect of photography, coupled with patience (waiting for the light) and then, and only then, the technical competence to execute the image you have in your imagination.
Don said:
...and yet.
From a different perspective the automation features modern (amateur) cameras have probably resulted in many vastly superior images being made. Simple things like facial recognition and ensuring the focus is on the eyes.
"Sports mode" automatically selecting a quick shutter speed to freeze the action.
"Landscape" mode choosing a tiny aperture and so on.
I'm old enough to know all about the trade offs between ISO/Aperture/Shutter speed but you can definitely argue that the onboard computer does an infinitely better job of that stuff than almost all photographers.
I have all the gear and plenty of idea (technical knowledge) but some of the guys on here take better pictures than I ever will because it is the indefinable art of composition that is the most important aspect of photography, coupled with patience (waiting for the light) and then, and only then, the technical competence to execute the image you have in your imagination.
Indeed and just to further the devil's advocate slant (because I don't really disagree with the OP but there can be more to it). From a different perspective the automation features modern (amateur) cameras have probably resulted in many vastly superior images being made. Simple things like facial recognition and ensuring the focus is on the eyes.
"Sports mode" automatically selecting a quick shutter speed to freeze the action.
"Landscape" mode choosing a tiny aperture and so on.
I'm old enough to know all about the trade offs between ISO/Aperture/Shutter speed but you can definitely argue that the onboard computer does an infinitely better job of that stuff than almost all photographers.
I have all the gear and plenty of idea (technical knowledge) but some of the guys on here take better pictures than I ever will because it is the indefinable art of composition that is the most important aspect of photography, coupled with patience (waiting for the light) and then, and only then, the technical competence to execute the image you have in your imagination.
I had compacts for years. Never remotely interested in photography, didn't know my arse from my aperture. But then a mate got a Nikon DSLR and I had a play with it and I loved its ability to separate out subjects. Its ability to shoot in low light. The speed at which it would take a photo after pressing the shutter button (compacts back then took about 10 minutes). Long exposures in low light that looked great. And one overriding memory was just how satisfying the shutter noise was. Made me feel like a pro.
That inspired me to go out and buy a DSLR for myself and the last 6 years have been a great learning experience. Now in hindsight, I can see that even the crappiest of compacts can do much of the stuff that inspired me to use a DSLR but it was getting a DSLR that actually inspired me to learn photography and I haven't stopped since.
It is impossible to deny the importance of high-quality equipment. But one can not deny the importance of having the experience and skills of a photographer. Although you can use post-processing of photos in various programs. You can even not know how to use programs to send to specialized sites for Wedding-retouching for example.
I belonged to a camera club. They had monthly competitions, contests almost. The chap who won most often was the one with the rangefinder camera.
Yet there was I, with my SLR, five lenses, filters, a choice of flashgun and a tripod.
He had an eye for composition. He'd take the same photograph from more or less the same position as another person, yet his pictures were so much more noticeable.
Everyone hated him. But he was good.
Yet there was I, with my SLR, five lenses, filters, a choice of flashgun and a tripod.
He had an eye for composition. He'd take the same photograph from more or less the same position as another person, yet his pictures were so much more noticeable.
Everyone hated him. But he was good.
Derek Smith said:
I belonged to a camera club. They had monthly competitions, contests almost. The chap who won most often was the one with the rangefinder camera.
Slightly contrary, note that amateur club competitions are only as good as the amateur judges! I recently joined an amateur film-making group for the entertainment (I directed and produced corporate video for 15 years), and their views on what is 'good' can be quite alarming!Having had SLR cameras since the day of the F2, I find myself, because of the weight, going backwards. I still have all my SLR equipment, manual lenses and all - and there is nothing to beat the 50mm f1.2 Noct in my view - but now I am in the main happy to carry the S110 Canon. I have manual, AF and shutter settings if I need, but in the main let the camera decide and get good results. For sport of course the big guns come into play, but I don't find myself taking the D3, 12/24, 24/70 and 70/200 on holiday any more. I'm too old and it weighs too much.
GetCarter said:
Used to see it a lot on track days. 'All the gear and no idea'.
The only thing I'd disagree with from the above is the pub/grand piano. Even if you can't play at all, just hitting random notes will sound a world better than a pub nag.
.
And if you have no idea what you are doing, a DSLR in auto mode is likely to produce a better image than a phone. My use of a piano as an analogy was to infer that someone like Beethoven playing a pub piano is going to sound infinitely better than someone who can't play, irrespective of what they are playing on.The only thing I'd disagree with from the above is the pub/grand piano. Even if you can't play at all, just hitting random notes will sound a world better than a pub nag.
.
I started out when film was the vogue and the bin was always full after development. Over time this improved, as my skills did. Even at the point semi auto picture taking was starting to take over.
In time, I moved onto rangefinders and slrs. Even up to the Leica M9, you were lost without knowledge of photography skills, and using a rangefinder was an art in it's own.
But back to the point, I do believe a point and shoot has its place and in some cases people will never want / need to learn further. Rob's comment is true, modern auto cameras have produced better looking poor photos but in some cases some very good stuff. All in the eye of the beholder Rob
Like all P&S; lens quality, lighting, angles, composition are still needed for a decent picture. In the case of the OPs experience with his mate, his end game would appear different from yours; he has a reasonably priced, decent lens camera and believes it will give him what he wants and so be it. I have friends who have Leica Q's at £3500 each; none of them get off auto some days but it delivers what they want for that moment.
Derek, people who use rangefinders are always gonna win
I don't see why people buying expensive kit can't use the auto setting. In time, hopefully they will learn more about exposure, etc etc but it is a choice thing and takes a while. It is a hobby at the end of the day, if anything people should be encouraged to explore the dark side before there is only one button left on the top of the body
In time, I moved onto rangefinders and slrs. Even up to the Leica M9, you were lost without knowledge of photography skills, and using a rangefinder was an art in it's own.
But back to the point, I do believe a point and shoot has its place and in some cases people will never want / need to learn further. Rob's comment is true, modern auto cameras have produced better looking poor photos but in some cases some very good stuff. All in the eye of the beholder Rob
Like all P&S; lens quality, lighting, angles, composition are still needed for a decent picture. In the case of the OPs experience with his mate, his end game would appear different from yours; he has a reasonably priced, decent lens camera and believes it will give him what he wants and so be it. I have friends who have Leica Q's at £3500 each; none of them get off auto some days but it delivers what they want for that moment.
Derek, people who use rangefinders are always gonna win
I don't see why people buying expensive kit can't use the auto setting. In time, hopefully they will learn more about exposure, etc etc but it is a choice thing and takes a while. It is a hobby at the end of the day, if anything people should be encouraged to explore the dark side before there is only one button left on the top of the body
ignore other peoples opinions - just take photo's of what you like -the way you like to take'em.
Camera clubs are way too opinionated, in fact they're a bunch of useless amateur pedantics.
>
Avoid any and all photo competitions at all costs - they simply steal your best shots for free!!
>
Good luck and enjoy Photography 'your way' - fk everyone elses opinion 
Camera clubs are way too opinionated, in fact they're a bunch of useless amateur pedantics.
>
Avoid any and all photo competitions at all costs - they simply steal your best shots for free!!
>
Good luck and enjoy Photography 'your way' - f
k everyone elses opinion lowdrag said:
Just why on earth do they waste their money like that?
Maybe people spend/waste money on objects just because they like those objects.Why buy an expensive watch for example? Movement dependent they don't do their
job of keeping time any better than the cheapest brands.
My late father was always spending/wasting money on German, Swiss & Swedish high end cameras,
and managed to produce the world's worst snaps from them!
But it turned out that his obsession with well made cameras was an excellent vicarious 'investment' for me;
I got interested in taking photographs with some of them and subsequently had 30 fun years as a pro.
In your friend's case he's almost certainly wasting money because he could have bought
an identical Panasonic (LX100?) but lacking the red dot, for an awful lot less money.
lowdrag said:
Just why on earth do they waste their money like that?
What makes you believe it is a waste of money?Here on PistonHeads there are thousands of high-performance car users who, 99% of the time, are unlikely to scratch the surface of their cars full capabilities. Speaking for myself, I've not once hit my cars top speed and very rarely get to use full acceleration. Is it a waste of money? Some would argue that it is, but for me I enjoy the experience of the car.
Maybe it is the same for those camera owners?
Simpo Two said:
Derek Smith said:
I belonged to a camera club. They had monthly competitions, contests almost. The chap who won most often was the one with the rangefinder camera.
Slightly contrary, note that amateur club competitions are only as good as the amateur judges! I recently joined an amateur film-making group for the entertainment (I directed and produced corporate video for 15 years), and their views on what is 'good' can be quite alarming!I've recently been looking for an amateur film making group to join but there's nothing round my way, this despite there being a small film festival just down the road in October.
Fair comment, and I witnessed one Ferrari owner with little ability who made an awful mess of it on a circuit, losing it on the straight of all things, changing up on a wet part of the track. I have a not-so-cheap watch and a Seiko, both automatics, and the Seiko keeps better time, so I am as guilty as the rest, but having taken so many photos, and my friend having pointed out so many times his camera was far superior than mine, I posted, perhaps without properly thinking it through. It still irks though, when I think, being the big-headed sod that I am, that I could take better photos with it than him. I must go and buy a Panasonic.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff