That's my word for today, and it's what I say when people start saying you can't make good images with cheap equipment. I wish I still had the photos I made with the pinhole camera I helped one of my kids make for a science project in school.
A camera is really a simple device when you boil it down to the basics. Lenses are far more complex, but again, do you really need that lens that costs as much as a good used car? Horseradish. Can you live without AF and VR, and ED, and all those other acronyms? You bet your horsepucky!
Did Ansel Adams have any of that stuff? Of course not, yet many try to emulate him. What do you suppose he'd say about modern camera and lenses? Well, I would think he'd say concentrate on the image, because it's everything.
This may seem like a rant, but it's not. I am saying don't get hung up on equipment. I see a lot of that going on in the forums. Heck, I got caught up in that and I nearly quit because I don't have the latest whiz-bang camera or lenses. Horseradish I say!
So now, here I am, back at square one with a whole new attitude. I love my camera and lenses! They are part of me and by golly I am going to be the best doggone photographer I can be. Light is my friend and I am going to learn all I can about him and how to use light to create some magic.
Heck, I might even build another pinhole camera, just for fun! Who is with me?
Darn it, George! I thought this thread was going to have something to do with Roast Beef.
Never-the-less, I agree with your point. As much fun as it may be to dream about, debate and analyze equipment, if you can't take a picture it's pointless. Just use what you have to take the best picture you possibly can. Analyze that to see how you can improve your technique, not your gear.
And if anyone gets a nice picture of a Beef-on-Weck in Buffalo, I'd be grateful.
>Darn it, George! I thought this thread was going to have >something to do with Roast Beef. > >Never-the-less, I agree with your point. As much fun as it may >be to dream about, debate and analyze equipment, if you can't >take a picture it's pointless. Just use what you have to take >the best picture you possibly can. Analyze that to see how >you can improve your technique, not your gear.
Exactly my point. To use a good pun here, it is about focus.
> >And if anyone gets a nice picture of a Beef-on-Weck in >Buffalo, I'd be grateful.
As soon as I figure out what that is, I'll do my best to get one!
>...So now, here I am, back at square one with a whole new >attitude. I love my camera and lenses!... Who is with me?
I'm not going to build a pinhole camera, but despite occasional NAS, I agree. I have an excellent camera and some nice lenses, even though they are not the top-of-the-line pro gear. My camera equipment is great for taking the kind of photos I want to take, and what's holding me back from getting better photos isn't my equipment, its the photographer who stands behind it.
One nice thing about digital photography is that having incurred a not insubstantial cost in acquiring my equipment, I can now go out and shoot for practice, just to experiment, without incurring much in the way of additional cost. That does add to my enjoyment of the hobby.
I wouldn't say that I'd be just as happy with any camera, or any lenses, but rather that I'm fortunate enough to have acquired a set of camera equipment such that the equipment I have isn't the limiting factor in the quality of my photos. And for that reason, I love my camera and lenses!
Interesting topic. I agree with you. Over the past few months I've been watching various threads within Nikonians and there is an absolute obsession with equipment - I think it might be a male thing that's somewhat analogous to "Mines Bigger Than Yours"!
I guess you have to keep in mind that the camera and lens are just tools. Some are a bit more automatic than others and some are bigger or weigh more and are longer or wider, but fundamentally the biggest difference in the output is the photographer. And, keep in mind the proverb "Clothes don't make the man", I'm sure the saying can be adapted to photography.
Well my thread has had the desired effect, so mission accomplished!
I like being a bit unorthodox, hence the horseradish lol. But it got people thinking and hopefully in a positive way. FX vs DX really doesn't matter. AF S vs AF D doesn't matter. Any or all systems are good as long as they help you produce the images you desire. If you like cameras and all you want is to collect, then more power to you!
Hmmmmm... lets build a pinhole with a digital sensor. Then we would need a back screen to compose, and maybe one of my old Nikon lenses on the front. I think I have an old Vivitar flash somewhere and then.....
You compose like you would do with a SpeedGraphix, experience and you could make frame that mounts in the hot shoe that could give one the limits of the view.
Also one needs to get the exposure by trial and error.
The pin hole camera might not get a better image than many photographers. But when you "master" it, you have more understanding about how to use a camera and figure out exposure. This added knowledge will improve your skills with the more advanced cameras because you should have better understanding of the mechanics of capturing images and thinking about what you are about to do before you unpack your camera.
You're kind of right with respect the the hobbyist. A good phone camera is all you really need. Small, decent image quality-what's not to like. However, when you make your income with imaging, the story changes. I had to invest in some new equipment if I was to satisfy some of my client base. To do what they wanted required an upgrade to certain areas. And what I have produced lately is really surprising me. Just couldn't do it with my older stuff. I have pushed the capabilities of the technology I had, time to move on. You hear it all the time, it's not the camera! It's not the camera! But I daresay, that a forum of mostly hobbyists like here at Nikonians that it is an important part of the fun. Going deeply into Nikon lens serial numbers, and testing new lenses with charts, and getting info about the best tripod or bag-that's an important part of this community. Let's not try to kid any body, the gear to a big chunk of thinking here is about. Got to go....I'll finish later
Of course it's a different ball game when it's your living. I am gearing this more to people like me who do this for enjoyment, and maybe make a little coinage on the side. Of course the camera and lenses are important, but to me it's all just a tool to make the image. Some need pro tools, while others just need consumer grade.
You might say this is a pep talk to myself and anyone else like me who have gotten equipment paralysis and need to break out of that rut and get back to making images.
Your argument is somewhat overdone. It is quite obvious that an experienced photographer does better with simple equipment than a novice with a top of the line camera and lens. On the other hand, the experienced photographer will do better with good than with marginal equipment. A case in point - If I compare a capture taken with the D70 plus kit lens to a picture of the same subject but taken with a D700 and a Zeiss lens, there sure is a difference.
You are correct when you state that a lot of recent photographic equipment is loaded down with useless bells and whistles which not only adds to cost and weight but in many cases is over-engineered and unreliable. I also agree that unfortunately many people fall for the trap set by marketing experts and acquire overpriced equipment they don't need. If Nikon comes up with a 100 MP camera, quite a few people would dump their brand new, but now obsolete D800, to buy the new model.
I knew I should have included a disclaimer with that link lol!
I heartily agree and I have just the right small drill bits to accomplish the task. Sounds like a little fun to enjoy over the long holiday weekend this week. I might have some images to share just for fun.
You can use a larger drill bit. Then using non shiny black tape, secure black construction paper inside the body cap. Use a pin to make a small hole in construction paper. It worked great on my camera.
With digital it is easy to experiment and find the best exposure.
True, but we are a bit off the theme, which is don't obsess over equipment. I realize there are specialties which require certain types of equipment. I am speaking more in terms of general photography.
>Seems to me that much of the obsession here *is* related to >sports, wildlife and other "specialties".
It does seem like there are two "types of obsessions" I notice here. One is from people who say "I'd really like to be able to do (fill in the blank) and my current set-up is inadequate, but it would cost a lot of money to get the gear that would do what I want." Another is "There's a new (something) that appears to be better than what I have, and I want that because I don't really want to be held back by my equipment, even though I don't know how my current gear might be holding me back." I think the latter is what George's original post addressed.
Neil, as to the first type of obsession, the many posts I have read from you and other birders makes me realize that the cost of admission will keep me from ever being a real birder!
>It does seem like there are two "types of >obsessions" I notice here. One is from people who say >"I'd really like to be able to do (fill in the blank) and >my current set-up is inadequate, but it would cost a lot of >money to get the gear that would do what I want." >Another is "There's a new (something) that appears to be >better than what I have, and I want that because I don't >really want to be held back by my equipment, even though I >don't know how my current gear might be holding me back." > I think the latter is what George's original post addressed.
I ran into this quote on the Earthbound Light website and thought it appropriate for this topic:
Galen Rowell observed in one of his books that "99 percent of the world's cameras are capable of taking publishable pictures, yet most of the world's photographs aren't publishable quality." It's not the camera that makes the photograph, it's the photographer.
>I ran into this quote on the Earthbound Light website and >thought it appropriate for this topic: > >Galen Rowell observed in one of his books that "99 >percent of the world's cameras are capable of taking >publishable pictures, yet most of the world's photographs >aren't publishable quality." It's not the camera that >makes the photograph, it's the photographer. > >Tom
Right on, Tom. That is what really struck me. Here I was, worrying about equipment, and neglecting the whole purpose of photography. So I am committing this year to development as an artist of light.