No new cameras?

[JoelM]

Yes, lenses were always a priority and we bought a camera body that did what we needed, but were always very much a back seat to the lens. Now, lenses come after the camera body because the sensor is in the camera and that is likely the main criteria for most buyers/users. This is especially true before auto focus and matrix-type metering came along. A Canon or Nikon F body was all you needed for many years, not nearly so today.

Joel

 

[fotografz]

Yes, lenses were always a priority and we bought a camera body that did what we needed, but were always very much a back seat to the lens. Now, lenses come after the camera body because the sensor is in the camera and that is likely the main criteria for most buyers/users. This is especially true before auto focus and matrix-type metering came along. A Canon or Nikon F body was all you needed for many years, not nearly so today.

Joel

Yes, it is an interesting dynamic now. It can go either way these days because, in general, the cameras have once again become so good/so close ... with a few offering specific sensor performance for certain applications.

I bought into the Sony Alpha 35mm DSLR system because of the AF Zeiss lenses ... which picked up where the Contax N system left off after Kyocera bailed on making photo gear. But I waited until Sony offered a FF sensor. Lenses were the driving criteria.

I would think the D800 is an example of sensor performance that is the exception to the lens criteria rule. Or the specialized Leica M Monochrome.

Tech cameras using a MFD back wouldn't be nearly as effective if it weren't for the view lenses available compared to MF DSLR optics.

My personal move to a S2 from a H4D was a balance of both criteria ... the camera better fit my changing needs, but the Leica S lenses were the deciding factor over other choices such as keeping the H4D/40, or moving to the much more economical Pentax 645D. IMO, the difference between sensors in the S2, H4D/40, Phase One 40 meg version and the Pentax 645D are pretty close ... but the lenses are not. Given a choice, I'd always opt for Leica optics (unless I couldn't afford it ).

Interesting times.

- Marc

 

[Tim]

Given a choice, I'd always opt for Leica optics (unless I couldn't afford it ).

Interesting times.

- Marc

Hehe, welcome to my world.
Q: what would you go for next in optics? assuming you could not afford Leica.

 

[fotografz]

Hehe, welcome to my world.
Q: what would you go for next in optics? assuming you could not afford Leica.

Actually, I now couldn't afford the Leica stuff I already have ... which was collected over time before I retired.

I agonized for months over spending the money to add a ZA 50/1.4 to my Sony kit .... which, while being pretty expensive, pales in comparison to most M and S lenses.

I just got the Sony ZA 50/1.4 today. :thumbup: Used "Bill Me Later" to soften the blow :ROTFL:

- Marc

 

[AreBee]

Marc,

If I may ask, what are your thoughts on the relative cost of S-lenses at the present time compared to the time at which you purchased your S-lenses?

 

[jonoslack]

Well, I buy new cameras because the mood strikes me . . . and because it's fun and informative seeing what's happening and how things are changing. I find it very hard to decide from reviews whether I'll like a camera or not. I get rid of the ones I don't like pretty quickly, and don't usually lose too much (at least, not more than I can afford).

There are various rules about new cameras which have become quite obvious to me over the years, and from which it appears I never seem to learn:

1. 'Compact' enthusiast cameras never satisfy - even very nice ones with big sensors and very good lenses (Ricoh GR, Fuji X100 are recent culprits).

2. 'Compact' cameras with smaller sensors and zoom lenses never satisfy (Sony X100, Ricoh X20 are recent culprits)


The truth is that 95% of my photos are either taken with a Leica M or an Olympus µ43 camera, of those, probably 70% with a Leica M.

I think that in the last year or so digital has really come of age, and that almost all cameras are capable of taking really good pictures which you can blow up to unfeasibly large sizes. So it's all down to whether you like using the camera and whether you like the look of the lenses.

To be honest I think that taking photographs is an entirely different occupation from acquiring/selling/talking about equipment, and it's pretty important not to get them muddled up in your mind.

 

[fotografz]

Marc,

If I may ask, what are your thoughts on the relative cost of S-lenses at the present time compared to the time at which you purchased your S-lenses?

If I recall correctly, until recently, the initial S lens prices remained pretty steady (35, 70, 120 and 180). Lack of supply on some kept prices at retail.

Recently, Leica raised their prices ... and increased the price of the newer 24mm and zoom by a lot ... before most people could even get one. It'll be interesting to see the price for the just announced S45/2.8.

I bought all four of my S lenses early on enough to take advantage of the trade-up to the CS versions for the retail price difference between the S and CS versions ... so, I now have all new lenses with warranty, for not a lot of money (relatively speaking ).

- Marc

 

[Godfrey]

...
To be honest I think that taking photographs is an entirely different occupation from acquiring/selling/talking about equipment, and it's pretty important not to get them muddled up in your mind.

Yes indeed. Totally different things in the mind.

Went to a workshop reunion gathering the other evening. We talked about photographs and projects all evening. Every so often the conversation turned to equipment ... and it was a TOTALLY different engagement by the people around the table.

G

 

[Tim]

There are various rules about new cameras which have become quite obvious to me over the years, and from which it appears I never seem to learn:

1. 'Compact' enthusiast cameras never satisfy - even very nice ones with big sensors and very good lenses (Ricoh GR, Fuji X100 are recent culprits).

2. 'Compact' cameras with smaller sensors and zoom lenses never satisfy (Sony X100, Ricoh X20 are recent culprits)

.

Its the exact opposite for me on rule 1. Some of my consistently best images were from a Contax T3. Most of the roll were technically great and a high number of keepers - there was huge satisfaction creating nice images from a minimalist kit. Fixed lens big sensor cameras are not the be all for me though, there are many images they just cant "get". I still have a small Em-5 "System" but its more a tool, I get more satisfaction from my GR in use though.

With rule 2 I find the lack of fixed aperture or bad aperture at the long end means I just tend not to use the zoom, so I go back to a camera in rule 1.

To be honest I think that taking photographs is an entirely different occupation from acquiring/selling/talking about equipment, and it's pretty important not to get them muddled up in your mind.

While I agree to a small extent, the two should go hand in hand - they are linked IMO. Acquire something that don't work well for you and you won't be taking good photographs.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I buy small cams because I think I want them . Turns out I don't which directly relates to boredom with files.

I buy big mpx cams to satisfy a need but there a pain in the *** to deal with. Or I have to spend a fortune to get a file that's not boring.

End of day I don't care about the gear so much just want nice files. I miss MF files from my tech cam. But I don't feel freedom from gear as much with them.

Almost 40 years and still nothing really jives with my head or my style. Guess I'm still looking. But last thing I want to do is talk about it or much worse stress over it so I don't anymore.

The end if the day I can shoot anything with good results that's just experience coming through so it's not one I can shoot better than the other but it's more about being married to it. On this front I'm afraid I'm still single.

 

[fotografz]

Well, I buy new cameras because the mood strikes me . . . and because it's fun and informative seeing what's happening and how things are changing. I find it very hard to decide from reviews whether I'll like a camera or not. I get rid of the ones I don't like pretty quickly, and don't usually lose too much (at least, not more than I can afford).

There are various rules about new cameras which have become quite obvious to me over the years, and from which it appears I never seem to learn:

1. 'Compact' enthusiast cameras never satisfy - even very nice ones with big sensors and very good lenses (Ricoh GR, Fuji X100 are recent culprits).

2. 'Compact' cameras with smaller sensors and zoom lenses never satisfy (Sony X100, Ricoh X20 are recent culprits)


The truth is that 95% of my photos are either taken with a Leica M or an Olympus µ43 camera, of those, probably 70% with a Leica M.

I think that in the last year or so digital has really come of age, and that almost all cameras are capable of taking really good pictures which you can blow up to unfeasibly large sizes. So it's all down to whether you like using the camera and whether you like the look of the lenses.

To be honest I think that taking photographs is an entirely different occupation from acquiring/selling/talking about equipment, and it's pretty important not to get them muddled up in your mind.

Same conclusion regarding compact type cameras.

I'd add one highly unreasonable, totally irrational, very personal note to what I bold faced in your post Jono ...

I associate success in image making with the equipment used, and when I feel let down by my image making, I also associate it with the gear. It is a totally superstitious mentality ... but there you have it.

I agree that we often like to tinker with new photographic tools just to see what is possible these days ... (which is the ONLY reason I bought a Sony-A99) ... and that shouldn't be confused with "Photography".

- Marc

 

[Godfrey]

1. 'Compact' enthusiast cameras never satisfy - even very nice ones with big sensors and very good lenses (Ricoh GR, Fuji X100 are recent culprits).

Hmm. Read this again.

You seem to be enjoying the Leica X Vario. I much enjoy the X2 as well. I find this class of cameras limited, but useful and satisfying in their niche, just like the Contax T2, Rollei 35S, and Minox 35GT-E were in film days.

G

 

[JohnW]

I'm trying to set some upgrade criteria for myself. Here are some to start with:

- A new camera should offer a visible improvement in image quality under the circumstance that I usually take photos.
- A new camera should have improved usability that will make it significantly easier for me to take photos.
- A new (or old) camera should have special, lasting values that enhances the experience of taking photos.

Any of the above will do in my book, but GAS is only acceptable for the last one, "lasting" being an important criteria. The latest digital gadget will always be improved upon a few months later, a 30 year old Hasselblad mostly won't.

Your criteria don't include the simple pleasure of using something new, different, or just appealing, for whatever illogical reason. My GR meets none of your standards for me personally, but I'm sure glad I gave in to GAS. Sometimes you don't know how rewarding something can be until you take the leap.

John

 

[Shashin]

The difficulty with the conversation is we are at different points along the path. I simply buy the best camera I can afford. I pretty much know what will work for what I do--there is not a lot of mystery in cameras for me. I much prefer sticking with one, or in my case, two cameras that are really well made and just focus on photography. Like skills, the equipment just needs to disappear while you work. And you can only do that with stuff you know well. The most defining factor in your work is you.

I am certainly not say equipment in unimportant. I have just been fortunate to work with just about every type of camera ever made. Cameras are like friends--good ones will last you a long time.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Your criteria don't include the simple pleasure of using something new, different, or just appealing, for whatever illogical reason. My GR meets none of your standards for me personally, but I'm sure glad I gave in to GAS. Sometimes you don't know how rewarding something can be until you take the leap.

John

The pleasure of using something new just for kicks is a double edged sword. It's usually short lasting and I have problems seeing the point wasting the earth's resources buying things I won't keep. I really prefer buying other people's leftovers, like the GH3 I bought yesterday and most of my other cameras. That way, I can build on other people's experience, buying what has been thoroughly tested, and I re-use items that might have ended up unused. The image quality is still the same as when it was new

The exception is when something really great comes along, like the E-M1 (and the GH1 before it), but then I know that it's something I'll keep for a long time, hopefully until it's worn out. I'm always happy when I've used a camera long enough for technicians to say that there's no point in spending money on repairs anymore.

Count me also to the group that rarely find satisfaction with compact cameras. They are sometimes fun to start with, but mostly lack the functionality I need to create the photos that I aim for. A viewfinder and proper physicals buttons, switches and wheels are items I can't live without. I have a Nikon P330 in my bag, but I always bring a "proper" camera too, just in case, so there's no point really.

GAS for me these days is mostly reserved for old but excellent cameras that I couldn't afford in the "old days". I have a lot of fun using my Contax RX, even if I only shoot half a dozen rolls per years with it, and I'm sure I will give in and buy an RTS III one of these days too, load it with Ektar or Plus F Pan and have a blast

 

[Tim]

I agree that we often like to tinker with new photographic tools just to see what is possible these days ... (which is the ONLY reason I bought a Sony-A99) ... and that shouldn't be confused with "Photography".

- Marc

I occasionally look for a new tinkering niche with equipment, but haven't been too successful... yet! - still looking

The difficulty with the conversation is we are at different points along the path.

I think you are right here, but I've found this conversation very interesting as members have expressed what they use and how it works for them.

For me I have kept some of my past photo gear out of a kind of nostalgia (shelf queens?) - eg: that is the camera that took this great image kind of thing. I've bought and sold a lot like most of us. Some, but not all that I have kept include, OM4 + Zuikos, Contax T3, Ricoh GR Digital and a Sigma DP2. Regrets on selling - mainly the Konica Hexar RF and lenses.

I'm interested to hear what others have kept from the past in deference to what was sold?
I like Jorgen's idea of a RTS III. I had lust for one in the past.

 

[fotografz]

I occasionally look for a new tinkering niche with equipment, but haven't been too successful... yet! - still looking



I think you are right here, but I've found this conversation very interesting as members have expressed what they use and how it works for them.

For me I have kept some of my past photo gear out of a kind of nostalgia (shelf queens?) - eg: that is the camera that took this great image kind of thing. I've bought and sold a lot like most of us. Some, but not all that I have kept include, OM4 + Zuikos, Contax T3, Ricoh GR Digital and a Sigma DP2. Regrets on selling - mainly the Konica Hexar RF and lenses.

I'm interested to hear what others have kept from the past in deference to what was sold?
I like Jorgen's idea of a RTS III. I had lust for one in the past.

Tim, one photographic "Tinkering" niche that has captivated me for some years now is lighting. Now there is a tinkerer's dream come true ... one that opened up whole new worlds of what is possible. Most folks on this forum aren't interested for one reason or another, and some avoid or diss it out of lack of understanding it, or outright fear of it. I got over any lingering residual prejudice I may have had regarding the use of lighting when I saw a video of Mark Ellen Mark shooting in Central Park with Profoto strobes :thumbup:

I held onto my 503CW and 203FE sets for a long time after it became practical to do so. Even bought a Hasselblad 949 scanner to perpetuate the delusion even longer. Probably because those were iconic pieces I associated with many a successful shoot in past. I now have no older film capable stuff except a Mamiya RZ Pro-IID and passel of Mammy MF lenses because it kills me how semi-worthless it all has become on the second hand market. Same for my great Kaiser MF Enlarger ... what a shame.

In another thread I waxed nostalgic about never having had the pleasure of handling a Rolleiflex Twin Lens, and a good friend and fellow Get Dpier loaned me one to "tinker" around with. Frankly, I'm more interested in shooting some photos of it with my S2 MFD than actually using it ...

I admit it, I'm done with film. The Leica M Mono put to bed any longing I may have had.

- Marc

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Lighting is a 'tinkering niche'? Lighting is photography! All the gear talk is just BS about boys toys in comparison.

 

[fotografz]

Lighting is a 'tinkering niche'? Lighting is photography! All the gear talk is just BS about boys toys in comparison.

:ROTFL:

"Tinkering" in the sense that there are so many subtile lighting tools to work with and different effects you get with different types of lights and modifiers ... and all the tech stuff like durations and so on ... love figuring out that stuff!

- Marc

 

[Godfrey]

...
GAS for me these days is mostly reserved for old but excellent cameras that I couldn't afford in the "old days". .../QUOTE]

I'm in that camp. I've acquired, at ridiculously low prices, several of the dream cameras I could never afford in the past, like the two-body, five lens Leicaflex SL outfit.

Although my real focus lately seems to be Polaroids that are given to me. I'm up to two SX-70s, one SX-70 Sonar Autofocus, one type 350 pack camera, and a Spectra Onyx (with another one on the way). All lots of fun. However, while the cameras might be free, let's not think about the film costs...=8^O

G