The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

What gear are you using now, and why?

sinwen

Member
As some have said above, I am puzzled by some who buy and sell equipment like there is no tomorrow.

When I look at digital cameras, I wonder how to use it, there are thousand of different settings, so many buttons, what's the use ?

I am wondering if people are buying so many cameras, it is because they don't find the proper settings :) , therefore never get satisfied with their results , or they buy toys then we are far away from photography.

To take a picture all you need to set is, ISO, speed, aperture and focus... and not even all four each time you snap.

So you have it, I want & need something very straight forward, that's the reason why I am still with film, there is nothing faster & easier, an Hassy & and two Leica M with a handfull of lenses. I sold My R6 and I am left with the R lenses which have no value on the second hand market, better keep them we never know, they are so good.

I would like to get digital but find nothing simple enough and worth the $$$ asked for. I just have a few years old P&S Pana TZ3 I use for quick snaps to send over internet.
The only camera I tempting me right now is ..... the new Canon S95, the results seems quite decents, to replace the TZ3.

To make this long story short, I still didn't find the digital cam to fit my needs so I keep on using film.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
To take a picture all you need to set is, ISO, speed, aperture and focus... and not even all four each time you snap.
This is so true. Add WB, and you have "my" digital camera. I still wonder why no camera manufacturers (except Leica?) have taken that challenge. Until a couple of years ago, there were people asking for a digital FM3A on Nikon forums, but they seem to have given up. Instead of better viewfinders, solid build and good ergonomics, we get "Art Filters" and panorama modes. While I'm sure many of those gimmicks are great fun for happy snappers, there are still a great number of photographers out there with enough time, good eyes, a functional brain and a heart for traditional photography.

Unfortunately, only products that can be sold in huge quantities get past the bean counters and the marketing gurus nowadays. ROI and shareholder value are the new buzzwords in photography. Photographers are merely tools to achieve those targets :(
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
This is so true. Add WB, and you have "my" digital camera. I still wonder why no camera manufacturers (except Leica?) have taken that challenge. Until a couple of years ago, there were people asking for a digital FM3A on Nikon forums, but they seem to have given up. Instead of better viewfinders, solid build and good ergonomics, we get "Art Filters" and panorama modes. While I'm sure many of those gimmicks are great fun for happy snappers, there are still a great number of photographers out there with enough time, good eyes, a functional brain and a heart for traditional photography.

Unfortunately, only products that can be sold in huge quantities get past the bean counters and the marketing gurus nowadays. ROI and shareholder value are the new buzzwords in photography. Photographers are merely tools to achieve those targets :(
Manufacturers need to make a profit.

I ignore the image processing settings in the camera. I set it to raw capture, manual or auto focus, aperture priority or manual metering. Sensitivity, aperture, exposure time, and focus. Doesn't matter what camera I have ... and I don't buy any camera that doesn't allow me to do that ... they all work the same.
 
Until a couple of years ago, there were people asking for a digital FM3A on Nikon forums, but they seem to have given up.
Honestly Jorgen, the Sony A900 is the closest I have found, though I imagine the D700 is similar. It is not a FM3a, but the weight is not too much more than a F3, it has a better viewfinder, it feels better in hand and I have only figured out how to use the meter reliably in spot mode.

When someone makes a digital FM3a for a reasonable price I'll be first in line. I thought the Leica DMR might be that camera, but really it was more of a downsize MFDB will all the hassle and gremlins, but without the huge files.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Manufacturers need to make a profit.

I ignore the image processing settings in the camera. I set it to raw capture, manual or auto focus, aperture priority or manual metering. Sensitivity, aperture, exposure time, and focus. Doesn't matter what camera I have ... and I don't buy any camera that doesn't allow me to do that ... they all work the same.
Manufacturers always needed to make a profit, but for some reason, they managed to do that and catering for the needs of the enthusiasts in the old days. Many good products are still being developed, and will be developed in the future, but I can't help asking myself why my GH1 has a zillion menu items, most of which are totally alien to me (and possibly to the majority of users), while such an obvious thing as one touch enlargement for manual focusing isn't included, even though it wouldn't cost them a dime. The reason, I suspect, is that they aren't photographers, and will never be. Bean counters :thumbdown:
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Manufacturers always needed to make a profit, but for some reason, they managed to do that and catering for the needs of the enthusiasts in the old days. Many good products are still being developed, and will be developed in the future, but I can't help asking myself why my GH1 has a zillion menu items, most of which are totally alien to me (and possibly to the majority of users), while such an obvious thing as one touch enlargement for manual focusing isn't included, even though it wouldn't cost them a dime. The reason, I suspect, is that they aren't photographers, and will never be. Bean counters :thumbdown:
Manufacturers never "catered to the needs of enthusiasts". They built the best cameras they could sell, at a price that made a profit. "In the old days" it was enough of a pain in the *** to work a camera successfully that only enthusiasts would bother with anything but a box brownie.

The expectations of the average camera user, in terms of features and capabilities, have gone through the roof. And the cost of providing those features and capabilities has dropped to near nothing in relative terms.

Your GH1 has a tremendous lot of stuff in it that no film camera ever could. All that stuff has to be controlled somehow if someone is going to make use of it.

"One touch enlargement for manual focusing" is right there: in Manual Focus mode, with the camera at its defaults, just turn the focusing ring with any Micro-FourThirds lens. Period. Because you want to use the camera a different way, no doubt ... with an adapted manual lens never intended to be used on it ... doesn't mean that the manufacturers have any obligation to provide whatever features your whimsy demands. You have to press TWO buttons to get magnification then ... Oh the pain! Sheesh.

If you don't want to make use of it, ignore the extra buttons and controls. Set the camera to capture raw files, set it to manual exposure and manual focus. Then all you ever have to do is set the sensitivity, the aperture, the shutter time, and focus. Simple.

Why worry yourself philosophizing and complaining about stuff that simply isn't a problem? Just use the camera and make photographs.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Honestly Jorgen, the Sony A900 is the closest I have found, though I imagine the D700 is similar. It is not a FM3a, but the weight is not too much more than a F3, it has a better viewfinder, it feels better in hand and I have only figured out how to use the meter reliably in spot mode.
The closest cameras I've found to my great old Nikon FE2 and FM2 are the Olympus E-1 and Panasonic L1. Set either of them into raw capture mode, ignore all the image processing stuff, and shoot away ... aperture priority AE like the FE2 or fully manual like the FM2.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I agree that any business is out there to make a profit. As long as brand loyalists do not populate a photo forum and behave like shareholders of that brand/company, we will be OK.:)
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Your GH1 has a tremendous lot of stuff in it that no film camera ever could. All that stuff has to be controlled somehow if someone is going to make use of it.
That's part of the problem. Most modern cameras are filled with features that aren't really needed, at least not if taking photos is the primary objective, but look great on a full page ad for the machine. I'm sure it makes sense from an economical point of view; features are cheap to make and sell cameras, while grumpy old men like me represent a tiny fraction of the market. But sometimes, I get the same feeling as with the remote control for the TV: there are millions of buttons, and I use five of them. God knows what the rest are for :confused:

Of course I shoot RAW. I wouldn't touch a camera that can't do that. If I don't have control, it's not my photo. I also find myself using manual focus increasingly often. As for the two touch on the GH1; of course they don't have any obligation to make it easy for people who use legacy glass, but on the other hand, I won't buy or recommend a Panasonic to others until they fix it. The two touch is very uncomfortable btw., not so much because of the two touches, but because they are placed in a way that makes it necessary to place the weight of the camera in the other (left) hand, which is used for focusing. Not a good combination.

One of the disadvantages with digital technology, at least at this level, is that small volumes aren't profitable. There's a reason why Cosina doesn't make a digital Bessa, which again makes it possible for Leica to charge more or less whatever they want for the M9. So the chances that we'll see some obscure, little company coming up with a simple, little digital wonder with F, K or M mount are tiny indeed. Which is sad, but those are the times we live in.
 

Diane B

New member
Jorgen, the GF1 is one touch for manual focus enlargement so I would assume that any of the newer models (G2?) would have this as well as any of the models in the future.

Though my 5D(I) does have a number of buttons it does feel more bare bones than the Pannys and I've loved shooting with it over the years. It has just necessary controls even eschewing a pop up flash and its menu is quite straight forward IMO. Its only "silliness" is a print buttom LOL. I will shoot with it until it dies I suspect.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I went to MF and not sure i could ever go back down for primary client needs to a smaller format. On a side note i actually outside of business needs like to shoot MF very much. I do have a little Canon setup for times i just don't want to bring the Phase gear on certain jobs but I am not fond of it either. What i would like is another personal cam for ME when it is not work related. I did love the GF1 but had to sell it for the business side. Like to get something similar back. But my Primary cam is the Phase One MF system
 

Diane B

New member
After saying I would keep the 5D until it dies, guess I should add a bit more. I shot more casually with many film cams over many years and went digital seriously with a Canon G1, moving quickly to an Oly e10 and then just as quickly to a Canon D60 the month they came out, buying a used D30 for backup. I did parttime commercial shooting for the furniture and textile industry and coveted FF though moving to a 10D and then a 20D still made my clients happy. I was considering a used MF film system and was procrastinating when the 5D was announced. I went that direction and have been very happy with it for years. i retired from commercial shooting 2+ yrs ago and stayed with the 5D because I love FF and that particular camera and don't really have a need to upgrade. I recently sold my
converted to IR 10d and a Rebel 400 and a number of lenses. About a year
and a half ago I added a G1 and then added the GF1 a year ago, primarily for size but find myself shooting mostly with them, sometimes with adapted lenses and sometimes with native lenses.

I'm not sure what I will do in the future. I do rather expect I will keep the 5D until it dies. I'm really not sure where I will go when it does or sooner. As to the m4/3rds, It suits my needs right now for size, IQ, flexibility but I do know that will be upgraded but, like many, I'm waiting to see what happens in the next year or so. I find I value smaller size/weight a lot more than I used to when the only other P&S i've owned (G9) was passed to my husband since I wasn't happy with its files. M4/3rds is a good compromise for me at this point.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
@ Jorgen Udvang :

Panasonic has already supplied one touch focusing assist for adapted manual lenses, on the GF1/G2 and G10 bodies. The G1 and GH1 cannot be updated to support it for hardware/firmware reasons. So your angst over this feature is unwarranted.

I don't find the two touch mechanism uncomfortable at all anyway ... I prefer it, frankly, as it does the right thing about letting see where the magnification rectangle will be prior to enabling it.

Just like I do with my television, I set it up and use what is appropriate to me. That's about three out of the 34 buttons on the remote. I ignore all the things that aren't. Why you don't just do that is a mystery to me. Complaining about stuff seems to be a personal entertainment for you and many others; I never understand wanting to waste energy on stuff like that.
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
We are just having a nice time talking together. Having a chat about what we think, what we wish, what we like and what we dislike, and why.
No reason to complain about that ... ;)
 

jonoslack

Active member
Complaining about stuff seems to be a personal entertainment for you and many others; I never understand wanting to waste energy on stuff like that.

:ROTFL:
:clap::clap:

Godfrey - sometimes you are priceless - what would we do without you!
 

charlesphoto

New member
Leica M9 - what else is there? :) Of course my Nikon D3 is the reliable workhorse and my Mamiya 6's/Rolleiflex TLR for art.

Lost some $ trying the GF-1. Won't do that again. Size wasn't small enough and imo ease of use and IQ paled compared to the Leica. Now give me a p&s digital camera just like the Olympus XA and I will be happy.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Probably chatter away endlessly bemoaning the "Goode Olde Days" of things you liked and how all the new stuff sucks. You'll do it anyway, I'm sure.
You're probably right . . . Mind you, does my M9 and A900 count as the 'Goode Olde Days' already? :rolleyes:

As for Jorgen - he has a 'get out of old git complaints free' card, as he takes such fab pictures and is a generally great guy.

Anyway - back to the thread - I'm using an M9 and an A900 because only cameras with a 9 in the name are any good.

Incidentally - just been looking at your website - lots of goodies - I especially like that Tate Modern shot.
 
Last edited:

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Personally (slowest gun in the West ?) ... I'm still on an APS-C sensor with a Nikon D300 and some Nikkor lenses plus some Zeiss ZF lenses.
At some point I want to upgrade to an FX sensor just to get a larger and brighter viewfinder.

I have this viewfinder obsession, the viewfinder is the single most important part of a camera for me.
It's what I use to imagine the image. The rest is about the optics. I don't care much about camera features, the fewer the better.
The D300 was just the lowest level and cheapest Nikon DSLR metering with oldfashioned AI-S type manual focus lenses, I could find.
Otherwise I could easily have done with an even lower level plastic camera body.

Apart from that 'viewfinder wish' I am for the first time in the digital age happy with what I have. Simply because it works for me.
It does what I expect it to do, it doesn't get in the way and luckily I no longer think all that much about the gear.
I can again concentrate about photographing. Simply put, that's why I use what I use.

But I do admit that I have been very tempted to try out the Sony Alpha DSLR system for probably the best FX viewfinder on the market plus autofocus Zeiss ZA primes.
Still keeping an eye with the development of that autofocus Zeiss ZA prime lens lineup. Optics are my second obsession :rolleyes:

Back in 2004 - 2005 I had some cameras and lenses that gave me some results I really disliked.
It was a nightmare of distraction and I ended up being manically focused on the gear performance in an attempt to find a solution by rapidly changing camera models and lenses until I simply gave up and jumped to another brand. Everything solved, I could finally relax and concentrate about the images again.

So I guess we could say that gear actually matters a great deal :D ... if it doesn't work for you, you cannot concentrate !
 
Last edited:
Top