Almost like film...

[Bill Pierce]

Because of the speed of delivery, news photographers were among the first to use digital cameras. While the AP started equipping their staff with digital cameras in 1994 and went totally digital in 2001, they had actually used digitals to deliver the results of the presidential conventions even before that.

Those early digitals were technically gawdawful and expensive, but they had the one thing news photographers needed - speed of delivery. Over the years, the cameras got better and less expensive. Unlike film cameras, whose development had slowed and stabilized, digitals not only improved in quality but added innovative features. And photographers, not just news photographers, but all digital photographers, found themselves updating and replacing their ever evolving cameras at relatively frequent intervals - not only moving up, but even changing brands.

And, guess what… Many lost the ability to use their cameras without thinking about them, thinking about the many new set up options and menu choices. The simplicity of setting the exposure and focus and then concentrating on the subject got lost. The all important looking at the subject, finding the best frame and pushing the button at the best moment were dissipated by an abundance of other choices that were often executed in different ways with every new camera.

I recently got a new camera. In addition to menus, it has 8 programable function buttons. I’m proud to say I only use 2 of them (ISO and focus lock) and only 1 of them when I’m shooting (focus lock). It’s almost like shooting film. And I am paying more attention to what’s in front of the camera than the camera itself.

Your thoughts?

 

[Tom R]

Generally, the more "automated" the process, the less engaged the operator. This has been shown to be true in a variety of human endeavors, and most certainly in the case in the arts.

Maybe that is why we continue to do this "photography" thing---as a way of reminding ourselves that we are part of something interactive as opposed to just being along for the ride.

 

[John Bragg]

Never had the urge (need) to go Digital Bill but I can imagine that the plethora of options could be truely mind blowing. It would leave a seasoned photographer feeling nostalgic for simpler times. You could complete the illusion and turn off the screen and fly blind. Trusting yourself to get the shot would surely be liberating in itself ?

 

[bayernfan]

Shooting the majority of my work on film over the past few years has changed the way I shoot digital. For example, I have auto-review turned off. I don't look at the images until I get home and plug the SD card into the computer. Film has given me that confidence.

It never fails to amuse me when a doc/street photographer takes a shot and immediately looks at their screen.

Also, I find the engagement with rear LCD screens to be highly distracting and prefer a camera that lets me change all the meaningful settings with a button.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Bill if you really want the 'film-like' experience of shooting, but not the back-end of film processing, this is a nice way to go:


M-D and Coffee by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

I realized by using the M-D how much time I waste looking at the screen on the back of my other cameras. Funny but sometimes I find myself reflexively looking at the back of the M-D after I take a photo, and all I'm rewarded with is the beautiful view of the ISO dial 🙂

 

[ptpdprinter]

And, guess what… Many lost the ability to use their cameras without thinking about them, thinking about the many new set up options and menu choices. The simplicity of setting the exposure and focus and then concentrating on the subject got lost. The all important looking at the subject, finding the best frame and pushing the button at the best moment were dissipated by an abundance of other choices that were often executed in different ways with every new camera.

I recently got a new camera. In addition to menus, it has 8 programable function buttons. I’m proud to say I only use 2 of them (ISO and focus lock) and only 1 of them when I’m shooting (focus lock). It’s almost like shooting film. And I am paying more attention to what’s in front of the camera than the camera itself.

Your thoughts?

I defer to your broader experience, but I would be surprised if professional photographers forgot how to use their cameras without thinking about them. I mainly shoot film, but I do have a digital camera, and I use it like I use my film camera. I rarely use the menus, except for occasionally changing ISO (I haven't set up any custom buttons, perhaps I should). You would think that a pro, who uses his camera every day, wouldn't be so befuddled.

 

[PKR]

I make pictures in both digital and film media. My first digital camera in 06, was a Kodak 14n, it had about 100 menu options. It took some time to get on the digital path. But, it's been okay.

When working with film, I use light meters. With digital I don't, except for a flash meter when using electronic flash. I chimp like most others. I look at exposure data in the LCD. Kind of like using a Polaroid back. With film, mostly b+w these days, I'm working on personal projects.. and using cameras I've owned for years. I don't think about the camera at all.

So, film work is like driving the car to work. It's thoughtless. With digital, it's not as free-flowing. There are many things to go wrong. Push the wrong button by accident (my thumb constantly bumped the rear command dial on a Nikon, changing the shutter speed) and you may find yourself in menu hell. Checking to see if a new memory card is writing properly.. all kinds of nonsense... all while trying to work.

One thing I would love is to be able to disable -- unwanted menu options that I never use. Camera designers think we need "toy camera" mode, with 10 choices of light leak FX. I'm around a lot of digital gear, from Phase One on a Sinar to APS-C sensor stuff. It's not as smooth a process for me as film work was/is.

Digital gear pays the bills. If I were rich, I might own a point and shoot digital. Nothing more.. a smart phone might serve the purpose.. I'm happy working with film. I see much better and react more quickly.

Edit: working tethered is great, but often has its own set of problems. Especially with big files produced rapidly. Faster than changing film holders but buffer speed is an issue. You glance at a monitor and you're looking at an image 3 frames back.. But that's faster than waiting for rush E6 in past days. But, then there was time for coffee and BSing. I guess I liked the old work flow better. As for quality, a scanned 8x10 chrome holds up well to anything digital I've seen.

 

[shimokita]

hahaha I struggled with the programmable function buttons on my x100t... particularly at night if I accidently pressed one or the other and couldn't figure out how to get back to 'normal' without a flashlight... As well I turned most of them off except for flash and face recognition... and I still spend some time checking the settings before use...

The User Pre-sets are useful (for example Canon C1-C2-C3) ...

 

[jsrockit]

To me the most important aspects of photography are framing and content. I think I had to think just as much about what I was shooting with a M6 as I did a M9. With the X-Pro2 and Auto ISO... I can choose the shutter speed and aperture I really want and just let the ISO run up and down a range. That, coupled with the move from MF to FAST AF, has allowed me to think about the most important aspects of photography better (framing and content). I don't use any programable buttons and generally only go into the menus to format my cards.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Today, the real life picture worth of the news (to me) is most likely taken with mobile phone. Which has only one button. And one program (the camera). The only aspect which is worth in this kind of picture is what the actual news is visible. This is it. Visible.

 

[sreed2006]

A Canon 5D Mark II is my newest digital camera, and I have used it a lot. If I let it sit for awhile then go to use it again, I will vaguely remember that a setting I need exists, but where the heck is it in the menu? Many minutes fiddling and cursing my less that photographic memory ensues.

I have had an Olympus OM-1 MD since 1979, have taken hundreds of rolls of film with it, and to this day, I still sometimes mess up when using it: forget to meter a shot, or focus, or even to put film in the thing.

So it really is a memory and attention issue. There is just a lot more to remember and pay attention to on a digital camera.

 

[shawn]

I don't use any programable buttons and generally only go into the menus to format my cards.

Don't need the menus for that. Press and hold down the trash button, after three seconds press in the rear command dial.

Shawn

 

[jsrockit]

Don't need the menus for that. Press and hold down the trash button, after three seconds press in the rear command dial.

Shawn

True, but does it work for dual cards? It was flaky in older Fujis too. I'm quick with the menus and was speaking of cameras outside of Fuji as well.

 

[shawn]

Yup, a window pops up asking which card you want to format.

Shawn

 

[farlymac]

My first two digital cameras were compacts that I at first used like a P&S. It was later on before I delved into the different settings, finding out how they really worked.

When I got my DSLR (used, old, and cheap), it was more complicated, but there were plenty of buttons to take you to particular sections of the menu without using the LED screen, just the LCD on the top or inside the viewfinder. I try to operate it like a film camera, using manual settings when I can take the time, and Program when I need to move fast. But I can still control the Program mode with the back dial on the D80, changing up or down depending on whether I want a wider aperture, or slower shutter speed.

I keep the Live View off, except for checking the first shot to see if any of the settings are off, or if I forgot to change them from the last time I used the camera. After that it's viewfinder only. Sometimes I will run through a series of shots to make sure I haven't missed something, like a particular angle or background.

The viewfinder was the main reason I got the DSLR. I got tired of trying to see what I was photographing in that glossy screen, which was usually reflecting my face. Mostly I was looking over the top of the camera, hoping I had the framing where it should be.

I still haven't used most of the menu items. I don't care to do in-camera effects.

PF

 

[Pablito]

Many lost the ability to use their cameras without thinking about them, thinking about the many new set up options and menu choices. The simplicity of setting the exposure and focus and then concentrating on the subject got lost.

Well I can't speak for others, but I use my digital cameras just like I used to use my Nikon FM, except for the AF which is a great addition, and of course choosing the most appropriate ISO.

 

[Ronald M]

My digital is set to M. Sometimes I use the autofocus button.

Since things are controlled by 4 menus, I set them before the job starts. Each represents a different film type and speed.

Spray and pray will not produce just as it did not with film. Digital it cheaper and faster, but you still need to work for quality

 

[willie_901]

Well I can't speak for others, but I use my digital cameras just like I used to use my Nikon FM, except for the AF which is a great addition, and of course choosing the most appropriate ISO.

Me too.

Initially takes a bit of effort to learn how to set things up. But then life can be pleasantly simple if you want it to be.

I used my X-Pro 1 this way and now do the same with the X100T. Even though the latter has reliable sophisticated AF, I often just use the OVF a single centered focus region and then focus and recompose as if I had an optical RF.

Raw file exposure can be minimalistic as well. I typically use apppropriate manual settings at ISO 200 and increase global image brightness as required during post-prodcution.

So, all I have to do is avoid overexposing the sensor when the shutter is open. This means minimal attention to the light meter no menu diving, no auto-ISO, and no exposure compensation required. For the occasional scene with extreme dynamic range, I auto-bracket three exposures aperture in 1/3 or 1/2 step increments and use the exposure with optimum highlights.

Digital cameras with out ISO-invarient data streams require a bit more work. These camera typically produce optimum shadow detail at two or three different ISO settings. So changing ISO as ambient light levels change is an additional step.

In-camera JPEGs also require paying close attention to the meter, ISO and occasionally to exposure compensation settings.

 

[Timmyjoe]

The new DSLR cameras can do things as far as focus tracking, Super High ISO, and the like, that my old film SLR could only dream of. But I agree with you, to set them up properly takes time and effort. I had two cameras that I used for sports, and they were set up and worked great for fast moving subjects and in really horrible light (for High School sports). But each one had over a dozen specific settings that need to be customized, and when I would use them for news events (where I changed the settings), and then went back to a sporting event, I would invariably miss shots because I had missed changing back one or more of the custom settings and the tracking/follow focus would be off. And in the moment, I couldn't remember what settings I hadn't changed back. Finally dedicated a separate camera for news events, and one for sports, so they can each be set up at home (where I have the manual to go over all the settings) and then I leave them completely alone when I'm out shooting.

Best,
-Tim

 

[PKR]

The new DSLR cameras can do things as far as focus tracking, Super High ISO, and the like, that my old film SLR could only dream of. But I agree with you, to set them up properly takes time and effort. I had two cameras that I used for sports, and they were set up and worked great for fast moving subjects and in really horrible light (for High School sports). But each one had over a dozen specific settings that need to be customized, and when I would use them for news events (where I changed the settings), and then went back to a sporting event, I would invariably miss shots because I had missed changing back one or more of the custom settings and the tracking/follow focus would be off. And in the moment, I couldn't remember what settings I hadn't changed back. Finally dedicated a separate camera for news events, and one for sports, so they can each be set up at home (where I have the manual to go over all the settings) and then I leave them completely alone when I'm out shooting.

Best,
-Tim

I think most on here set their cameras up for one task. The one they do most often. Those of us that may work indoors with flash and still life one day and outdoor fill flash portraits the next have a different story to tell, as with your AF settings. I keep a notebook of setting info for the two different cameras most used. I would rather that I could just insert a card with all the settings for a particular tasks than spend 15 minutes setting and checking menu items each time. And without the list, I forget some.. I've done this. Also, all cameras in manual mode, always. AF usually with people, MF with static CU objects.