Do you choose the type of camera , or which feels right ?

[dee]

This is an odd , but serious question brought on by the habit of ASD to look for sameness in handling , style , shape , whatever overusing the function of the 'toy'.It imprints on a shape and form rather than a category of ' camera ' whatever .
My X-Pro one was immediately familiar , read safe , recognised , real .

[ Although the menu, at first , was not, eventually , I realised that the Fuji XF1 is similar .]

On encountering my Minolta SRT , I realised that the shape and size is almost identical , as is the Kiev to a Praktina , the 1st camera I ever encountered .
The story continues with the Sony A290 [ with most familiar Minolta lens ] , reminiscent of my Minolta 7000i...
Even the chunky Panasonic LI with analogue controls is reminiscent of the SRT , but bigger !!
A smaller , lighter , FuJi x would probably be more sensible , and the SLR style versions even more close to the SRT , but the X-Pro is close enough .

Whether the 'camera ' is SLR / DSLR / CSC , seems immaterial .
If I find anything that I like , I would buy many the same , as with shoes , for example , I have to consciously rebalance each time i change .

I would hazard a guess that the type of camera is the first requirement , with everything else secondary .

Am I talking crazy again ?

dee

 

[user237428934]

So image quality is not on your list of important features?

 

[FrankS]

By thoughtful buying (used), I have many different types and brands of cameras from which to choose from on any given day, depending on the task at hand and on my mood or whim.

 

[Talus]

^ best response. I'm also one for buying used. It allows me to experiment more with less damage to the wallet.

 

[tbhv55]

I have many different types and brands of cameras from which to choose from on any given day, depending on the task at hand and on my mood or whim.

Me too... in my case, the "mood or whim" factor frequently outweighs the "task at hand" factor, despite the reverse being perhaps the more rational approach. 🙂

 

[dee]

IQ etc has been on my shortlist , such as manual override , but I will be content with a 'lesser' camera such as the stripped out Sony A290 of it's CCD colour rendition , familiar handling and lenses , as opposed to the ' better ' Nikon / Canon offerings .
I guess that that safe feeling , IS more crucial than absolute IQ , as I will chose to use the Panasonic L1 and Sony A290 over the Sony A35 ...

The X-Pro 1 / 27mm covers all the bases , which i just perfect, but it was 'right ' when I picked one up at a time when it was way out of reach of less than £350 [ typical entry level CSC/DSLR ]
The X-Pro is now my carry all camera for the familiarity of the 41mm viewpoint and semi-compact handling .

I am perfectly content to use the 7mp Panasonic L1 [ Leica Dig 3 ] over the Sony A35 or the Leica M8 , but I am just a casual snap shooter , using a camera as a filter on confusion , so a different perspective .
dee

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Camera has to be RF or at least RF style.

 

[Jdi]

My wife is autistic. Not mildly, nor does she advertise it or view it as a reason she can't do something.

She shoots a Minolta SRT, a Fuji xe1 (recently sold), an RX100m3 and grabs my xp1 or xe2 whenever. Doesn't appear to have any issues. That's not to say she'll shoot anything. Never touched my 35 years of Nikons. Just didn't care for the in-hand experience. Which happens to be our #1 criteria when buying a camera. If it doesn't carry well, it doesn't get purchased -- no matter how capable the "experts" deem it to be.

Her mindset of being able to do anything helps a lot. Might try it out.

 

[Merkin]

The days of needing to seriously consider the capability of cameras to make a quality image are basically over. It is pretty clear now which film cameras/lenses do and don't make good images, and nearly any digital camera made this decade is capable of producing an image that is as good as you are capable of producing. That means it has gotten to the point where it comes down to workflow- how well the camera works with you, how instinctive and intuitive you find the operation to be. A lot of this is subjective- I find the operation of a Nikon DSLR better for the way I shoot than a Canon DSLR, for instance, even though there isn't really much difference between them. A lot of people love the fuji x series, but for me, personally, buying an X-pro1 was the biggest mistake I have ever made. I've just never gotten along with it. I wish there were more cameras on the market that actually operated like old film cameras instead of just looking like old film cameras, because that's what I'm most comfortable using.

 

[Doug]

I guess I have a similar preference for feel/handling and familiarity, Dee, thinking back. In the mid-1970s when I wanted to go with medium format, I was offered a used Pentax 6x7. As a Pentax user that was attractive but I thought it would be good to try the Mamiya RB67 first. So I borrowed one for a while and didn't like it... it reminded me of brief previous experience with disliked TLR and Hasselblad. The big Pentax felt comfortable and familiar right away, and became a favorite.

Later when I thought the Pentax 645 would be useful, I got one but over time came to dislike its form factor.... which reminded me too much of the Mamiya!

Whether a camera is RF or SLR is less important to me than comfortable handling. I use them in much the same way, interchangeably. The charming Bronica RF645 reminded me of the favored Minolta CLE and became an equal favorite.

 

[willie_901]

I am interested in one thing: will I enjoy using the camera?

For me, enjoyment comes from the cameras feel/handling as well as the sensor assembly's analog signal-to-noise ratio.

I prefer an OVF and manual operation. For studio/commercial work an EVF-only finder is acceptable. Otherwise an OVF is essential. AF is not a problem if I can operate/control the AF system manually. While the newest focus-by-wire lens and body combinations have evolved to not being annoying, Focus-by-wire has a long way to go until it can compete with a well-engineered mechanical focus barrel. I doubt focus-by-wire will ever be attractive. I believe there is technology that could make a huge improvement in the 'feel'. So fewnew-camera buyers care about focusing with a lens barrel that brands using focus-by-wire won't add or subsidize the the additional costs.

Even when low light performance is not important, the SNR determines the dynamic range.

Brand and my current lens inventory is not much of an issue. What is an issue is: does the brand have a lens line that meets my needs?

 

[zuiko85]

So image quality is not on your list of important features?

A loaded question. For instance, many folks here make photographs with a pinhole camera. Some of their pictures are quite beautiful. They have found a type of image quality that is probably far different from what you had in mind when you use the same term.

 

[user237428934]

A loaded question. For instance, many folks here make photographs with a pinhole camera. Some of their pictures are quite beautiful. They have found a type of image quality that is probably far different from what you had in mind when you use the same term.

Probably not. When someone wants to shoot pinhole photos, the primary criteria for a camera will not be how it feels in the hand. The primary criteria will be the medium to achieve a certain image quality.

 

[airfrogusmc]

For me it's what comes natural for the way I see and work.

 

[CMur12]

I'm overwhelmed with acronyms if every area of my life.

What is ASD?

Thanks -

- Murray

 

[Doug]

I'm overwhelmed with acronyms if every area of my life.

What is ASD?

Thanks -

- Murray

Aspergers Spectrum Disorder
https://www.google.com/search?q=asperger's+spectrum+disorder+in+adults&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

 

[FrankS]

Autism Spectrum Disorder, of which Asperger's is along/part of.

 

[zuiko85]

Probably not. When someone wants to shoot pinhole photos, the primary criteria for a camera will not be how it feels in the hand. The primary criteria will be the medium to achieve a certain image quality.

I was using hyperbole to note that "image quality" is a very fluid term. A few years ago I bought a CV 35mm f2.5 PII from a guy in our apartment building. The lens seems fine to me, good contrast and resolution, smooth focus and half click stops for the aperture. It was in like new condition and I paid 2/3 of the then current price of a new one. He sold it because he didn't like the image quality, 'too clinical' he said and he was shopping for an older 35mm Summaron.

Now, to be fair it could be that I like the image quality and handling of the CV lens simply because it is what I can afford. I don't have the money to buy and sell and try out a whole lot of different lenses and so, really don't have the broad experience to speak authoritatively about 'image quality'.

 

[user237428934]

I was using hyperbole to note that "image quality" is a very fluid term.

You are so right. 100 people have 101 definitions of image quality.

 

[CMur12]

Aspergers Spectrum Disorder
https://www.google.com/search?q=asperger's+spectrum+disorder+in+adults&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Thanks, Doug.

I know what Aspergers is, but I didn't think of that as I was trying to think of some meaning related to photography and coming up short.

I know acronyms that have completely different meanings in different contexts. I would like to see acronyms used with more care, spelling them out and/or giving the context.

Thanks for the consideration -

- Murray