Does camera body choice matter?

[Jamie Pillers]

Looking at other photographers' work on-line is helpful to me for a couple of reasons. Often their work tweaks my creativity a bit one way or the other, sending me off in some new interesting direction. And I sometimes get a clue to the impacts equipment/film can have on image 'character' (sharpness, color, bokeh, etc.). However I find it a bit annoying when a photographer goes to the trouble of specifying what camera they used, but not what lens or film.

Don't the lens and film choices make far greater impact on image character than the camera? Does camera body choice make much difference? For example, does it really matter much whether I use my Noctilux (I should be so lucky 😛 ) on a Bessa R3A or a Leica M6? I'm curious what others think about this.

 

[visanic]

It's who is behind the camera...

It's who is behind the camera...

Check out some of Chase Jarvis' shots made with an iPhone here:

http://www.chasejarvis.com/#s=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&p=5&a=0&at=0

 

[rya]

If the body were the difference between digital and film, or different formats and such it would obviously be as important as film choice. But just limited to 35mm film I don't see the box being that important.

It could speak to the style of photography being employed, though. Shooting with a Nikon F6 in auto modes would be very different than with a Leica III. One might be purposefully filling a body of work with photos taken by rangefinders or TLRs, etc, and just be using the exact camera name rather than saying "with a rangefinder." Just mentioning the camera without lens specifics could be a way of generalizing all of the other information. For example, saying a pano shot is from an Xpan could imply it is not cropped, from 35mm and with a hassleblad lens.

But on the whole, I agree that I would usually just rather know the lens and film (since these factors would tell me the type of camera, etc, if I wanted to know that as well).

 

[uhligfd]

Yes it matters. But: Why did you ask? What did you try to understand here with your title of the post?

 

[Roberto]

Lens has influence on the picture, camera has even more impact on who takes the picture..
Different cameras mean different feeling, mood, habits, happiness and so on... so to me: YES, it does matter a lot and it changes the way you take pictures

 

[ferider]

Lens has influence on the picture, camera has even more impact on who takes the picture..
Different cameras mean different feeling, mood, habits, happiness and so on... so to me: YES, it does matter a lot and it changes the way you take pictures

Like he said 🙂

 

[sevres_babylone]

However I find it a bit annoying when a photographer goes to the trouble of specifying what camera they used, but not what lens...

When I do that, it usually means I can't remember which lens I used...and can't refresh my memory from reading the bokeh.🙂

 

[bobkonos]

Camera body choice is important to me because I am a tactile person who appreciates a certain feel when holding the camera, advancing film, and setting controls. I am also interested in industrial design so the design of the body is important to me.

 

[ruby.monkey]

It matters a little - more so with digital, I think - but for me it's definitely placed after lens and film.

 

[back alley]

lens impacts the image

camera impacts the photographer

 

[Pickett Wilson]

I think the brand of camera strap is most important!

Seriously, I could care less what camera someone used to take a photo. It's the image that's important to me.

 

[back alley]

straps can have impact.
i can't use a shoulder strap around my neck without getting an instant headache.
it's one of the reasons i like wrist straps.

the op is asking about lenses more than bodies though...

 

[nobbylon]

In the OP the question asked referred to 'sharpness, colour, bokeh etc'. Does the body affect any of these? only the sharpness as some film cameras vibrate less at slow speeds. For the rest it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever as it's only a light tight box. Back Alley gets it spot on as the camera can definately affect the way a photographer who, shall we say has a romantic view on equipement choice views the world. Maybe by using more expensive kit or iconic kit can inspire, maybe it just makes you work harder to get a certain picture because you think you should be getting better results. Film choice and lenses are what's important. Maybe you want to use a particular lens?
Digital? not all cameras are equal, so yes, it makes a difference.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

Camera body choice is important to me because I am a tactile person who appreciates a certain feel when holding the camera, advancing film, and setting controls. I am also interested in industrial design so the design of the body is important to me.

I'm stealing this answer. This is exactly what i would have said if i could have said it so precisely and elegantly....

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Good questions. I guess my post was about two things. First, I find it useful when a photographer includes what lens and film he/she used. These have always seemed to me to be the most critical TECHNICAL issues involved, as opposed to the issues inside the photographer's head. 🙂

Second is that since I do see a lot of photos posted that include only the name of the body used, I wonder if I've been missing something with respect to the technical factors that contribute to image sharpness, etc.. Like many of you that responded to my original post, I've assumed, within reason, that the camera body is just a box that holds the film. More specifically, I've owned Bessa R-type bodies but am considering switching to an old Leica. So my second interest is... does a Leica body hold the film consistently flatter, or is the distance from the lens mount to the film plane more accurate in a Leica body. If not... then strictly technically speaking (asthetics/emotional stuff aside), it shouldn't make any difference using a Bessa or a Leica.. right?

 

[Jamie Pillers]

So, Joe... does that mean you take better pictures with the RD1, ZM, or G1? 🙂

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Exactly. And whether we like it or not, lens and film play a significant role in what that image looks like to you. My original post has to do with whether the camera body makes any difference.

Your point is a good one... as a consumer of images, I don't care at all what equipment was used. However, as a photographer interested in understanding how to get a certain look, I'm VERY MUCH interested in all the things that can contribute to that look. 🙂

 

[Jamie Pillers]

I understand the point raised by many here... equipment choice can affect what goes on in an artistic brain. All the emotions that go with holding a fine piece of equipment, etc.. I was just trying to separate out a smaller issue... Does the camera body contribute any quality variation in image quality. My assumption had always been no... the black box of a camera body is a simple device that has little if any impact. A Bessa R doesn't contribute any more or less to image quality than a Leica MP. Now a photographer HOLDING a Bessa or a Leica MP... that's a subject for a nice fat research project! 🙂

 

[Jamie Pillers]

And so...

And so...

My goal, I think, with this post was to just say that I really like it when the photographer posting an image includes the lens and film they use. This information doesn't change how I perceive the beauty of his/her picture; it just helps me to improve as a photographer trying to figure out how to get certain sharpness, color, bokeh, etc. qualities in my photographs.

Thanks everyone for responding. 🙂

 

[nobbylon]

I have to admit that I saw no difference quality wise on images using bessa or M's and I regularly used slow speeds at or below 1/15th sec. I don't believe film flatness is an issue worth debating with these two.