Great piece on a pro photog who uses vintage digital

"My sweet spot now is between 2008-2011"... And you call it vintage? ....
It is the "piece" for sure...

My daughter, just as many real pro photogs is still using Canon 5D MKII. It is 2009 camera.
My wife prefers 5MP FujiFilm from 2003 and she took way better portraits than this "pro".
I constantly have my old 8MP Lumix in use. Because of the CCD sensor and Leica zoom.

So, where is big deal and what is interesting, exactly? Lame photos? Common cameras?
 
The cameras she is using are not vintage. They are just old. Or rather, older. And even then not so much. But saying vintage gets you to click. Since she is buying them at thrift stores, maybe discarded would be a better appellation.
 
Certainly not vintage compared to film cameras, but they are early digital cameras.

Still using a Nikon D70, Fuji S3, F20, F40 and Epson RD-1 here occasionally for the CCD look, I think they must be from around 2005? Ancient history in the digital world, I guess.

When the America 24-7 book series came out, I had several photos in the Ohio edition, including a double-truck aerial shot taken with a Nikon D-1, about 2 or 3mp?

I can remember in about 1999 or 2000, carrying around two staff issued Nikon / Kodak dSLRs, they were horrible! And they were about $15K each!
 
I do this a lot too. The most recent of my digital cameras is the M8.2. Still use the floppy disc Sony.
 
Damn...makes me want to get a Sony U20 or U10 again...

CYBERSHOT_DSC-U10_1_L.JPG
 
Ko.Fe. said:
"My sweet spot now is between 2008-2011"... And you call it vintage? ....
It is the "piece" for sure...

My daughter, just as many real pro photogs is still using Canon 5D MKII. It is 2009 camera.
My wife prefers 5MP FujiFilm from 2003 and she took way better portraits than this "pro".
I constantly have my old 8MP Lumix in use. Because of the CCD sensor and Leica zoom.

So, where is big deal and what is interesting, exactly? Lame photos? Common cameras?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't get it either. I was looking forward to an article about shooting with early compacts, instead I got one about about shooting with recent used compacts.
Heck, I have a Lumix LX5 as my only digital compact, and I like it *shrugs*. Wouldn't class it as vintage.
 
Ste_S said:
Yeah, I didn't get it either. I was looking forward to an article about shooting with early compacts, instead I got one about about shooting with recent used compacts.
Heck, I have a Lumix LX5 as my only digital compact, and I like it *shrugs*. Wouldn't class it as vintage.
Click to expand...

It clearly explains her process of using early 2000s compacts at first but then needing more MP for her clients. Therefore, now she uses 2008-2011 compacts for that purpose. It seems that she still uses her favorite 2001 compact when she can.
 
I didn't know there was such a thing as vintage digital. I guess the film cameras I use would be called primitive. Time is flying.

Mike
 
They are certainly cheap these days, my last one cost 50p; think 50 cents (dollars or Euros) and you'll get the idea...

Regards, David
 
Something standing out to me is she's only been in the industry 2 years she clearly has a very young career. I'm curious if there's a level of kitsch or gimmick involved here. A lot of what the article says about old digital compacts sounds very similar to what people would have said about using film it was at its lowest a few years ago.

Film as an aesthetic tool seems to be booming these days. It's only natural for someone to early-adopt to something new to set themselves apart. Another thing to note is photo editing software has come a long way in the last few years as well. I can't say for certain that I see a whole difference in the images featured in the article though. It seems to me like a lot of the effects could be recreated on a modern camera with possibly some tweaks to the way you shoot it and some editing. Though the argument for ccd vs cmos is valid. I've seen the evidence of this first hand.

In my opinion the limitations of film are far more legitimate than self imposed limitations by using crappy old digital cameras and really shouldn't be called limitations.
 
Nice read, thanks.

A Fuji F31fd is still my go to carry around if I'm not shooting film. I bought an F11 when it was first released and used it happily for years until it died last year. The F31fd 'upgrade' only cost me £12 from ebay. The older Fuji CCD sensors look wonderful in monochrome mode.
 
jsrockit said:
Damn...makes me want to get a Sony U20 or U10 again...

CYBERSHOT_DSC-U10_1_L.JPG
Click to expand...

I gave my Olympus D-100 away to a friend out west for a friend of his who used it for a number of years.

It was a fun little camera, simple, solid, not going back there though (1.3 MP is a bit low). But perhaps this weekend I will try and breath life into my old GRD III......

olympusd100-big.jpeg
 
It is an interesting article. Rather links up with the question Bill P asked in this thread, How Big.

Thanks for sharing.

B2 (;->
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom