The importance of knowing your equipment

[Takkun]

I know some artists that rotate between pen/ink, watercolor, oils, etc to keep themselves fresh. I do the same between MF, 35 and digital when I need something new.

But familiarity does have a edge when it comes to getting the shot regardless. It took me a very long time to get a handle on the X100 that almost made me give up on it, but nowadays it has a regular place in my rotation. Going all-manual, all-film simplifies things though, if I were to get something new.

 

[noisycheese]

I'm in total agreement with the OP. For me, simpler is always better.

Same here. While my friends are wrestling with the menus and technology embodied in their DSLRs, I am able to keep on making images with my
M4-P.

Shutter speed, aperture, focus, click, wind is often quicker than a DSLR that shoots 8 fps - once you figure out how to use it or figure out how to get it unlocked. 😉

 

[thegman]

Maybe for modern/complicated cameras it matters, but for older/simpler ones, they're all much the same anyway.

Basically, my Fotoman 4x5 camera is roughly the same as my Rolleiflex. You set focus, shutter, and aperture, and compose. They are self explanatory in the way they work.

If I was to get an Alpa 12 TC, or a Horseman SW612, I would not expect to have to read a manual, as their operation is so simple.

Perhaps it helps on some cameras, but all the ones I use don't really need to be known inside and out, being so basic.

 

[Keith]

Same here. While my friends are wrestling with the menus and technology embodied in their DSLRs, I am able to keep on making images with my
M4-P.

Shutter speed, aperture, focus, click, wind is often quicker than a DSLR that shoots 8 fps - once you figure out how to use it or figure out how to get it unlocked. 😉

I'm not a Rhodes Scholar but I find a DSLR pretty simple to use and I would make sure I had all my settings correct well before taking a photo or series of photos in any situation. If you can convince yourself that a completely manual rangefinder will out perform a DSLR with matrix metering, focus tracking etc etc, good luck to you.

Slamming the SLR/DSLR has been a trend on this forum for as long as I've been here ... you're grist for the mill mate! 😀

 

[Richard G]

I know what you mean with the new cameras.....But I love them. I like using different cameras just as I like driving different cars. I appreciate each one more for using something else as well. The pleasure of something new or different or revived after a long absence probably improves my keeper rate, but I've never done the maths.

However, simple is best. What could you forget from the M Leica's instruction manual, or the Rolleiflex? I started a thread here a few weeks ago on mode problems with cameras, inspired by the alleged Asiana autopilot error at San Francisco Airport. With P mode M mode and A mode, and adjustable ISO and auto ISO, manual v auto focus, a complex modern DSLR has a lot to keep track of, and multiple mode delusions to bring on an error.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Maybe for modern/complicated cameras it matters, but for older/simpler ones, they're all much the same anyway.

Basically, my Fotoman 4x5 camera is roughly the same as my Rolleiflex. You set focus, shutter, and aperture, and compose. They are self explanatory in the way they work.

If I was to get an Alpa 12 TC, or a Horseman SW612, I would not expect to have to read a manual, as their operation is so simple.

Perhaps it helps on some cameras, but all the ones I use don't really need to be known inside and out, being so basic.

For me, it's not so much a question of an instruction manual or of obvious controls. It's being able to use pick the camera up and use it without thinking, and that's pure habituation. I can even get used to DSLRs if you give me long enough. But if I switch from (say) my Alpa 12 WA to a Fotoman -- and I've done it, for reviews -- then I don't know exactly where my fingertip will fall, etc. The same happened with the M Typ 240 after the M9, and vice versa.

Cheers,

R.

 

[thegman]

For me, it's not so much a question of an instruction manual or of obvious controls. It's being able to use pick the camera up and use it without thinking, and that's pure habituation. I can even get used to DSLRs if you give me long enough. But if I switch from (say) my Alpa 12 WA to a Fotoman -- and I've done it, for reviews -- then I don't know exactly where my fingertip will fall, etc. The same happened with the M Typ 240 after the M9, and vice versa.

Cheers,

R.

Yes, that's true, and perhaps if you need to take a photo quickly that would matter quite a lot.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Yes, that's true, and perhaps if you need to take a photo quickly that would matter quite a lot.

When I did press photography, I copied the procedure that I saw others use: take a reading on arrival, set the camera then forget the aperture and shutter, unless the lighting changed dramatically.

Of course, this meant there was almost always an element of extra work when it came to making prints. Moreover, the image quality was sometimes rather poorer than camera club members would demand. However, provided the image got used, I got paid, which was the name of that particular game.

Now that we have "P" mode and even "AI", it is very seldom that I move the controls to any other setting. I blame my misspent youth. 😀

 

[Michael Markey]

I'm not a Rhodes Scholar but I find a DSLR pretty simple to use and I would make sure I had all my settings correct well before taking a photo or series of photos in any situation. If you can convince yourself that a completely manual rangefinder will out perform a DSLR with matrix metering, focus tracking etc etc, good luck to you.

Slamming the SLR/DSLR has been a trend on this forum for as long as I've been here ... you're grist for the mill mate! 😀

Yes its one of the RFF myths that gets trotted out on a regular basis.
I believed it myself until I started using a dslr.

I use mine on manual with manual lenses ...one wheel changes the ISO and the same wheel ( preceded by touching a button) changes the ISO.

Must have taken me all of five minutes to figure that out.
Changing either shutter speed or ISO on the hoof is faster than any of my other cameras.

 

[Pete B]

I would've said most people say that using film and knowing they only have 36 exposures slows them down as they put more thought into each exposure, and they speak of spray and pray with DSLRs. This implies they think DSLRs are quicker. Are we talking about two things here? Of the film cameras, I feel I "work" quicker with the simplicity of a Leica film M, but, if the lighting conditions aren't requiring exposure compensation or focus over-ride for some reason, a DSLR with matrix metering and autofocus will be quicker.
Pete

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

I use mine on manual with manual lenses ...one wheel changes the ISO and the same wheel ( preceded by touching a button) changes the ISO.

I'm guessing, as I do much the same thing with my Tamron lenses, that you mean you set the shutter in one mode and the ISO in the other?

 

[hepcat]

This may be age-related. When I was younger, yes, new kit inspired me. Now, the picture is what inspires me more, though I have to admit that sometimes trying to get ANYTHING out of new equipment inspires me.

Cheers,

R.

I think it's related to maturity in photography. Once you've climbed the learning curve on how to make images, then the image should be what matters.

I'm not a Rhodes Scholar but I find a DSLR pretty simple to use and I would make sure I had all my settings correct well before taking a photo or series of photos in any situation. If you can convince yourself that a completely manual rangefinder will out perform a DSLR with matrix metering, focus tracking etc etc, good luck to you.

Slamming the SLR/DSLR has been a trend on this forum for as long as I've been here ... you're grist for the mill mate! 😀

I'm neither a Rhodes Scholar nor a luddite Keith, but I think that any camera I have to "tailor to my style" before I can start using it is over-done. I've had the DSLRs with matrix metering, focus tracking etc. etc. and while they're nice features, none of it is trustworthy when you need it most. Focus tracking isn't all it's cracked up to be (read any brand forum there) and matrix metering is fine, as long as its a "normal" scene. When you're outside of the design limits of "normal," and then you have to fight with the gear to use it manually, eventually it just gets tiresome. I've had a Fuji X-Pro1 miss focus on two out of three shots during a commercial shoot, all the while giving the glowing green focus confirmation light. And the X-Pro1 is all but useless in manual modes.

I have a Panny GX1 for snapshots and occasionally close-up live view and it does a nice job, but I'll take my M bodies any time. I'm trying something new (old) in the commercial business realm again and I just loaded up with late model "V" system Hassy gear. When I last owned Hassy, it was just Hasselblad, but now it appears to be Hasselblad "V" system to differentiate it from the Hasselblad-Fuji hybrids. Anyway, I'd forgotten how much I still "see" in square format, and it's nice how my hands fall to the controls so naturally. It's kind of like coming up for air and breathing again after holding your breath under water for a while.

When I did press photography, I copied the procedlure that I saw others use: take a reading on arrival, set the camera then forget the aperture and shutter, unless the lighting changed dramatically.

"f8 and be there." 😀

Not too many years ago, one of our local hospitals was doing the first building implosion using explosives done in the state. I got there early and set up my new-to-me Olympus E3 on a monopod with a 50-200 lens (effective 100-400 on 4/3rds) with the motordrive on from the nosebleed seats behind the police lines a couple of blocks away. I metered, and set the shutter speed and aperture. With the first "puff" I pressed the release and got a nice, well exposed 25 shot string of exposures of the building's collapse. (yes I readily admit that my M9-P wouldn't have been as well suited to this task.)

The local paper had days to scout and set up four Canons set up with radio remotes in the best "strategic" locations around the building. They'd tested them and all was well, until the moment. He triggered the remotes and got nothing. On any of the cameras. Testing afterwards showed them working fine. My guess was that the RF from the blasts interfered. They had no one "on the ground" shooting and got no images. I knew the hospital PR person, and they knew I'd been there, so my images made the front page.

The paper photographer was a (relative) youngster and was a child of the digital age. The lesson he learned was that the likelihood of the technology failing is directly proportional to the importance of the event. I've never had a manual body or lens fail during a wedding. I can't say that about AF lenses and electronic bodies.

So, the technology isn't always all it's cracked up to be. It's convenient under "normal" circumstances, but when you get outside it's design limits it can get really dicey, and that's not the time to have to fight with the gear to make it do what you want it to do. The problem is that those limits aren't defined anywhere until you reach them and you have an unexpected failure. Sometimes knowing your stuff and using a manual process is more reliable when you HAVE to bring the images home.

 

[Michael Markey]

I'm guessing, as I do much the same thing with my Tamron lenses, that you mean you set the shutter in one mode and the ISO in the other?

I set the camera to manual ...choose a suitable aperture , manually focus and vary the shutter speed or ISO accordingly using one wheel and one button press (to change the iso.)

Bearing in mind I`m using it to take fast moving objects in an indoor and not very well lit space.
Shutter speed and ISO are important.
That doesn`t imply that I have to be fast just the shutter because, should I miss ,the opportunity will present itself again.

When I use my M cameras I`m taking a different type of shot altogether and in a different situation and I require a different mode of operation.

These blanket assertions that this or that camera is more difficult than another often denies the context in which the camera is being operated and the type of shot required ....was my point.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I'm not a Rhodes Scholar but I find a DSLR pretty simple to use and I would make sure I had all my settings correct well before taking a photo or series of photos in any situation. If you can convince yourself that a completely manual rangefinder will out perform a DSLR with matrix metering, focus tracking etc etc, good luck to you.

Slamming the SLR/DSLR has been a trend on this forum for as long as I've been here ... you're grist for the mill mate! 😀

There is no metering system or auto modes that can replace experience and how I expose to get the print that I need. And there is no autofocus faster than being pre-focused (hyper focus). When talking street work, for me, there is not a DSLR out there that can capture my vision faster, more accurately, than I can with a manual tool, period. I don't need more than one well placed frame so I don't use or need 10 FPS or what ever. The machine gun approach has never been part of my visual vocabulary. Use old jarheads would much rather have one very well placed round that a dozen of rounds not well placed.

Becoming one with the tool for me is very important because then I can just respond to what I am seeing. I am not thinking about the technical issues and how to operate the camera. That has all become second nature.

 

[helen.HH]

better to know and Shoot effortlessly ...😉

 

[Ko.Fe.]

DSLR and RF, scale cameras will take some time to learn how to operate.
It is initial level for keepers. Like, to have right exposure and get it in focus.
But then it is lens. Takes weeks on digital and months on film to learn how to get real keepers.
If you jump from one camera-lens to another you'll have first level keepers.
This is why I use lens reviews from photozone just to find out how sharp it is at different apertures and so on.
But real potential of the lens is only revealed by experienced in this lens user.
Once you'll learn the lens, real keepers comes.

 

[Keith]

There is no metering system or auto modes that can replace experience and how I expose to get the print that I need. And there is no autofocus faster than being pre-focused (hyper focus). When talking street work, for me, there is not a DSLR out there that can capture my vision faster, more accurately, than I can with a manual tool, period. I don't need more than one well placed frame so I don't use or need 10 FPS or what ever. The machine gun approach has never been part of my visual vocabulary. Use old jarheads would much rather have one very well placed round that a dozen of rounds not well placed.

Becoming one with the tool for me is very important because then I can just respond to what I am seeing. I am not thinking about the technical issues and how to operate the camera. That has all become second nature.

I respect your point of view toatally but I think you're refering to specific usage in line with how you use a camera personally.

The DSLR, though far from perfect, really is a do all tool ... a rangefinder isn't. I stood in the middle of a motocross track recently with my D700 and an AF 24-120 zoom ... something totally new to me. The action is constant and there is no time to focus or faff about with metering and you have to rely heavily on the camera's abilities to get the shots you and others want.

I'm not saying I prefer a DSLR to a rangefinder because this thread isn't a DSLR V Rangefinder rant but when you have an object coming towards you at seventy ks and you want to photograp it at any point in it's trajectory a knowledge of exposure and how to prefocus is of little use.