The Right Camera for the Job

[rsl]

Here are two very different situations requiring two very different cameras.

The picture of the kids at the science fair would have been almost impossible to shoot with my D2X. As it was, I walked around the very extensive middle-school science project, which was spread out in a mall, and shot somewhere around 60 frames with my R-D1. I carried the camera in my hand with the strap wrapped around my wrist. There probably weren't more than three times that the kids I was shooting noticed me or my camera. I shot four frames of these girls, who were horsing around, from a seat across the isle and they never knew I was there. The size of the D2X and the noise of the mirror would have made that impossible.

The picture of the great blue heron would have been almost impossible with the R-D1, or any rangefinder. I've shot hundreds like this one along the Palatlakaha river in Florida with the D2X, using continuous focus tracking and burst mode. Hish speed burst gives me 5 frames a second shooting raw. An important part of the bird setup is the 24-120 VR zoom lens which lets me frame the bird as he flies and eliminates cropping.

The R-D1 is a great camera for street work, but if you're a serious photographer it can't be the only tool in your kit.

 

[RFNewbie]

How true. I totally agree with you. I bought a R-D1 a couple of months ago and have found that I rarely use my big dSLR (1dmk2). But there are times where the R-D1 will not do the trick, speed, action, etc. The main downside of the 1Dmk2 is that it's difficult to get candids in the streets and it so much larger that most people will have a look of shock when you bring it out with the bazooka size lens compared with the R-D1, not to mention the added mass that one has to carry. Yes, you definitely need 2 cameras.

 

[J. Borger]

The R-D1 is a great camera for street work, but if you're a serious photographer it can't be the only tool in your kit.

Did you already give Ralph Gibson a call ..... to tell him he is using the wrong tool all of his life 🙄 😀

 

[rsl]

Did you already give Ralph Gibson a call ..... to tell him he is using the wrong tool all of his life 🙄 😀

No, but I had a seance and contacted Cartier-Bresson to tell him he was using the wrong camera when he shot things like the ducks in the pond and the picture of Isle de la Cite. I used to use a rangefinder to shoot things like that too, but that was before really good SLRs were available. Eugene Atget used to do street photography with a view camera too, and it was the only tool available at the time, but I doubt he'd pick that camera nowadays.

 

[bchoiniere]

what lens were you using?

 

[rogue_designer]

I suppose that it depends on what you shoot (as a serious photographer).

I agree that you need the right tool for the shot you need to take. But it is entirely possible that you can be a serious photographer, and only shoot in a style that allows you to use one preferred tool.

If you feel that you have to be able to handle any possible photographic situation, then I shudder to think how many cameras you'd need. (I already have far too many... but am thinking of eliminating some types of photo work, rather than try to adapt my equipment needs.)

-

Hmm - on reflection, that doesn't really reflect my point. I guess I'm trying to say, that you don't have to be able to handle a huge range of assignments to be considered a "serious photographer."

I have no interest in covering sports, events, weddings, wildlife, etc... so I don't need a big dslr. (Tho I do own one regardless...)

 

[rsl]

I guess I'm trying to say, that you don't have to be able to handle a huge range of assignments to be considered a "serious photographer."

Rogue,

The term, "serious photographer" got you, did it? Seems like a truism, maybe even a tautology to say that if you have an interest only in one kind of photography you only need one kind of equipment. I couldn't agree more. If I had my way I'd spend all my time doing street work, but that's not always possible and I still want to shoot pictures when I can't shoot on the street, so I need the equipment to do what I'm doing, even if it's not exactly what I'd rather do. Back in the sixties and early seventies I used to shoot with three Leicas, a Rollei, and a view camera, depending on what the subject was. With digital I can get it down to two cameras -- the rangefinder and the D2X.

 

[rogue_designer]

Aye - I do agree that it's not a tool for every job. I myself still shoot with 4x5s, several 120 bodies of various sorts, etc.

But yes - I guess the supposition that a serious photographer can't make a living only doing one style is bothersome. They can and do.

 

[rsl]

what lens were you using?

With the R-D1 I was using a CV 35mm, f/1.7 Ultron aspherical, shooting at 800 ISO. With the D2X I was using an f/3.5-f/5.6 Nikkor 24-120mm VR, shooting at 400 ISO. The light wasn't particularly good for that shot or I'd have been at ISO 200.

 

[rsl]

I guess the supposition that a serious photographer can't make a living only doing one style is bothersome. They can and do.

I'd never make that kind of supposition. I never made my living at photography, though I did quite a bit of commercial work in the sixties. Trouble was, I always hated shooting what someone else wanted instead of what I wanted. Nowadays I have an office in Colorado Springs, Colorado. There's a pro down the hall who occasionally asks me to do a shoot for him and I always turn him down. Instead, I shoot what I want to shoot and put the results into four different galleries in the Colorado Springs area. I also sell off the web, and you can see a small sample of my stuff at http://www.rslstudio.com. It's a pretty eclectic collection, but most of it is street work or pictures from shoots on the western prairies and in dying western towns. That takes two kinds of cameras, though I probably could do both with the rangefinder if the DSLR weren't so convenient.