Any "serious" shooters without DSLRs?

I think that the future belongs to EVF as it is the cheapest way to provide a big viewfinder and fit it in a small body. And viewing quality, while already high, can go higher.

I have a G9 which I find quite convenient, but I will be real happy when I get a very good EVF to look through and to provide a more stable shooting position.

I think that Panasonic and Olympus are on the right track (for me).

There are two types of activities in which I take pictures. The first of these is when the purpose of the activity is to pursue my photography hobby. In this case, I will usually take along 2 DSLRs and 3 or 4 lenses. Depending on the situation, I may also include either a tripod or monopod. I don't mind lugging all that stuff around because I know from experience that the equipment set will provide the maximum image quality and versatility in usage. There are times when my Canon G9 would have worked just fine, but the moment I take only that camera is the moment when I will run nto a situation when only a DSLR will do. I suppose you could call this "serious" photography although it isn't the only time when I care about results.

The other type of activity is when the focus (pun intended) is on some other activity than photography, but I wish to capture memories or record events for historical purposes. In most cases, I will bring my Canon G9 or even the old Panasonic FZ-8 if I anticipate needing considerable zoom. I might even use my ancient Canon A520 if there is a chance the camera will get damaged. I don't want or need 15 pounds of photography gear distracting me from the real purpose of the activity. There are a few times when I might take just a single DSLR with a long zoom if I don't think the point and shoot cameras will do the job and the situation is such that it won't hamper the activity. I would consider some of this photography serious too, but not all.

As others have said, there is a place for all sorts of cameras. I wish I had a pocketable camera like the Canon S95. That may be my next equipment acquisition. I am also considering an Olympus E-PL1 as a replacement for the G9.

Anton Roach said:

Well said, tvw. These forums used to be OK until the "high ISO" demand started. Now everything has been on a steady decline with way too many "know everything and nothing" types bickering back and forth over the most inane technical hogwash. It's really pitiful.

Click to expand...

I'm a serious photographer, who also enjoys blabbing away on all sorts of forums.

This so called "indictment" of people who enjoy chatting, is more of an indictment of the poster then those who hang out here.

Break a leg...

Dave

A clinically-obsessed photographer won't go anywhere without a truck full of equipment, or venture into the wilds with anything less than a bevy of medium-frame cameras, 70mm ToddAO movie equipment, and enough lenses to burden a four or five pack burros. Lighting equipment must be brought in by helicopter. In the city, a cameraholic will have nothing less than two rigs bobbing from his neck, a large pack of lenses, a vest reminiscent of a flack jacket. and a tin foil hat. Like any stag in the wilds, he will belicosely confront any other peer, asserting dominance with the optical protrusions the way beasts might use antlers or horns. Commication is through grunts, bellows, and snorts, not unlike a male baboon. The only, occasional compliment is, "Gee, your camera is almost as good as the old cheapie I dumped when I traded up." Fanboy brawls are almost as common as ones between competing clubs of Harley and Honda bikers. Keep your distance. With a pocket camera, you can stay incognito and still get nice pictures.

I use a DSLR because it's quick and practical, but it's no match for film scans from my 4x5, with the obvious exception of much better DR (e.g., vs. Velvia/Provia, etc.)

Some years back I was in my race car garage working on the race car when one of my friends drove up in a new Honda Shadow. I asked why he bought a Harley "look alike" instead of the real thing?
He answered, "because I wanted a motorcycle, not a religion".
--

' You don't have to have the best of everything to get the best out of what you do have'.

.........in your initial post it is not surprising that replies would revolve around various interpretations of the term.

I think many photographers who enjoy taking thoughtful (if that's what you mean) pictures know that; technical limitations aside, any camera can take beautiful, historical, or interestings pictures (if that's what you mean).

BobT said:

..."who has chosen to experience their interest in photography (casual and greater) via non-DSLR means? ...

Click to expand...

Almost all of my "fun" photography these days is done using 40 and 50 year-old analogue (film) gear (35mm, 6x6, and 6x7). Some of these don't even have batteries or a lightmeter.

I shoot 2 to 3 films a week, on average, and use a pro lab that still does silver halide work.

Although I keep up with the reviews in these forums I decided that the DSLRs on offer did not give me what I needed and much I didn't even want, so I have never bought one.

I do have two "digicams", several years old, now, which I use to record family occasions only, when I'm too lazy to use my analogue gear.

YUP!! still use my Canon F-1
--
ABA DABA

I'm a serious hobbyist and I'm serious about photography. Serious in a sense that I'll try to come up with a good compo, good lighting and good IQ if and whenever possible. I only have a SLR since 1985, thereafter, FZ50, GH-1 and a 2nd hand LX3. I'm a Fellow of the Royal Photographic Society (UK) and my accolade was done with the FZ50.

Do I need a DSLR? No, not at the current size and lugging around lenses.
--
David I used to rely on divine appointment with the subject.
Main Arsenal: GH1
My Gallery: http://david-low.smugmug.com/

Piecart said:

Although I keep up with the reviews in these forums I decided that the DSLRs on offer did not give me what I needed and much I didn't even want, so I have never bought one.

Click to expand...

I've purchased five dslr's: one failed due to hardware faults, I've given away three others and recently threw my last into the dumpster out of frustration. I love the SLR format, but no digital SLR I've used is as easy and fun as a simple, manual focus SLR. In addition to my Contax 139Q bodies, I use two digital point and shoots, a Sony MVC-FD200 (which has the least unpleasant highlight clipping of any digital I've used) and a waterproof, pocketable Pentax W20.

Funny how for years great street photography was done before digital appeared. HCB for example.

I could have used some $$ to buy the latest DSLR. Instead, I'm awaiting an M4-p to arrive.

that's serious.

BobT said:

"...who has chosen to experience their interest in photography (casual and greater) via non-DSLR means? Who has chosen to use P&S cameras instead of DSLRs for all of their photography interests?"

Click to expand...

Thank you for rephrasing the question. On 35mm I finished with two all-in-one SLRs (Olympus IS-1000, IS-2000) because I never liked the optical viewfinders on 35mm cameras - the framing was not precise.

While I did have two digital cameras that had a mirror and an optical viewfinder (Olympus C-1400L, C-2500L), I also owned a P&S along with each (Olympus D-400, D-490). The P&Ss had better resolution and less noise at a slightly smaller pixel count, and they could survive for longer than five minutes on alkaline AA cells..

When I had the C-2500L I photographed the woman who I spent my money on. She is still in my life, so a DSLR never got a look-in. She does not like competing with a camera for attention (she no longer poses).

The other issue is - what do I do with my pictures? Most of them get stored away, and they occasionally get dragged up to make a point in a discussion. I have a number of galleries on Pbase (which get dragged up in discussions). The woman is now overseas, but she wants a new email each morning, preferably with pictures in them. I also edit an amateur radio newsletter, of which I am the main picture contributor.

I had one exhibition in 2002 which was a flop.

So, for what I do, a 10x pocket P&S (Olympus Stylus 9010) takes care of 70% of my picture needs, and the 20x superzoom takes care of the other 30% (Olympus SP-570UZ), which includes bird photography, moon shots, and the almost daily documentation of art, house and garden maintenance for Sandra (and that often needs a strong external flash in- and outdoors).

Henry

--



Henry Falkner - SP-570UZ, Stylus 9010, Stylus 7020, D-490Z
http://www.pbase.com/hfalkner