Interesting article posted by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

Started Mar 4, 2014 | Discussions thread
Chris Malcolm Senior Member • Posts: 2,101
Re: Interesting article posted by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

jhinkey wrote:

Interesting read, though it is certainly only from his point of view. He makes some sweeping statements and gets some things right while others he's off base in my opinion.

His overall point of cameras being good enough, though not valid for me personally, is true for many people I know that are casual shooters.

Not just casual shooters. I take an interest in RE photography (photographs of houses for sale or rent). Lighting, exposure, composition, and pp are pretty important to get good images which will sell the house and impress the agent. But the maximum print size very rarely exceeds A4, and a lot of images never get further than web images rather unpleasantly downsized by the letting agency's software and tiny prints in local house sale newspapers. Yet on the RE forums there are plenty of photographers discussing lens upgrades and camera body upgrades to acheive levels of detail resolution which nobody is ever going to see and low light high ISO performance which they're never going to use, because they shoot on tripods at small apertures for maximum DoF. Cameras these days are good enough that you can take top quality RE photographs with mid-range gear, and not even a forensic photographer would be able to tell the difference between a good zoom vs a prime lens or a 10MP vs a >20MP sensor.

It's like agonising over which top end mountaineering boot or approach shoe to buy for a walk round the park. Which is also starting to happen.

Cells phone sensors and images became good enough and the compact market has dried up.

APS-C based cameras became good enough and there is little incentive to switch (based on the casual Canon, Sony, and Nikon DX shooters that I know) to a new DSLR or to something like m43 (which I think Oly and Pany have not done nearly enough advertising here in the states to let most people know m43 even exists which has nothing to do with educational standards as the folks that I know who shoot APS-C DSLRs are certainly above average in eduction, affluence, etc.).

It has a lot to do with the kind and quality of the education. Anyone with what used to be good school grades in maths and physics, and now has sadly become around two years of university maths and physics, and wanting to buy an exchangeable lens camera would ask enough technical questions in the shop or of friends or the web to very quickly find out about the different sensor sizes and the existence of m43. If you need to rely on advertising to let you know that a kind of product exists then either you're technically uneducated or your education killed your natural curiosity.

One of the problems in the affluent Anglophone countries is that eduation has been shifting away from nerdy science and engineering towards fashionable arts and humanities. If you're a rich nation you can get immigrants to dirty their hands doing your research and engineering or you can outsource it. The result is the nation no longer makes cameras and the population buys fashionable cameras.

-- hide signature --

Chris Malcolm

 Chris Malcolm's gear list:Chris Malcolm's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A550 Sony SLT-A77 Sony 50mm F1.4 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony 500mm F8 Reflex +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow