"Blame the camera"

[Bob A L]

Absolutely great description of it. My attitude also. I don't think I have ever had a situation where I could blame my equipment. But it seems to be getting to the point that now the equipment is being blamed for not focusing on the right eye, the right bird, the right hockey player, etc. I find it humorous myself. If I come home with photos exhibiting any of those problems, it's me, not my camera that is to blame. And that's fine with me, that's why I take photos, to see if I can get the photo I want.

 

[sybersitizen]

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

Only when it's actually because of limitations in the gear. But now it's possible to overcome many limitations (like noise, lack of sharpness, CA, distortion, vignetting) with software. My purchases have shifted to the software side so I'm not as tempted to replace gear.

But how many years has it been since there were serious limitations in the gear?

I don't know if your definition of serious is the same as mine, but for me, the limitations I described are serious enough. They've been there with most of the gear I've owned since the 1970s (back when noise was known as grain) and are still there in the present. I was much less cognizant of these issues in the film era, but now that I have digitized versions of my slides, they're more obvious.

It may have been harder to make them produce what we are after, but the gear itself has been capable of most anything for a long time.

Again, I named specific limitations that interfered with the results I'd prefer to have. In general, there was nothing I could do to overcome those limitations within the constraints of the gear and the shooting situations until software became available to address them.

There were endless numbers of sports, action and action photographs produced even before autofocus or digital. By very skilled operators I will add, but nevertheless, the camera could handle it.

Correct, but not relevant to my comment.

 

[cutterpup]

Back when I was still using Pentax I attended a model train show with my husband. As i walked around I saw a gentleman with the same model camera and lens that I used 75% of the time. He told me that the camera/lens had originally belonged to his son, and that his son insisted they were faulty and he could never get any good images so he gave them the man I was talking with.

The man said he read the users manual and learned about fine tuning the lens. He did so and has since gotten many "good" images and he could trace any "bad" images to user error.

I think the need to fine tune the lens in some DSLRs is an engineering fault. It shouldn't be necessary.

Don

Be that as it may, the need does exist at times. and when those times occur only a fool would not do what it takes, engineering fault or not, to get the best out of the equipment on hand.

 

[BackToNature1]

The more access to technology we have, the less we tend to try to become better ourselves. Do you agree?

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

For years, I only shot at One FPS. This year, I decided to use Burst Modes on all my Best Cameras. That was really Eye opening. That has me doing Far more to better myself, not less. Newer Tech tends to opens up more doors and challenges, not necessarily less.

So folks not caring and or using that new Tech, might not get that.

 

[Larry_T]

The camera is a tool, it does what you ask it to do. If you hit yourself in the thumb with a hammer is it the hammer's fault? Granted the camera is much more sophisticated, to the point that many users do not know how to use it to achieve the desired results (myself included). I do not think this is the fault of the camera however.

 

[Krusty79]

I occasionally have moments of honesty with myself.

I currently have 4-5 cameras and all of them are just wonderful, at least when compared eith the cameras i started with, around 17 years ago.

Yet, generally speaking the quality of the images i get isn't much different than it was 17 years ago, and most of the differences lie in the way i handle the camera, because now i have more experience.

You really have not improved in 17 years? If so, then that is all on you. Maybe you are relying too much on the camera. What have you done to improve your compositions?

As a consequence, i have to ask myself every time i want a new camera- would it do me any good?

The answer is no. It's the reason i stopped chasing the latest tech in camera development, it wouldn't improve my skills except make my life easier, with things like eye AF or pet eye AF.

So, nowadays i don't blame the camera when i fail to reach a certain result, because i know the camera's fine(I always want better optics, though).

To be honest i didn't blame the camera in the beginning either. When all you have is a cheap P&S you make sure the get the best of it, which i did. I still enjoy seeing those 6 megapixel images today.

If the old photos produce an emotional reaction, then mission accomplished.

The more access to technology we have, the less we tend to try to become better ourselves. Do you agree?

No, we just have better tools available, but no camera can tell you the best way to frame a subject, the best way to light it, or what to include/exclude from the frame. These are skills I am always trying to improve. This is also why I am not concerned about AI taking over photography.

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

No, just like I don't blame my driver when I pull a shot out of bounds.

 

[SelrahCharleS]

Just to play devil's advocate - one reason for a poor workman to blame his tools might be because he's not using the right tools...

Then he doesn't know what he's doing, does he

Well he could know the right tool but not have the budget for it, or just not have access to them.

If a UFO shows up in the distance I know a nice long telephoto is the tool for proving there are aliens, but if all I have with me is my smartphone you can bet I'm taking a blurry picture with that and lamenting the tool.

 

[BackToNature1]

As a consequence, i have to ask myself every time i want a new camera- would it do me any good?

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

This is especially true when someone buys a new camera and isn't satisfied with the results. They often blame the camera when 9 times out of 10 it's because they aren't using the camera correctly. The moral of the story is to get familiar with the new camera and learn how to use it before complaining about the results. Unless there is something wrong with the camera every camera made is capable of excellent IQ.

Plus a modern camera is quite capable of poor results in the best of Hands. One only has to show off their best. Regardless of which was at fault.

There are simply hard limits per sensor sizes and or a variety of standards everyone will or won't accept. So the very best IQ some modern cameras produce won't be acceptable to everyone. Nor should it be.

 

[pentax mono]

I have just the ticket for you ..... listen to me extremely carefully.

you want a big jump in your image quality ?

get yourself a Fuji Medium format camera ... a few of their best lenes ...... a Gitzo tripod and an Arca swiss geared cube head

your going to be astounded at the quality you get ,,,,,,, the camera almost does all the work for you ..... I have literally seen mediocre photographers with poor compositional skills and lacking in original artistic vision -take some pretty dang impressive shot with that set-up

Always blame the camera ? .......... yes !

 

[tbcass]

As a consequence, i have to ask myself every time i want a new camera- would it do me any good?

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

This is especially true when someone buys a new camera and isn't satisfied with the results. They often blame the camera when 9 times out of 10 it's because they aren't using the camera correctly. The moral of the story is to get familiar with the new camera and learn how to use it before complaining about the results. Unless there is something wrong with the camera every camera made is capable of excellent IQ.

Plus a modern camera is quite capable of poor results in the best of Hands.

Not if the camera is used properly.

One only has to show off their best. Regardless of which was at fault.

There are simply hard limits per sensor sizes and or a variety of standards everyone will or won't accept. So the very best IQ some modern cameras produce won't be acceptable to everyone. Nor should it be.

That's not what I am talking about. The examples I am familiar with are where the results the person was getting were significantly worse than what the camera was capable of. Other than the rare times when the camera was faulty every time it was a user error and not the fault of the camera.

 

[tbcass]

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

Only when it's actually because of limitations in the gear. But now it's possible to overcome many limitations (like noise, lack of sharpness, CA, distortion, vignetting) with software. My purchases have shifted to the software side so I'm not as tempted to replace gear.

Absolutely, I agree 100%.

 

[HRC2016]

People by new gear they don't need become of marketing and online cheerleading.

They often don't take the time to learn their gear.

 

[BackToNature1]

Ensure the continual decline of overall camera Sales.

 

[lomoapontaechuta]

When things don't come out the way i envisioned i always blame my position in relation to the sun.

 

[Jon in Thailand]

I occasionally have moments of honesty with myself.

I currently have 4-5 cameras and all of them are just wonderful, at least when compared eith the cameras i started with, around 17 years ago.

Yet, generally speaking the quality of the images i get isn't much different than it was 17 years ago, and most of the differences lie in the way i handle the camera, because now i have more experience.

As a consequence, i have to ask myself every time i want a new camera- would it do me any good?

The answer is no. It's the reason i stopped chasing the latest tech in camera development, it wouldn't improve my skills except make my life easier, with things like eye AF or pet eye AF.

So, nowadays i don't blame the camera when i fail to reach a certain result, because i know the camera's fine(I always want better optics, though).

To be honest i didn't blame the camera in the beginning either. When all you have is a cheap P&S you make sure the get the best of it, which i did. I still enjoy seeing those 6 megapixel images today.

The more access to technology we have, the less we tend to try to become better ourselves. Do you agree?

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

..................................................................................................

A Nikon D300 has been in my hands for 16 years or more.

I live in the jungles of S.E. Asia and have used it most everyday.

Now just recently a D500 has been gifted to me and it is taking

awhile to adjust to this, new to me piece of high-end technology.

.

Over time the D500 will most likely become the one used

on a daily schedule, but the D300 still fits an works just fine.

.

D300, Nikkor 17-55 2.8.





........................................................................

 

[WiltshireMoonraker59]

I occasionally have moments of honesty with myself.

I currently have 4-5 cameras and all of them are just wonderful, at least when compared eith the cameras i started with, around 17 years ago.

Yet, generally speaking the quality of the images i get isn't much different than it was 17 years ago, and most of the differences lie in the way i handle the camera, because now i have more experience.

As a consequence, i have to ask myself every time i want a new camera- would it do me any good?

The answer is no. It's the reason i stopped chasing the latest tech in camera development, it wouldn't improve my skills except make my life easier, with things like eye AF or pet eye AF.

So, nowadays i don't blame the camera when i fail to reach a certain result, because i know the camera's fine(I always want better optics, though).

To be honest i didn't blame the camera in the beginning either. When all you have is a cheap P&S you make sure the get the best of it, which i did. I still enjoy seeing those 6 megapixel images today.

The more access to technology we have, the less we tend to try to become better ourselves. Do you agree?

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

No I never blame the camera I always know that it's my mistake but I do agree about not chasing after the latest tech. I have had several cameras in the past from DSLR's 16mp to 24mp, LX100, RX100mk1, RX10iv, Fuji X-S1, Fuji X30, Olympus EM10ii, EM1ii and EM5ii, all of them were brilliant cameras and capable of great photos. I have got rid of all of those cameras except one, the EM5ii which although only 16mp, to me it is a perfect camera for everything I need, its well built, small, lightweight and I have a great collection of small lightweight lenses to go with it, I don't need anything else. The same can be said of software for editing, I have had lots of software over the years and I have a few of the latest AI powered programs, Luminar Neo, Topaz Photo AI, Radiant Photo but I also have a program called Photoscape X Pro, which I had long before all those programs and too be honest, it is more than capable of producing excellent images from my RAW files

 

[Paul Pasco]

I occasionally have moments of honesty with myself.

I currently have 4-5 cameras and all of them are just wonderful, at least when compared eith the cameras i started with, around 17 years ago.

Yet, generally speaking the quality of the images i get isn't much different than it was 17 years ago, and most of the differences lie in the way i handle the camera, because now i have more experience.

I would agree with this to a point. I got my first DSLR, a D50, in 2005 and still have it. It still takes very nice photos but not as nice as my Z50.

As a consequence, i have to ask myself every time i want a new camera- would it do me any good?

The answer is no. It's the reason i stopped chasing the latest tech in camera development, it wouldn't improve my skills except make my life easier, with things like eye AF or pet eye AF.

So, nowadays i don't blame the camera when i fail to reach a certain result, because i know the camera's fine(I always want better optics, though).

To be honest i didn't blame the camera in the beginning either. When all you have is a cheap P&S you make sure the get the best of it, which i did. I still enjoy seeing those 6 megapixel images today.

The more access to technology we have, the less we tend to try to become better ourselves. Do you agree?

That totally depends on the person. On the one hand newer, better tech can make it easier to get a properly exposed photo and some will just be happy with that and not grow any further in their skills. Others may realize that new tech can allow things they never imagined and strive to make the most of them and grow as a result.

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

No, assuming the gear is working properly it’s up to me set it to get the results I want. I have been using tools of various kinds most of my life and that old saying about blaming the tool always applies.

 

[jxh]

...

So, nowadays i don't blame the camera when i fail to reach a certain result, because i know the camera's fine(I always want better optics, though).

To be honest i didn't blame the camera in the beginning either. When all you have is a cheap P&S you make sure the get the best of it, which i did. I still enjoy seeing those 6 megapixel images today.

The more access to technology we have, the less we tend to try to become better ourselves. Do you agree?

Do you blame the gear when things go wrong and the images are just not right?

The reality is that the changes in cameras in the early days were fundamental improvements. Tech now, however is chasing incremental levels of refinement which are probably not even needed for much picture taking. There is no need to constantly look for the latest.

 

[tbcass]

Ensure the continual decline of overall camera Sales.

There will always be a segment of photographers for which smartphones aren't good enough just like in film days where Instamatics weren't either. Eventually, it will reach an equilibrium where people replace broken cameras and young enthusiasts get old enough to buy new ones. Population growth ensures some increase in sales. That is the way the business was before the digital revolution and that is the way it's becoming now. The fact that digital cameras don't last as long as film cameras do will result in more rigorous replacement sales.

 

[Bob A L]

Great response. I concur completely. But realize if everyone was like me, the camera manufacturers would be in big big trouble considering my most recent equipment purchases this year were a 10 year old camera body and a 15 year old zoom lens. Both work flawlessly and are used on a regular basis.