Prosumer vs. DSLR approach

[John Chandler]

I thought some of you may enjoy this. It reflects many of my thoughts too, and it's some of the reasons I haven't yet added a DSLR to my photographic tools--yet. The link below was sent to me by a professional photographer who is amused at the belief that many people have that by buying a DSLR camera and expensive lenses, it will make them a better photographer.

http://reviews.ebay.com/Olympus-C-8080-Rangefinder-Camera-vs-DSLR-Approach_W0QQugidZ10000000000004230?ssPageName=BUYGD:CAT:-1:SEARCH:5

Most people give lip service to the idea that "it ain't the camera." But, do they really believe it? I do. I've seen it. Put a P&S in the hands of a great photographer and they will make great photos. Put the most expensive DSLR in the hands of a mediocre photographer, and they will make mediocre photos -- and often times not as good as they could get with a P&S.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against DSLRs in any way -- they do have some significant advantages,* if* you need them. And, they are a necessity for many professional requirements, including the requirements for large reproduction in print, and making large prints for sale. But, how many of us have those requirements? If one is posting only posting their photos to the Internet, and making small prints, even a 2 mp camera will do.

No P&S shooter should feel like a second class citizen, and no DSLR shooter should feel superior. It's all in the "eye," and I believe that can be learned as well, or better, with a P&S as with a DSLR.

--John C.
C-8080WZ
http://www.pbase.com/johnchandler

 

[lkv11]

Great link! I fully agree with you. Well said.

 

[Wayne N.]

No P&S shooter should feel like a second class citizen, and no DSLR shooter should feel superior. It's all in the "eye," and I believe that can be learned as well, or better, with a P&S as with a DSLR.

Everything you say makes sense.

My c770 is a very advanced and capable camera, and there are MANY things about it that I still appreciate over my dslr. In fact, when I pick up my c770, I am amazed at just how much sophistication fits into such a tiny (and robust) body.

Of course, the opposite is true as well. There were some areas where the c770 was at times affecting my ability to get a shot (ie focusing issues, high iso capability), and many of those issues are definately lessened (if not resolved). Also, I wanted a RAW capable camera. And I wanted something huge to lug around lol!

Then again, the dslr presents a whole new set of things to think about. For example, my dslr is not nearly so forgiving with the DOF as my c770 is. With my c770, I mainly would have it at f/5 or f/5.6, and it would get everthing in focus for landscape shots. No such luck with the dslr, as I really have to pay attention to aperture, which greatly affects shutterspeed etc.

So back to your main premise - I couldn't agree more.

Cheers,

Wayne
http://www.pbase.com/wayne_n

 

[John Chandler]

And it should go with out saying, but perhaps I should have said it: As far as I'm concerned, both are welcome on OTF. I think there is a great deal we can continue to learn and enjoy from each other.

--John C.

 

[Typeaux]

Enjoyed the article, John. The author brings up several points that I take for granted with my C-8080 that I would surely miss with a dSLR.

The part of your post that hits home for me was this:

Put the most expensive DSLR in the hands of a
mediocre photographer, and they will make mediocre photos -- and
often times not as good as they could get with a P&S.

That is also "incrementally" true of my own experience, in that my smaller 2.1 MP Oly D490Z often prompted me to be more creative, and its LACK of features often allowed me more flexibility in composition because I didn't have to think about anything except framing and shooting.

The C-8080 may not be a dSLR, but it is anything but a "simple" camera. It has more options than any camera I have ever owned, some of which I can only understand through experimentation since here is no equivalent feature in a film camera of any size, at any price.

I have no illusions that having a dSLR will make me a better photographer. I can and do take some good photos, but until I can do it more consistently, I will continue using the C-8080 until it all becomes more "automatic" (meaning habitual, where I don't have to think about it so much) and I can concentrate more on composition and less on exposure, white balance, depth of field, and all the other numerous things that should (if I want to say that I'm even an accomplished amateur) be able to do reflexively, without conscious thought.

It is this ability of yours, John, that I admire about your photography. It is all second nature to you, and transcends whatever camera you happen to be using. It is a very important lesson for all of us, and I appreciate your generosity in sharing your experience and knowledge with us, whether it is nuts and bolts technique, of your overall philosophy of taking photographs.

If I haven't said it before, thank you.

-- Typeaux

The only test of an image is the satisfaction it gives you. There simply isn't any other test.

 

[John Chandler]

Thank you for your comments. I think they are helpful.

Many years ago, a very wise and famous photographer told me, "John, learn everything you can about the technical aspects of photography, then forget it as fast as you can." Meaning, of course, don't let technical things get in the way of composition and vision.

I think some people are more interested in the technical aspects of photography, and some are more interested in the "art." And that's fine. No, it's more than fine: it's good. Because, a person should be free to do what they enjoy without any value judgements from others -- as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

But, the truth is, it generally takes some of both to consistently do one's best work. It's not an either/or proposition. The key to me is to master the tools one has to work with. It's amazing what can be accomplished with the most basic tools.

--John C.

 

[John Chandler]

It is this ability of yours, John, that I admire about your
photography. It is all second nature to you, and transcends
whatever camera you happen to be using.

That's a very nice complement. I appreciate it, and your other kind remarks as well. In fact, I feel more than a little embarrassed.

But, I should point out that it's not all so second nature to me. I wish it were. I have to do lots of thinking when I make a photo. And I make many mistakes in the heat of the battle. I'm constantly fighting getting excited and getting in too much of a hurry in fear I'll miss the photo -- even when I'm photographing a big rock in the middle of a stream -- go figure -- that rock is not going anywhere.

First, and foremost, and most important for me is the composition. Then I go to work to "previsualize" the final image, and what I want it to look like. Then I try to determine what will be necessary with the exposure, and post processing to produce that final image that I have in mind. Things like: focal point and DOF; what is too light or too dark; what will need to be cropped out, are there any visual pollutants in the image that I need to work around, or frame out; and so fourth.

I'm anything but successful much of the time. I still have a lot to learn and I have my share of failures. But, by being aware of these types of things, and trying, does seem to help get a higher percentage of decent photos.

Granted, having experience and quick working knowledge of the technical alternatives does help. But that only comes with practice. Which is all the more reason to go out and take more photos. How can you have successes if you don't try?

--John C.

 

[SMBooth]

any camera that you can adjust the settings will allow you to take good photos. Prosumer and SLR both have their problem that need to be worked around.
It your attituide that takes good photos not your camera
--
Shane
http://australianbushwalking.fotopic.net
Adjust your monitor

 

[Typeaux]

It your attituide that takes good photos not your camera

All this time I thought it was your altitude that takes good photos. So, I've done my best to be as high as possible.

This clears up a lot .

Thanks, Shane. ;o)

-- Typeaux

The only test of an image is the satisfaction it gives you. There simply isn't any other test.

 

[Henry Falkner]

I never even got to the C-8080. Instead, last week I stuck an H type card into my C-750UZ for shorter shot-to-shot times at SHQ.

Main reason is, the money is going into the house, technically I have not been single for five years.

I did get a new camera last year - a splashproof Stylus 800. Still, I get good comments for pictures from both these cameras in my pbase galleries.

Portability is a major consideration. After that, it is a toss-up whether I am going to do long tele shots, or take movies in the rain.

Slightly OT, my new laptop, together with a D-Link tuner, can capture videos from my 1998-vintage DV camcorder. This means, I don't need urgently a new still camera that does 640x480 movies at 30 frames per second. Now I can transfer and edit our Disney World trip, from 2004, from DV tapes to DVD.

At the age of 64, it takes me more than six months to get the best out of any new equipment that I buy.

Sour grapes? Of course.

But I do want Sandra in my life. This place would have collapsed and buried all my toys without her. Gains on the swings, losses on the roundabouts.

Henry

--
Henry Falkner - C-750UZ, Stylus 800 http://www.pbase.com/hfalkner

 

[Larry Lynch]

Late to the thread (as usuall) but Im going to chime in and agree with you John.....

Over in the Oly DSLR forum there is so much rending of shirts, and crying going on because Oly hasnt yet announced a replacement for the E-1... Its detrimental to ones health to be reading that forum right now...

Its so bad over there I came up with a new sig while pondering everyones "weeping" about how they NEED a better Pro level camera RIGHT NOW..knowing in my own mind that none of the weepers will buy it 'till it hits "clearance sale" prices...

I've got E-1/E-300/E-500 and C770... The C770 still gets at least a weekly workout, because it does such nice things with photons.
--

Put one hand on each cheek..Now the solution to better photography is in your hands

Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

 

[John Chandler]

Thank you for your comments. Your remarks reminded me of something I try to keep in mind about equipment: As long as it works like it is supposed to, it is not "obsolete." It still does what it did in the first place. And many times that's more than good enough. Many people take pride in using "old" equipment and getting as good results at those with the latest, most expensive available.

--John C.

 

[jennyi]

I can't, for some reason, get the link but I get the jist of what it must have said. But hey, I said similar in my post below.

Here's what I said:

And you know what? What is called "just" the P&Ss have left me feeling very inadequate. I've seem some fantastic photos from them, from you guys. I have the C750 and NEVER took photos like I've seen some of you take. I may now have the E-300, but trust me, you P & Sers leave me in the dust.
--
http://photobucket.com/albums/b325/maggiesue1/

 

[John Chandler]

You are really not that late. After all this is OTF, we move at a slower pace.

Thank you for chiming in. And your new "sig." is right on the money. It hits the nail on the head. It's dead on, etc., etc., etc.

--John C.

 

[John Chandler]

I'm sorry the link is not working for you. I just tried it and it worked fine. If you get a chance, you might try again. I think you may find that it's worth reading.

Thanks for dropping in, and for your comments. I think what you said is helpful.

--John C.

 

[stewart6]

Photography is not without its snobbery. A bit like wine tasting I have been in photography since the negatives were made of glass and the shutter was a lensecap.The point and shoot camera is a very sophisticated piece of equipment and will outguess most photographers except in unusual lighting such as back lit subjects etc I have no more ambition to return to lugging a trunkfull of expensive lenses around in a case the size of a modest trunk than I have of returning to smelly darkrooms.

Some people still buy stickshift cars and that's fine so long as they don't tell me that I'm a philistine for driving an automatic. Take care and best regards. Stewart

 

[John Chandler]

Stewart,

Well, you certainly have been around a long time. I've been around quite a while, but not that long. So, you know that some of those "old masters" made some of the best photos ever made with the most rudimentary equipment and under very difficult conditions too. And you are quite correct in that most of the P&Ss are very smart cameras. It is easier now to make technically good photos than ever before. But, I don't think it's gotten any easier to make good compositions.

I appreciate you dropping by and offering your thoughts biased on many years of experience.

--John C.

 

[Typeaux]

Photography is not without its snobbery. A bit like wine tasting

You're absolutely right. About 16 years ago, a group of my friends wanted to taste fine wines but take the snobbery out of it, so we started our wine group, the Pompous Twits. We gave it that name for a couple of reasons, but mostly it was to remind us that the only real test was "yum" or "yuck" no matter how much it costs. )

The other reason was that wine maker Randall Grahm (Bonny Doon winery) pulled up to the wine shop in his car that had a bumper sticker (remember those?) that said, "You don't have to be a pompous twit to enjoy fine wine!" We've been testing that premise ever since.

You don't have to be a photography snob to take superb photographs, either. Look what Marion just accomplished, after all. It's all good.

-- Typeaux

The only test of an image is the satisfaction it gives you. There simply isn't any other test.

 

[AK3D]

What a nice link, and a great post by you. I agree with most points. I know a photographer here - Mr Vivek Desai, and he's well renowned (all over India, infact) - for him, it doesn't matter if he's shooting with a hasselblad or with a compact camera. He will take his own time to think, compose, and shoot his own way. Shooting has only gotten easier with the P&S, and even a 4MP camera like mine gives superb large prints. All in all, the equipment does matter, only when you know what you're doing with it. As Wayne pointed out earlier, the C770 has its advantages (as I well know), and it has its disadvantages. Now, I would REALLY love a DSLR, but that would be to suit my style of street and portrait shooting (if you care to follow the link in my signature) , I guess. I think I'm alright with the C770, but a DSLR, with its faster speed/low light focussing/high and clean ISO would suit me even more. BUT, till the time I have it, this is a great camera to have. Why, till a couple years ago, I had a manual SLR, you had to change both the shutter speed, and the aperture and also had to allow for the metering - there was no spot meter in it, but an average thing. I used it for over 15 years and by the time I outgrew it (had never used an AF slr!) and that was because the camera died, finally, and it wasn't repairable. That was the time I was on the lookout for a new camera, and Wayne's posts and photographs with the 770 had a (good I believe) influence on me! Again, my thanks for the thread and link. I wish people would realise that its the photograph that matters, not what box that made the image.
--
-- Aamir --
3D/Multimedia
Olympus C770
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aamir

 

[Michael Meissner]

I thought some of you may enjoy this. It reflects many of my
thoughts too, and it's some of the reasons I haven't yet added a
DSLR to my photographic tools--yet. The link below was sent to me
by a professional photographer who is amused at the belief that
many people have that by buying a DSLR camera and expensive lenses,
it will make them a better photographer.

http://reviews.ebay.com/Olympus-C-8080-Rangefinder-Camera-vs-DSLR-Approach_W0QQugidZ10000000000004230?ssPageName=BUYGD:CAT:-1:SEARCH:5

We've been having this debate over in the Olympus SLR forum with the amount of measurebators publicially announcing they are deserting the fold for some new, greener pasture. I ripped into one that had bought $6k worth of stuff, and then suddenly decided that it wasn't happy because the E system didn't provide a camera that could do 5fps, because 'all pros' need that.

Most people give lip service to the idea that "it ain't the
camera." But, do they really believe it? I do. I've seen it.
Put a P&S in the hands of a great photographer and they will make
great photos. Put the most expensive DSLR in the hands of a
mediocre photographer, and they will make mediocre photos -- and
often times not as good as they could get with a P&S.

Well yes and no. A great photographer can only take great photographs within the limits of his/her equipment. There are many, many great photos that don't need to push the limits of what the equipment can do, but there are photos where you need that extra advantage. If I have a camera, I try to realize what is limitations are and shoot within those. However, there are cameras I have threatened to throw against the wall if it won't acheive a focus lock

For example, one of the reasons I got the E-1 and the lenses I own is because it is weather sealed, and I have some pictures that were taken in the middle of Niagara Falls or in a pouring rainstorm, but 99.99% of my photos where taken in dryer conditions. If I had had my C-2100UZ along, I would have just kept it in the ziploc (tm) bag I keep for such emergencies, and not taken the picture. By the same token, two weeks ago, I was at the Maryland Renaissance Faire, and the site is fairly wooded, and I was finding it hard to get the telephoto shots with the E-1 + 50-200mm lens, that I got more easily with the C-2100UZ (E-1 I had to shoot at ISO 800 to avoid camera shake, while the C-2100UZ with its stabalization could take the pictures at ISO 100/200). I was frustrated taking pictures of my daughter's dorm room because I only had a camera whose wide angle was 35mm, and I couldn't back up any further.

Am I a tech junkie? Perhaps. I tend to be frustrated when I see a picture that would be great, but I don't have gear to render the scene as I see it with my eyes. I have a whole bunch of photos that I've seen while driving, and not been able to pull over to capture them.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against DSLRs in any way -- they do
have some significant advantages,* if* you need them. And, they
are a necessity for many professional requirements, including the
requirements for large reproduction in print, and making large
prints for sale. But, how many of us have those requirements? If
one is posting only posting their photos to the Internet, and
making small prints, even a 2 mp camera will do.

Assuming the 2mp camera will take the picture. As you know, I still shoot with my trusty 2MP C-2100UZ, though I am beginning to wonder how long the grand old dame will last.

No P&S shooter should feel like a second class citizen, and no DSLR
shooter should feel superior. It's all in the "eye," and I believe
that can be learned as well, or better, with a P&S as with a DSLR.

Again it is a matter of knowing the equipment. For instance, the C-2100UZ has a shutter lag, like many cameras of its era. But by compensating and anticipating the action, I was able to take various pictures with what I thought was the defining moment. However I do have to think about retraining my fingers when I switch between the cameras, since the E-1 has much less lag time.

I recently picked up a Fuji F30 to use as a pocket camera for social gatherings where I don't want to announce I'm carrying a camera, and I've had to relearn how to shoot with a completely auto camera, picking the appropriate scene mode to capture the image that I want.