People moaning and whining about cameras - why?

<p>On every photographic website and especially YouTube there are people moaning about cameras and lenses. I try to filter it out to get to the good stuff but recently with the mirrorless systems being discussed the moaning and whining seems to have got worse. I use the term moaning but that is putting it politely as often threads completely derail with twaddle.</p>

<p>I don't think I have ever moaned about a camera or a lens in my whole life. I have used some that were downright poor but I still used them as best I could. No moaning. I still could get a decent photo if I tried. But now we have photographers telling us how things are downright unusable and making a real fuss. Some examples:<br>

Lenses with 'unacceptable' fringing, aberrations, colour, sharpness, vignetting, distortion...blah blah blah.<br>

Cameras that are 'unusable' due to one button not being just where they might wish or missing some fluff feature.<br>

Moans about whole manufacturers for not being making what they want and how they are making a big fuss about 'moving' to another brand.<br>

How their bad experience with one item whips them up into a right tizzy and everyone must be told.<br>

How they tried something in the shop and found out then and there it was no good and take time to tell others how they should find it no good too.<br>

Commenting how their choice is the only logical one because how all the other brands are so far behind. Especially true for those chasing the megapixels.</p>

<p>Most of these comments are backed up by often pretty flaky photos and half-baked 'facts'. Honestly, we are so spoiled at the moment with the use of not only all the great lenses and kit from the past but new stuff too. The only thing I could perhaps moan about is the effort it takes to actually get the good photos in the first place which shows up my lack of skill and experience at times.</p>

<p>I remember David Bailey (as an experiment) using a basic Box Brownie camera to take photos of the Queen. The photos were great - and that has got to be one of the most limiting and unergonomic cameras ever. So why so much moaning about kit? What triggers this off? Are people honestly that upset about photographic kit?</p>

<p>It's a sign of just how wonderful and easy life is. Entitled wankers using some percentage of their finite lifetimes to complain about how nearly miraculous, affordable technology is in some hair-splitting way not designed the way they would personally do it if they had <em>any</em> possibility of ever actually getting off their rear ends and achieving anything of that caliber in their entire lives anyway. Which of course they could never do. <br /><br />First World problems indeed!</p>

<p>I think people simply feel more like 'experts' when they point out the 'flaws' in something, and everyone on the internet is an expert.</p>

<p>And everything you read on the internet is absolutely true and believable! The internet says so.</p>

<p>A lot of spoiled brats, used to complaining, because the world owes them. Sorry if that is harsh, but I see it every day in peoples' behavior, failing to take responsibility for things. I used to complain about them, but when I heard my adult daughter complaining about the "winers", it jolted me and I accept that a generation or two just needs to mature. On the positive side, I'm inspired by many young people who are strongly motivated and manage to achieve goals without groaning and complaining along the way. In my volunteer work I often intermingle with young people who are physically and developmentally challenged and they seem to really do what is necessary to enjoy life, instead of blaming it. Enough proselytising. Thanks for bringing it up Ian.</p>

<p>I suppose it depends a little on what your references are and where you're coming from. </p>

<p>If you think photography is what you see on the internet, and expect the thing in your hand to emit the painstakingly processed images you see there with a click, then life will be disappointing. </p>

<p>After a lifetime of shooting slides, I think it will be a long time before I stop saying "oh wowee" every time I am able to take a free throwaway shot, or vary ISO with the flick of a wheel! </p>

<p>It is also, of course, much easier to blame problems on something other than oneself. I couldn't have figured something out, so it must have been gods from space. I can't get that picture, so my camera is no good. </p>

<p>I had a boss once who, at his weekly meetings, insisted that everyone present a problem and a solution to that problem, even if a problem didn't exist. I have learned one thing though, if four or five camera reviews mention a particular camera has, for example, auto focus issues, it probably does. </p>

<p>Good comments. You know, I was almost believing the complaints at one stage. They were delivered with such authority how could they <em>possibly</em> be wrong? I sometimes visit a few other popular photographic websites, not only for inspiration but to keep up with the new technology. Recently they are more depressing than interesting so I prefer to just use what I think I may like and see how it goes.</p>

<p>Matt and Bill nail the main reasons, I think. Complaining makes you seem knowledgeable, and is a lot easier than simply working around the quirks, enjoying and making the best of things.</p>

<p>I think it is the inevitable risk of making things more user-friendly: people need less fundamental basic knowledge to get good to very good results from the device, actually be completely proficient with it. It creates a dependency, though - as ultimately, when the userfriendliness doesn't do its thing right, what next? Claiming a camera is bad because its autofocus doesn't do what you want it to do, to me in other words "<em>I don't know how to focus manually</em>"; the camera is under- or overexposing, a.k.a. "<em>I do not understand how my light meter works, I just follow it blindly</em>". And so on.<br>

The technological improvements aren't a bad thing, as they usually do work, but having those backed up with knowledge and understanding how to intervene when they don't do what is needed still works better. And many do not see a reason to learn that - blaming the gear is easier than admitting you lack knowledge (a problem not unique to photography, see the average computer helpdesk of forum: very much the same).<br>

I cannot and will not claim I'm any better, though. I'm pretty sure I've complained about my gear. Not because it upsets me, but rather when the result just isn't as hoped, and I cannot get the reason why. Blaming the gear is the lovely easy way out.</p>

<p>I spend money only on the best possible choice - for me. If I cite the features I consider important as the reason for my choice, others are free to decide for themselves. Sony A7 cameras have been dissed for lack of a touch screen, which is of no consequence to me. It is described as huge, perhaps compared to pocket cameras (but not to a Leica). I would like better battery life and uncompressed raw images, but four extra batteries fit nicely in a pocket (in a folding pouch, never needed more than two in a day) and I've never found any artifacts due to compression. Sony won't squeeze much more capacity into that thumb-sized battery, but uncompressed raw files is on their short list for a firmware upgrade.</p>

<p>I just learned that putting the A7 into Airplane Mode (Wi-Fi off) extends battery life. That certainly saves energy in an iOS device, and I only used Wi-Fi in the Sony to see how it worked (it works well). It's worth a try.</p>

<p>As that's not affecting me or situations/people I care about, that won't be getting me worked up.</p>

<p>Personally, I'm only a step away from writing next great <strong><em>shakespearean</em></strong> drama - or comedy - haven't decided yet. I just need to find a right quill and pot of ink.</p>

<p>Things I don't care about that can lower a camera's ratings: WiFi (never use), Video (never use), Too Expensive (willing to wait until discontinued & discounted) and my favorite, poor location of on-off switch (who care about a switch you use once or twice a day!). Reviewers will praise a camera's small size and then recommend adding a grip because its too small. They rave about the quality of Fuji's 16mb sensor and then tell up they really need to offer a bigger one.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I remember David Bailey (as an experiment) using a basic Box Brownie camera to take photos of the Queen.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />Are you saying that the Brownie is a bad camera? It's a great tool for that assignment. A soft lens, a negative large enough to work on, and lowered expectations are just the things one would want.</p>

<p>Hector, if I remember correctly it was the celebration of 100 years of the Box Brownie and David had been doing some portraits with his own camera then swapped over to the Brownie. You are right, the photos were excellent - I use my own Brownie (1930 model) for a similar effect. When you take time to understand the Brownie and what it can and can't do the resultant photos can be magic.</p>

<p>Sometimes I moan about cameras, though I rarely moan about people moaning about cameras!</p>

<p>I think we all know that a modern camera is rarely the limiting factor. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't criticise obvious misfeatures, or (e.g.) be enthusiastic about a company that has crippled some function purely for reasons of 'product differentiation'. If you hang out on gear forums, be prepared for robust discussion, not all of it entirely logical. There are other places where the more important aspects of photography (which generally transcend gear) are discussed, some of them even on photo.net!</p>

<p>Now I am beginning to wonder what we are all doing in a forum like this one?<br>

<br /> Instead of sharing our experiences and knowledge, why don't we just resort to the few answers that don't look as if we are complaining about anything: it is what it is, deal with it. Distortion - deal with it. Poor ergonomics - deal with it (and you should be using a tripod anyway). Softness in the corner - live with it. Limited memory buffer - it is what it is, deal with it. <br /> <br /> We could also throw in a couple RTFMs and "google that" for good measure. And then we can all wax on about the philosophy of photography and how everything was so much better in the "good old days".</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Now I am beginning to wonder what we are all doing in a forum like this one?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Living irony. ;-)</p>

<p>To whine, on just about anything, not merely camera equipment, is human nature. At least that is my experience.</p>

<p>In the immoral words of "Yoda"-- "Do or do not do, but <em>don't whine</em>!"</p>

<p>I figure that if I've spent my own money. that I worked hard for, on a piece of equipment and that equipment doesn't meet my expectation (legitimately) in some respect, I am "entitled" to whine. It's the same for cars, kitchen appliances, or anything else I've paid for. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>In the immoral words of "Yoda"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't you mean "immortal"? And I thought he said: <em><strong>Try not. Do…or do not. There is no try.” </strong></em> Granted, it was said in response to Luke's whining.<strong><br /></strong></p>

<blockquote>

<p>Living irony. ;-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>;-)</p>

<p>I was trying to write a constructive comment but then realized there is no try.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>On<strong> every photographic website</strong> and especially YouTube <strong>there are people moaning about cameras and lenses.</strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>+</p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong>To whine,</strong> on just about anything, not merely camera equipment,<strong> is human nature.</strong> At least that is my experience.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And they get more fun to do it to a <em>perceived </em>big audience.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>I believe a lot of people pronounce judgement without considering what the camera was disigned to do or the market that was targeted. Not necessarily here but I hear a lot of trashing of kodak but their products are for people who had no desire or need for higher end cameras and just wanted to catch moments with snapshots. Their products performed very well in this respect. Besides, how many here started with Brownies as kids before moving on to mserious stuff? ( makes the brownie a classic in a sense). This is not a scientific and probably subjective observation. Kodak decided to let everyone else fight for a share of the high end market and they pick their own niche and I think it was very wise of them. I sure if they really wanted to compete in the high end market they could have had more impressive products. </p>