Wish list

[johne37179]

<p>If you could buy your ideal equipment, including cameras, lenses, tripods, lighting, computers, software, etc., what would you get and how much would it cost?<br>

Do you have a rich and generous uncle?</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I would buy the ability to make my subjects instantly comfortable with me when I'm photographing them. ;-)</p>

<p>Unfortunately, it doesn't come cheap ;-)</p>

[johne37179]

<p>Ilkka, there are classes at your local pub every Friday night.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>I would probably go for a Leica M9 and a full array of lenses. I would also include the Canon Dx as a back up with a full array of f2.8 or less, L series lenses.<br>

Lighting would be Profoto of course. Computers probably Dell or Acer with 8GB RAM (I'm not very familiar with Macs). Sotware Photoshop CS5 - "extended"<br>

Tripods Gizto all the way, with Swiss Arca ball heads.<br>

My guess is that this stuff would run into the Millions of dollars !</p>

 

[Matt Laur]

<p>I would have: an assitant to take care of all of the annoying tasks that prevent me from doing more photography in the first place. I'm including things like laundry, cleaning up after dogs, paying taxes, grocery shopping, and all the rest. Essentially, a household and professional staff would be the best addition to the collection. But then, I suppose they'd want a day off here and there. Bah. Humbug.</p>

[johne37179]

<p>Matt: There certainly is something to be said for that. I spent years as that assistant on location and on the set before getting behind the camera full time. Having at least one assistant on a shoot is invaluable. Having two is a lot better. I'll bet it is easier today than it was when you were loading and logging film as fast as it could be shot, handling lighting, props, garments, etc. I would think that the digital world has both altered the workflow and made it easier. The art director being able to see the image on a screen as shot instead of waiting for a polaroid to check pose and lighting.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>My main wish list is rather simple: A universal (maybe 4 or 5 sizes being realistic) battery size and charger. Stop giving us ~950 mAh batteries and give us ~1900mAh, like just a few years ago...Or make a minimum CIPA rating like 400 or 500 shots. Currently, I have three batteries per cam (non dslr), at the least! And they barely last a somewhat longish afternoon/night photo outing... </p>

<p>Camera wise (nit pick):</p>

<ul>

<li>I wish the NIkon V1 had a bigger sensor and more lenses, OR</li>

<li>I wish Sony Nex had more lenses and AF a tiny bit faster, OR</li>

<li>I wish the M4/3rd Shutter was a bit quieter like the X100 or V1's electronic shutter, OR</li>

<li>Someone tell Fuji to steal/hire a Ricoh's GXR menus/ergonomic designer, OR</li>

<li>Someone tell Ricoh to stop playing the camera elitist game and lower their GXR prices a bit, OR</li>

<li>Someone tell Nikon (or Canon or Sony) to make a FF camera in the size of a d40/FM3A)</li>

</ul>

<p> </p>

[bobatkins]

<p>I'd like a camera that didn't get in the way. One that was small enough to be convenient and smart enough to figure out all the technical details and let me concentrate on the compositional and aesthetic aspects of the shot. Basically something that captured exactly what I saw at the time I saw it without getting in the way of me seeing it.</p>

<p>I don't much care what format it is, what name is on it or who makes the lenses for it.</p>

<p>We're getting there, or at least we have the technology to get there. However we are not there yet.</p>

<p>The last thing I'd want would be an EOS 1D X or Nikon D4 and a bag full of lenses.</p>

[dan_south]

If money were no object I would be shooting a Phase One digital back mounted on a technical camera with the best Rodentstock Digital

lenses. If I could hire porters I might add a nice 8x10 system. I don't have a rich uncle, but I bought a lottery ticket yesterday.

[stephen_hipperson]

<p>If I had a rich Uncle I don't suppose it would matter how much it cost. But ... here we go<br>

A van - not just any van, 4x4, with facility of lifting the side/rear to create a hide. With a racking/drawer system to keep all my gear in. (I'm presuming there's no such things as thiefs). It would also have sleeping facility, and a minor cooking facility -to make myself a cuppa or a bacon butty. And in I would put.<br>

(I use Canon as I know the kit a little better, but the equiv nikon would do)<br>

Canon (the big one) - two bodies, a 5DMIII, suite of lenses to include 300, 400, 500 with widest aperture, macro lens. Maybe a tilt and shift. <br>

Portable Lighting kit, probably 3 lights and softboxes. Ring flash, speedlights.<br>

Big tripod little tripod.<br>

a 5x4 view camera, and tripod and a selection of lenses.<br>

A good leica film camera and a selection of lenses.<br>

Filter selection.<br>

Big portable Mac and a screen.<br>

Remote releases/trolley/<br>

At home base - a professionally kitted out darkroom, able to print b&w to 5x4. Big mac, a couple of screens and a printers capable of printing from a4 to a2. software PS++ and other software. A studio with pro quality lights (hanging from ceiling on rails), backdrops, softboxes, snoots, brollies, etc. , provision for wet work (glass tanks), and other environmental setups. <br>

Or £100k and I'll just make do.<br>

And budget to update items as and when required.</p>

 

[hjoseph7]

<p>Might as well throw in the <strong>Hasselblad</strong> H4D-60 Digital SLR Camera. Push come to shove, I could always use it as a down payment for a new home. </p>

[stp]

<p>A back-up H4D body. The things are so bloody expensive that the thought of having a back-up makes me laugh, or cry.... I'm not sure which.<br>

An M9 with a set of great lenses, for when I want to go light. And to be able to say I've owned a Leica.<br>

A Hasselblad 120mm H lens, just to fill the gap, complete my set, and better enable macro shots.<br>

A Canon 70-200mm II lens, because everyone says they are so good<br>

An ability to do great portraits and candid street shots. The biggest obstacle is between the ears.<br>

Another 30-40 years of vigorous, productive life to employ all of this.</p>

[johne37179]

<p>Bob Atkins: That may be another thread -- but you make a great point. I think we tend to lose why we do this in the midst of all the technology. I remember years ago when I was doing a lot of flying and owned an airplane. They tend to be complex and unforgiving devices where your mistakes can kill you. It was only after many hundreds of hours in the same cockpit that the airplane stopped getting in the way of the flying.<br>

I think the same is true of camera systems. I love my new D7000. But I'm still in the early stages of the learning curve after nearly 6700 exposures. I'm still making dumb mistakes with the camera because I have to think about the technology and the system instead of the photography. I'm sure I will overcome this and the camera will finally move out of the way and I'll be able to play decent photographic music on it without having to think about the instrument.</p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>I would use unlimited funds as an opportunity to go places I haven't been but want to go, and to go back to those places where I screwed up photos the last time around. The camera equipment? Doesn't matter as long as handles high ISO well, and is easy to fit with rented lenses as I need them. Equipment is not the answer - but time and opportunity are the questions.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>John - I doubt that the camera will ever move out of the way since it's pretty rare that anyone uses a camera for more than a couple of years these days since that's about how long it takes for something "better" to be released. By the time whatever you have becomes second nature to you (if it ever does), you'll be looking at a new model. Many current cameras are so complex with so many options (some of which are so difficult to remember how to get to) that I'm not sure anyone ever fully learns to use them as second nature. You're still standing around extracting bodies and lenses from your bag, pushing buttons and turning dials while whatever it was you wanted to photograph has disappeared!</p>

<p>The closest thing to an ideal camera right now is probably something the size of the Olympus Pen or Sony NEX, with a really good electronic viewfinder. If someone could develop a good (and small) 24-240 or 20-200 (35mm equivalent) zoom with excellent optical stabilization for it, that might be the ideal lens. Panasonic have a optically stabilized 28-300 (equivalent) and Olympus have a 38-380 (equivalent) for M4/3, so clearly a 10x zoom ratio isn't out of the question, though starting wider makes it more difficult. Then if the software and overall operational and AF speed was improved and the menus made more user friendly it would start to come close. If it could be programmed by the user for their own program mode preferences it would be better still. I'd like to be able to hook my camera up to a PC and download a chart of what ISO settings, shutter speeds and apertures I'd want to use under various lighting, focus distance and focal length settings.</p>

<p>There are already hints at most of these functions in cameras, but nobody has gotten it all together yet in a small, convenient and easy to use package. Instead of going more and more complex, I'd like to see some smart design which maintained (or improved) performance, but increased usability.</p>

<p>It's easy to say you'd go out and buy the most expensive, powerful, cameras and lenses given an open budget, but I know that (in my case at least), it wouldn't make my photographs any better because 95% of the time I wouldn't be wheeling all that stuff around with me in a cart, and even if I was it would take me some time to decide on which body to use, which lens to pick and then try to remember how to set the camera! I guess If you're shooting in a studio, that's not a big issue, but I don't shoot in a studio. </p>

<p>This article -<a href="http://www.economist.com/node/17723028?story_id=17723028&CFID=158417495&CFTOKEN=82304636">http://www.economist.com/node/17723028?story_id=17723028&CFID=158417495&CFTOKEN=82304636</a> - presents and interesting view that more choice isn't always going to make you happier. If you have 20 lenses to pick from, that's not necessarily better than only having 2 to pick from, and in fact the more lenses you have to pick from, the unhappier you may be,</p>

[keith selmes]

<p>Speaking from the uncle perspective, this is a very scary thread :)<br>

But my photographer nephew is doing good work with my old Eos D60, which must be almost 10 years old now. I have in mind I should budget for a replacement, having last year replaced a broken zoom lens. Thankfully though, nephew seems happy with that old DSLR and just one 3rd party lens, and is doing good work with it.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I'd hire an assistant, an accountant, a lawyer, a webmaster and, most of all, a pop culture-savvy promoter to convince people that every waggle of my finger on the shutter release was a gesture of genius.</p>

<p>After all that, the equipment would be an almost insignificant factor. An iPhone or Digital Harinezumi would be good enough.</p>

[maciek_stankiewicz]

<p>Since I allready have a lovely Minolta MD system I think I would get some<br>

<strong>more lenses for my Konica Autoreflex T.</strong><br>

... and some 24x36" HF (HUGE FORMAT) camera with slide film sheets for it :)</p>

[richard_john_edwards]

<p>well ive owned a 4x5 feild camera, a Mimiya 7x7 and various SLR's.this year i get a Leica M9, so i will see if its all its cracked up to be.For me lugging the larger cameras is a bit of a bummer, sort takes the fun out of it these days, maybe when i was younger.I would like a light weight carbon fibre Manfrotto, and I guess a few more lenses than the 50mm1.4 leica and 35mm1.4 leica i have ordered (bloody 6 month wait grrrrr) better be here for my USA trip.</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>My wish list would be pretty small but expensive! So, . . . rich Uncle, listen up! (Yeah, right, . . . if I had one.)<br>

I'm content for the most part with my Canon gear that I've acquired over the years, but my 50D is getting a bit older, . . . so a 7D would be a nice replacement for it, but a 5DII could make both the 50D or 7D my backup body. Then the "icing on the cake" would be either the EF 500 or 600mm f/4 IS II, either would do with an appropriate Gimbal head! The EF 800mm can wait! Yeah, I know, . . . I'd still be manually focusing, but I could live with that!</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>I'd love for Kodak or Fuji to figure out how to make a 400 ISO colour film with the grain of Tech Pan. Failing that, Kodak could release a Portra 50 (based on the just-released VISION3 50D movie film).</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Someone tell Nikon (or Canon or Sony) to make a FF camera in the size of a d40/FM3A)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Agreed. And get rid of 80% of the features. We don't mess with film in the camera so why mess with image settings? That's what Aperture or Lightroom are for. Quality and file format settings shouldn't be an option. You just turn the camera on and get shooting.</p>

<p>And for goodness's sake, can we stop with TIF and NEF and JPG and DNG? No computer that can handle modern image files is restricted to 8+3 file names. Get over it. DNG would stay the same but JPG could be free to become JPEG and NEF could be NEFF and TIF could be TIFF. Heck, just do it for the sake of it. What is this, 1992?</p>

<p>I also fancy a RED EPIC. Perhaps for my purposes though I'd be 99% as happy with the Scarlet-X, a cheaper version with the same sensor.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I haven't noticed any issue with learning to use the camera without having to give it second thought. In fact, four out of the six DSLRs I have owned have had essentially identical user interfaces, so they can be used interchangeably. The two deviants are consumer models which have all sorts of odd user interface decision.</p>

<p>I also happen to prefer the bodies with integral vertical grips for many situations when I do a lot of portrait orientation shots. Although the body is physically bigger, the awkward position of tilting the camera 90 degrees with your right hand above your head is avoided, improving the ergonomics of shooting dramatically. Also, from the subjects' point of view, avoiding this strange position makes the photographer less alarming and distracting. I've never felt my camera gets in the way but that's because I tend to stick within the same lineup (with exceptions). I also use only one format for the same reason - so I don't have to adjust to unnecessary changes that distract from fluid use of the camera. With the user interfaces in consumer cameras and mirrorless cameras, there is nothing but distraction - they have been designed very obviously by non-photographers for non-photographers. All the most important controls are missing or function with poor responsiveness. The screen has a long delay, preventing the capture of moments. In my experience, only the mid higher-end DSLRs have what it takes for the camera not to get in the way.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>And get rid of 80% of the features. We don't mess with film in the camera so why mess with image settings? That's what Aperture or Lightroom are for. Quality and file format settings shouldn't be an option. You just turn the camera on and get shooting.</em></p>

<p>I disagree. In many practical applications, the files need to be used immediately after they're shot so the camera has to have enough flexibility so that the look of the image is suitable for the subject matter and use. Everyone uses their cameras differently; the customization needs to be there so that the camera works to the requirements of the operator.</p>

[jodys]

<p>A mini-helicopter with a 1000-mile+ range and a 1000lb payload.</p>