K.I.S.S.

[za33photo]

I for one am glad that I am using older and simpler photographic gear.

How do owners cope with these expensive and over-complicated modern camera's , filled with "features" that many will never use ,  photography should be a pleasurable experience , and not having to continuosly worry about technical settings , not so ?.

How many owners of these "wizz-bang" camera's set them to "full-auto" because they do not fully understand them ?.

😄😄😄.

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by za33photo
spelling

[Niels - NHSN]

While I do hate to acknowledge that I don't fully utilise the potential of my digital camera because I don't understand all the settings, I also appreciate that I can just take a photo, and if it looks OK on the rear screen then I probably have an OK picture.

With RAW + JPEG I also have the comfort in knowing that I (or someone more knowledgeable than me) can improve on it in case I captured a masterpiece.

I don't see any harm in that.

From the perspective of enjoyment; I certainly have more pleasure from my many film cameras - although I must admit that making a technical good photograph is much easier with my full frame digital camera or even my iPhone.

 

[AJG]

1 hour ago, za33photo said:

I for one am glad that I am using older and simpler photographic gear.

How do owners cope with these expensive and over-complicated modern camera's , filled with "features" that many will never use ,  photography should be a pleasurable experience , and not having to continuosly worry about technical settings , not so ?.

How many owners of these "wizz-bang" camera's set them to "full-auto" because they do not fully understand them ?.

😄😄😄.

SLRs

Probably a lot of them use full auto, or as I tell my students, P  on the dial doesn't stand for professional.  On my DSLRs they are on full manual 95% of the time since almost all of my professional work is done with studio flash and camera exposure meters are useless for this.  The one thing I am truly grateful for is the ability to magnify the image in live view so that I can focus accurately.  It reminds me of focusing my 4x5 with my 8X Schneider loupe, a happy memory.  The good thing about most DSLRs to this point is that you can turn off all of that automation if you have a clue about what you're doing.  But since it costs almost nothing to automate exposure and focus once you build an electronic camera, I'm not holding my breath expecting anything non-automatic any time soon.

[samstevens]

I keep my camera on manual. I don’t use many of its features but it never bothered me that features are there that I don’t use. The same goes for my TV, my phone, my car, and my toaster. I got used to modern technology and how to best deal with it about 20 years ago. These days, I just adapt to each new purchase as quickly and effectively as possibly. I get by. 

[Sanford]

Use what you already have, really nothing to be gained by trading up anymore. If you need something new to keep your interest going try a new lens. Look at the No Words thread "Vintage Digital". Besides, with few camera stores left and very little retention value in digital cameras, trading up has become an expensive proposition.

Edited June 18, 2023 by Sanford

[paddler4]

it all depends on what one photographs.

My new body, a Canon R6 Mark II, does have loads of features I won't ever use. That doesn't concern me a whit. The point for me is that it has a lot of features I do use, that make it far easier than it used to be for me to capture what I want and decrease substantially how many discards I have. 

I think about settings that impact the extent to which I succeed in capturing what I want. It's not worrying; it's part of the craft. I did the same with fully manual cameras, but I have lots more options now.

I learned in the B&W film days, starting in the late 1960s. My first two SLRs were completely manual, although both did have an internal meter. Since going digital, I've owned an embarrassingly large number of digital cameras with lots of features. I don't think I have ever once used any of them in "auto" or "program" mode. I shoot entirely in manual, aperture priority, or shutter priority mode. 

I'll give one example of a "whiz-bang" feature that helps me a great deal. I shoot a lot of candids of little kids. Little kids are constantly moving in unpredictable ways. I used to have lots of discards because it was so hard to maintain focus as they moved around. Now I have very few discards. If there is only one kid in the frame, I can tell the camera to use the whole frame for autofocus and to track people. I can then forget about focusing and instead pay attention to composition, capturing the right expression, and settings that matter, like aperture. If there are multiple people, I can set the camera so that if I manually focus on one, it will then track that person anywhere in the frame, focusing on the head if no eyes are visible and the eyes if they are. Having this advantage required that I spend some time learning to use a complex autofocus system. Time very well spent. 

I'll give one more. Starting all those years ago, I've learned lots of ways to meter in difficult lighting, but the fact is that I sometimes get it wrong. With my old digital cameras, I would have to take a shot and then look at the histogram on the LCD to see whether I needed to add exposure compensation or, if in manual, simply change a setting. Now I can have an RGB histogram in the viewfinder, so I can get the same information while I'm composing the shot. Very helpful.

Are there lots of people who buy fancy cameras and don't really have a use for them? I assume so. 

[httpwww.photo.netbarry]

13 hours ago, za33photo said:

I for one am glad that I am using older and simpler photographic gear.

How do owners cope with these expensive and over-complicated modern camera's , filled with "features" that many will never use ,  photography should be a pleasurable experience , and not having to continuosly worry about technical settings , not so ?.

How many owners of these "wizz-bang" camera's set them to "full-auto" because they do not fully understand them ?.

😄😄😄.

 

Nice rant.  You know you don't have to use one.

[Ricochetrider]

There are certainly times when it's way more about the journey than the destination... but in photography the "destination" rates pretty highly. I use my "modern' (ie: digital) cameras to kinda just get it done; it's more of a conveninece factor for me. I admit to getting far more actual enjoyment out of my older film cameras. In the end tho, if the shots are great, and you & your viewers are pleased, memories preserved,  moments captured etc- how much does it really matter how it came to be? IMO there's no wrong way. 

 

All that being said, I dont even try to understand the functions on my modern cameras. I learn enough to make them work for me.  

[Niels - NHSN]

19 hours ago, Ricochetrider said:

All that being said, I dont even try to understand the functions on my modern cameras. I learn enough to make them work for me.  

There is always the "how do I make it stop doing that" period in the beginning. For me, that is always longer than the "how do I make it do that" period.

[Ricochetrider]

3 hours ago, Niels - NHSN said:

There is always the "how do I make it stop doing that" period in the beginning. For me, that is always longer than the "how do I make it do that" period.

LOL yep. I basically want to shoot straight RAW with zero filters, in either full manual or Aperture Priority but when stuff gets weird (toy camera mode to name but one example) ya gotta handle it ha ha ha 

[Robin Smith]

I do not regret giving up film at all. Greater than medium format quality even from m43 and easy "development". AF systems are miles better than my film cameras. Easy storage and cataloging. Then there is the revolution in lens quality stimulated by digital. I have a bunch of film cameras that bring back happy memories, but I never use them. I always think I will use up my residue of film in the freezer, but never actually get to it. Cameras are complicated, much of it is AF or video related, but you just have to pick out the items that matter to you and ignore the rest. I like being in control of the process from start to finish, which never was the case when I shot color film.

[Ed_Ingold]

You had to know a lot more using "vintage" cameras, with no automation, than for modern cameras. That said, I frequently use manual mode when consistency is more important than being "right." An example would be formal group photos at a wedding.

If you want simplicity, look no further than the cell phone in your pocket. Their automation is superb, and they're always with you.

[David_Cavan]

I shot film for 35 years, switched to digital 22 years ago and have never missed the old school stuff. The features on modern cameras are fantastic, and I can choose to go from P to M with all the variations of T & A in between from sequence to sequence.  The ability to over/underexpose easily, reset ISO, review what I've shot, and do some video is a fantastic way to live and photograph. I'm glad there's people out there still doing film, but I have no interest in going down those roads again. I might just have turned 73, but I'm by no means stuck doing what I've always done. Oh, and I'm adding Midjourney AI into the mix to help keep things fresh.

BTW, I came home from a contract at a local racetrack last Sunday evening with 2100 images, and I've been able to fire off 8 different sets of 50-to-100 shots to race teams as of last evening using the digital tools that are available now. I'm very content that I can do these things, and I'm looking forward to the next upgrade, which is to Canon mirrorless, later this year.

[za33photo]

I would actually like to see the Camera Manufacturers dropping the "bloatware features" , and put the money in improving the build quality of their digital camera's.

Modern digital camera's are not built to very high standards in my opinion . only one manufacturer stands out but the camera's and lenses are priced out of reach of the average Joe 😁.