douglas_green1 Posted July 11, 2003 Share Posted July 11, 2003 Jean Baptiste, I accept your metaphor, but the folks who take pictures with automatic cameras are not PHOTOGRAPHERS, any more than your computer users are PROGRAMMERS. Anyone can use a photo to take a picture. But one must actually understand the elements of the photo, and how they got there, and how to re-create and vary the respective elements of the image, to manipulate it, to say what they want it to say, in order to be a photographer. It's one thing to get a camera that puts on the film, just what you see in the viewfinder. That has very little to do with being a photographer. What draws that distinction is someone who composes an image, and knows in their mind what they WANT the image to look like, and then uses any equipment that they care to in order to create that image. Snapshots are images that reproduce a scene as it existed in actual life. Photographs are images that communicate a message that wasn't already there to be merely recorded by the next individual with an automatic camera that just happened along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_manning Posted July 11, 2003 Author Share Posted July 11, 2003 I bought two books off of Amzanon for Beginners. The Basic Book of Photography The Photographers Handbook I figure after these I can move on to the mroe advanced Shaw, National Geographic, and Exposure Books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbq Posted July 11, 2003 Share Posted July 11, 2003 Douglas : I see what you mean, but let me slightly disagree. You're implying that the fact that a camera is all-automatic (or has some all-automatic modes) prevents a photographer (as opposed to snapshooter) from taking good pictures. I don't think that this is true. A good photographer will be able to make great pictures with a Holga, with an F5, or with APS disposable, or with a Sinar P2. With a bit of practice, a good photographer will learn the characteristic of those cameras and will use all those characteristics as creative tools. Honestly, don't tell me that the F5 is bought by snapshooters. Or the 1Ds. They're used pretty much exclusively by pro photographers. And they're as automatic as cameras get. Any artist will tell you that they can manage to work with whatever equipment they have at hand - and they'll tell you that they have their favorite equipment, and they'll tell you that they don't know why it's their favorite equipment. Anyway, week-end is almost here, time to go and take some pictures... (I'm a week-end snapshooter myself...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_appel Posted July 11, 2003 Share Posted July 11, 2003 Good for you Sean. Now go out and burn LOTS of film- The only way to really learn. My objections to the modern, computer marvel, electronic everthying cameras are that one, they are noisy. Two, if the battery dies you now have a paper weight.Three, they are big, heavy and bulky, sort of defeating the idea of a 35 in the first place. Three, they can be way complicated to use. It seems that if you know enough to know what exposure mode you want to use, it is just as easy to set the shutter and f stop apropriately. As an old wanker, I have a number of 50year old cameras that work quite well, thank you very much. And I wonder how many Rebels, ZX-m"s, etc, will still be operattional 50 years from now. Of coarse it won't matter as we will all be using digital :(. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brainbubba_motornapkins Posted July 11, 2003 Share Posted July 11, 2003 Bruce, You don't know what you're talking about. Leave it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 Jean Baptiste, I never said that the modern do-everything camrera prevents a serious photographer from making serious images. Merely that they are designed so as to get beginners into the habit of relying on the camera, rather than relying on their own instincts. And that they do not make it as easy as manual gear for the serious user to control the various elements that make the image. Certainly an F5 doesn't impede control to the degree that an N55 or an EOS Rebel does. But it's still not as easy to use manually as an F3 or F4. It is, of course more capable when used automatically than these other cameras. But an F5 is not what we were discussing in this thread - it's nearly unique among AF cameras in that it's designed almost exclusively for professional use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_appel Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 To Back Shooter- I beg to differ. I do know what I am talking about. It may not be what you think, but it is based on lots of experience and knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brainbubba_motornapkins Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 Bruce, Why do you say that all-auto SLRs are "big, heavy and bulky"? Which ones are? Compared to what? Have you ever used one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 I'd say that big and bulky are accurate, heavy is not accurate, as most of them are made with flimsy lightweight plastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_johnson3 Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 Sean..... it seems that you have a lot to think about. I would definately buy something with full manual. As a beginner, you will learn what a beginner should be learning with a full manual. How a camera works and begin to understand what has intrigued photographers for years. Start off simple, learn what you like or don't like in camera and progress. And save your money. Camera's that I would recomend? Well, everyone has had great suggestions (except for the coolpix, go digital later). Some things to think about are durability. The N65 would not be a durable camera compared to an older Nikon. I was a big fan of the Nikon FE or FE2. Don't be afraid to buy used (from a shop like B&H), they will most likely give you 90 days to test the camera. Go with your gut feeling and Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brainbubba_motornapkins Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 Yes Douglas, you would say that. And already have. Several times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_johnson3 Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 oops.... I just read where Sean bought the camera. Good for you Sean, wise choice. For the digital folks out there learn to paint with a brush, not Photoshop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_appel Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 To back shooter- I have used a friends EOS ( not sure which model), and played with my sisters Rebel.I found both to be bulky, loud, and akward in use.The zoom lenses they had on them were slow.They are battery dependant. The advance mechanisms are loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brainbubba_motornapkins Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 <P>OK Bruce, Fair enough. In your opinion, the Canons are "big, heavy and bulky". I haven't actually tried one, but I've (at least) seen a friend's Rebel. It did not strike me in any way as being big, heavy and bulky, it was not bigger or more bulky than metal SLRs apart from the early OM's, which are hardly average in their form factor (that is even without motor winds, which in all fairness ought to be included in the quation)</P> <P>I have recently acquired an auto SLR, and it is significantly smaller, and lighter than any other SLRs which I have owned and used -- except for an OM-1 which was smaller, but heavier. I have large -ish hands, and I personally found the OM-1's controls were not ergonomically pleasing to me. I posted a 'first impressions' review of my new acquisition, with links to sample photographs I've shot with it <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005NYq">here</A>.</P> <P>The zoom lenses typically bundled with consumer auto SLRs are indeed slow and not of first-rate optical quality. Can you take good pictures with them anyway? I suppose that depends on your definition of 'good pictures'. I think so. I have certainly seen any number of photographs on PN which I think are very good indeed, which were taken by plastic auto SLRs (of course I have no idea whether they were taken in full/part auto, or full manual). Regarding speed, with the fast, fine grain films that are available today, this is not nearly as big a factor as it once was.</P> <P>My new, plastic auto SLR can be operated in part/full manual mode, and it does so very, very well, including manual focus. Of course, I can't speak to other brands I haven't tried -- but then, neither can you. I sought advice on this issue and got some very reassuring information which persuaded me to try plastic <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005Ah7">here</A>:<br /> "I can't speak directly for the SA-7, but I've owned the original SA-300 since 1992?, and recently picked up a SA-5 (they're really cheap right now). The SA-300 finally cracked the area around the battery door this winter, hence the SA-5, other than that it's been no problem. Consider that this camera has been everywhere with me: road trips, hiking, bike touring, a year in the alaska bush (Bethel), 3 years here in Fairbanks, AK, lots of cold weather shooting (one in McGrath where I got about 5 frames per battery, with 2 spare batteries in my pocket to swap them out. No film advance problems, seal problems"</P> <P>It is almost certainly not as durable as a metal SLR (apart from the corrosion factor), but let's face it, very few cameras are going to meet the sidewalk and not need a trip to the repair shop. A plastic SLR, and its cheap, slow lenses can be <I>replaced</I> for less than what you will spend repairing a metal 'classic'.</P> <P>Yes, the auto SLR does depend on batteries. Guess what? So does your car. And your cell phone. And the meter in your metal camera. Etc. Why is this a big deal?</P> <P>Finally Bruce, and this applies to Doug as well, do you feel personally affronted or threatened by the existence of plastic, auto SLR's? I find your attitudes very puzzling, and you are kind of insulting the intelligence of many, many serious photographers like me, who have chosen this particular route, in my case after having used metal, manual SLRs (and a TLR) for thiry years first. Please, enlighten us.</P> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dj_soroka Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 In case you are interested, my brother, who is basically a point and shoot or Polaroid type of guy, has the following equipment for sale. Mint Nikon N2000 camera and like new Zoom Nikkor 50 mm to 135 mmm f/ 3.5 AIS zoom lens. The lens is a manual focus zoom lens that John Shaw has raved about in several of his books, and that Moose Peterson has classified an "Oldie but a goodie" in his Magic Lantern Nikon Lenses Guide. The lens looks like new, comes with front and rear lens caps, and the instruction manual. The camera is in mint condition. It has a choice of program mode, aperture priority mode or manual mode, TTL Flash (including programmed TTL flash with any AI or AIS (including AF) lenses), shutter speeds from 1 second to 1/2000, flash sync at 1/125, auto film loading, DX bar code reading of the film canister, auto film advance, built in motor winder (single shot or 2.5/frames per second), exposure compensation, self timer. The price, for the camera and lens, is $400 including shipping and insurance. The reason that the price is as high as it is is that the lens looks like new and the camera is in mint condition. The camera includes an instruction manual and strap. The 105 mm focal length is great for faces. The 85 mm focal length is great for one or two people in vertical mode or up to three people in horizontal mode. This is a great lens for people, portraits and travel photography. If you are interested, please e-mail me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dj_soroka Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 Ignore the last post. You move quickly. Posted question July 10. Today is the 12th and you've already bought yourself an FM2. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 Actually Backshooter, I'm not the slightest bit offended by the fact that you've made a conscious decision to rely on an automatic computerized camera to make your exposure and focus decisions for you. In your personal case, it very well might be a valid decision. I am simply of the view, based on my experience in mentoring numerous starting photographers, that using an automatic camera is the wrong way to LEARN photography. Once one knows what they are doing, it's perfectly reasonable to choose to use an automatic camera for the sake of convenience. But anyone who aspires to serious work really WILL NOT get the proper foundation if they are BEGINNING their experience relying on a camera that makes their decisions for them, in a manner where it is by no means clear to such a beginner WHY the computer chip in the camera was programmed to make the choices it made. They will develop bad habits, and they will not understand the fundamentals of photography, and it will limit them. If you've already developed those fundamentals, more power to you. I am simply giving my best advice to someone who asked for it. It's you who are hostile to the concept that an older camera might be a better camera. I make no bones about the fact that a Nikon F5 or a Rolleiflex 6008a or some similar gear might be a BETTER automatic focus, automatic exposure camera than some of the manual instruments that I'm recommending. But these cameras cost in the neighborhood of $1500-2000 or more just for the basic outfit. It's the automatic cameras that the vendors have intentionally "dumbed-down" the capabilities of, and which are targetted to the mass market, that I consider to be inferior to the older cameras in ergonomic terms, when used manually, that I don't consider to be useful LEARNING tools. Note, I did not say inferior picture takers, in knowledgeable hands. I DID say inferior learning tools for novices. The issue of build quality of these older metal cameras is an entirely separate issue from this, but it DOES relate to whether or not one gets the same degree of enjoyment from learning how to point a computerized camera in the right direction and pressing the button, vs. learning how to make a complex and multi-variate analog machine do one's bidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobar57 Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 Very well put Doug. All come down to LEARNING. After the person known the basics of photography then is a matter of choice: keep working with your brain or let a little computerized chip in the camera do the brain work for you. Another gadget for the lazy society in which we live. Just my personal opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_appel Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 Backshooter- I find nothing offensive or threatening in your choice of gear, or anyone elses.Use whatever makes you happy. " Never wrestle with a pig, it just gets you muddy and agravates the pig" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brainbubba_motornapkins Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 Douglas, You apparently still presume I use my new camera in full auto mode, including focus, and you continue to insinuate I do so because I'm lazy or incompetent. I don't understand why you persist with this line of argument because in the first place, you don't know how I use my camera or why I use it in a particular mode, except for what I have explicitly told you, and in the second place, I have explicitly told you I don't use the auto focus, and I don't use program mode AE, I use aperture priority to select preferred apertures, and I don't normally use full-frame evaluative metering, I use spot metering of a particular subject, then I lock exposure and compose the frame. I am in full control of my picture taking, including what I choose to point the camera at, and when I choose to snap the shutter (both things, of course, my 'full-auto' camera can't do in any case). So please, drop this particular argument because it only makes you look silly and dishonest. If you feel that any of the photos I have posted online reflect laziness and/or incompetence, please be sure and point them out to me, and we can discuss that. Perhaps you can even post some of your pictures, so we may evaluate for ourselves the claims you seem to be making that it is the equipment, and not the photographer that makes good or bad photographs. Oh, and by the way, YOU DON'T NEED TO USE ALL-CAPS TO MAKE A POINT. Gwan, I dare ya :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 Look Backshooter, My posts in this thread have had ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with YOU, until you started to attack me, and others. They are my recommendations for NOVICES who aspire to serious photography. Your photography habits and cameras are completely irrelevant to the message - It's YOU who keep interjecting yourself into it. What I am saying is that for beginners, these current automatic cameras, used automatically OR used manually, are crappy learning tools. If you're not a beginner, which, obviously, you're not, then I'm not talking about hou YOU would use them. I'm talking about how someone who has never developed the basic instincts for picture taking would use them. And for THOSE people, My earnest advice is to get a manual camera. You obviously disagree, but you are overwhelmingly in the minority if you think that the ergonomics of a modern automatic mass-market camera used manually, match the ergonomics of a 20-30 year old manual camera which was designed to be used manually as it's standard mode of operation. I have no desire to convince YOU of this. I want to make it 100% clear to OTHER folks that your opinion is an anomaly in this regard, and ONLY in this regard. The rest of your posts have nothing to do with anything I'm trying to communicate in this thread. And, as far as using caps, I'm not using all caps. I'm using SELECTIVE caps, for intentional emphasis. Clearly YOU don't get that, because you continue to misinterpret my responses in this thread as being about you. They are not. They are about novices. They only become about you when you when you interject your experience, as someone who switched from manual to automatic cameras later in the game, as somehow being relevant for beginners. Now get it through your dense skull that I could care less how YOU use your cameras, and which cameras you use. You're not a novice, and not whom I addressed with my advice here. Go ahead and shoot whatever gear you choose, however you choose to shoot it. It has nothing to do with the initial inquiry here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 BTW, BS (seems like a reasonable abbreviation for Back Shooter), none of my serious work is digital and my $29 Canon flatbed scanner is not capable of preserving the resolution and tonal range of my medium format film images, so I don't post any. If you'd like to send me $1500 for a high quality medium format film scanner, I'd be happy to send you some nice digital images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobar57 Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 It seems tome that this thread is a bit long and some recollections are due in order to refresh memory and discern who is pig,in case is there any... As we all recall Sean was asking for advice for his first camera,a beginner... some of us recomended manual cameres and some others says autofocus cameras. Here enters the first post of Back Shooter: "Sean, I recently purchased a Sigma SLR with two zoom lenses for $300 U.S. from b&h. I don't think anyone else can touch the price for a body with this feature set, and focal range (28mm wide angle to 300mm tele, and everything in between). Some people will sneer at the lenses, but I think they are very decent optical performers for the money, that have been rated similar to their nikon counterparts (i.e. autofocus, with the same zoom ranges and apertures). The camera is all-auto (focus, exposure, film advance & rewind), but can be easily set -- and used -- to part/all manual. I think cameras of this type can be excellent for beginners, and I like it after having used 'traditional' manual SLRs for thirty years. I posted a review of it here. There are also links to 'image quality' test photos I've taken with it." Then you all see the post of Douglas Green where he clearly express that the post was aimed at beginners and he was not one,etc. Here is an excerpt from one of the lat post of Back Shooter: " I have explicitly told you I don't use the auto focus, and I don't use program mode AE, I use aperture priority to select preferred apertures, and I don't normally use full-frame evaluative metering, I use spot metering of a particular subject, then I lock exposure and compose the frame. I am in full control of my picture taking, including what I choose to point the camera at, and when I choose to snap the shutter " I will question a couple of things: 1- Mr. Back Shooter, when mentioned in your first post(allow me to use caps to remark):"I think cameras of this type can be excellent for BEGINNERS, and I like it after HAVING USED 'TRADITIONAL' MANUAL SLRs for THIRTY YEARS. Don't you think that is kind of contradictory, after all what it has been discussed here, to say that an automated camera is ideal for a beginner, when in fact you never had the first hand experience? As Douglas said a pro can use a pro auto camera, as could be your case with great ease, but if you give a beginner an auto camera you are spoiling his abilities, probably even numbing his senses as artist and avoiding creativity. 2-If you use your automated camera in (look to me)full manual mode, why all the fuzz and contradiction you had created ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brainbubba_motornapkins Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 Robert, My post was in response to this statment by Doug, "you've made a conscious decision to rely on an automatic computerized camera to make your exposure and focus decisions for you." I don't know how you intend to bend the meaning of that, but it seems fairly clear to me. This is not the first time Doug has made this comment about how I photograph, but I'm hoping it's the last. The argument made by Doug and some others here is that using a full auto SLR camera in manual modes is somehow inferior to using old cameras which were (of course) designed to be used in 'manual' mode only (although in fact, many of the models which have been cited have various types of AE). Most curiously, the bitterest pill of all for you lot to swallow seems to be auto-focus, and auto film advance and rewind (although, again, many of the 'manual cameras' that have been recommended here have add-on film winders that are far more bulky, loud and kludgy than the modern SLRs you love to hate). You feel that auto-focus lenses cannot be effectively used in manual mode. I'm here to tell you that's simply not true in my experience, and even it were true, it is completely irrelevant to one's ability to learn and practice good photography. Get over it. My reply has been that, having used one full auto SLR for several weeks now in all of its various modes (full auto including auto focus; AE + manual focus; and full manual), and I can confidentally say that, ergonomically it is superior in full manual mode to the several old, manual-only SLRs which I have used. That is to say, it is easier, faster and more responsive to set this camera's controls, because, IMO, they are better designed. I have cited my use of manual cameras for thirty years, in support of my argument: no one can say that I have 'never' used manual cameras. But in fact Douglas has said this repeatedly in other threads, though I have corrected him each time. I'm frankly baffled by this crusade of the heavy metal gang. Again I pose the question: why do you palpably fear plastic, auto SLRs, and hate the idea that someone could actually learn photography with them? I have yet to hear a clear and convincing argument, just a bunch of unfounded, troglodyte prejudice that seems in much the same vein (and perhaps linked) to prejudice against digital cameras, and computer post-proccessing and printing. How unfortunate that Doug's 'nothing but the best' mentality prevents him from sharing his photographs with us. How is this a good example for beginners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobar57 Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 Fair enough,I understand you now,to each one its own.I'm an amateur,fresh. I started seriously with a Pentax K1000 and moved to a Rebel 2000 when the Pentax was stolen. Guess what..I sold the Rebel, why? It what a pain to focus in auto mode, specially in low light situation, where there was not enough texture or structure in the subject to photograph with vertical or horizontal lines,in manual mode the lens didn't feel quite smooth while focusing, the screen was quite dark, you name it. I move to a Nikon FM3A and don't regret it. Oh, and I don't use motor drives.If I want a motor drive, I buy an automated camera, then maybe I use my my loved chunky metal manual lenses ;). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now