markwyatt

Agreed, in a bigger picture sense, the results are what matter. From a more gear/process perspective, I would add that the medium is also important (film, plates, Pt vs. silver, digital, RAW vs. jpg, etc.). Sometimes exploiting very limited technological means (i.e., pinhole camera) can lead to spectacular results because even within those limited means there are a transfinite number of possible results, and tuning the process and one's creative sense to those results that benefit the most from the limited means can lead to interesting results. I think this is the direction you are pointing.

I photograph therefore I am.

I find that there are photo opportunities anywhere you go. Unless you are trying to create stock images for travel magazines, keep your eyes open and grab a shot wherever you see one. I find that some of my favorite shots are close to home where I have had the opportunity to explore more and shoot under varying conditions. On the other hand, travelling presents you with new and interesting material, but unless you can stay a while you have to take the conditions you are given, and may not have the time to explore the subject. We took a family trip to Spain last year. Here is a Flickr album of some of what I shot while there: Spain 2018

In the end to me it is less about the camera (today's cameras are technologically superior in many ways) and more about the lenses (the camera is a holder/enabler for some light sensitive technology). Are older lenses "better" than newer? I cannot say that. What is the criteria? MTF? Lack of optical defects? Modern beat the older. "Look"? That remains subjective. I like some older lenses, and do fine with some newer also.

Plastics are about toughness, not tensile strength. Materials are chosen for a variety of reasons, certainly not just tensile strength. I am not a fan of 1980s-1990s plasticized cameras, but to be honest some are probably very good for some people and purposes.

Agreed. I love my Fujifilm XT-2 for its technology, convenience, and results. I do not expect it will be as useful 25 years from now, but my 1953 Contax iia is just as useful now as it was 66 years ago (even more useful given that there are better film choices available now).

My Contax iia (1953) is one of my favorite cameras ever, and the most used in the last year.

Agreed. I have some use cases where a meter helps (for instance adapting my Schneider-Kreuznach DKL lenses to M42 with only a relative aperture reading), but other than that I tend to use a hand held meter.

Cameras are still pretty cheap, but lenses in general are not as cheap. Still, compare the capability you can buy in film equipment to comparable digital equipment, and film is a bargain, even for some higher end equipment (not considering Leica or Hasselblad for instance, but a lot of other stuff). If you want to take pictures, film is very cost effective, even considering the cost of film and development. Capital outlay can be quite low (under $50 for a very decent 35mm SLR with a great normal lens). Decent digital starts at 10x that.

I have an MTL5, and it is one of my favorite M42 cameras. It is also one of two where pretty much everything (including the meter) work. If you have lenses with it, this is the most important thing. You can pick up Praktica bodies pretty inexpensively (I got my MTL5 plus two Pentax spotmatic bodies, and some camera cases, all functioning generally for $24 on ebay). Spotmatic biodies and other M42 bodies are just fine also, but I do like the Practika vertical travelling metal shutter and I like the way the Practika L and M series shoot (I also have an LTL3). I would look into fixing it, but would not spend much on it, rather try and get a replacement M42 body and keep any Pentacon or other M42 lenses.

Vine On Wall by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

manneflection by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

TeslaX by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Lock by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Branch by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Men Working by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

crane by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Feel My Relativity by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

I have a Contax iia, and it is my favorite film camera to shoot at this point. I generally use the rangefinder to focus, then compose with a top mounted viewfinder. It is a pleasure to use and takes great pictures with either Zeiss glass or my Voigtlander SC Skopar 21mm f4 (probably my favorite lens at this point). I also have a Kiev 4a (1978), which is very nice, but has some winding issues. It is probably my most attractive camera. Kiev 4A Type2 (Black) by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

trail by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Garage by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Curiosity by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Marilyn Fan by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Corps France by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

road by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr