[biz-engineer]

Well you're in luck, the Leitz Photographic Auction is just a couple weeks away and you can bid on some 100 year old cameras.https://www.leitz-auction.com/auction/en/home

This is the other extreme end. Japanese can have wild ideas of how far electronic devices can go; I've seen a documentary about electronic girl friends in Japan, some single men prefer to have an electronic (virtual model) of girl-friend or wife, because a real girl-friend/wife is too cumbersome, electronic girl-friend can be switched-off if she's talking too much. I can see a place for robotic vacuum cleaners and robotic grass mower, because these activities aren't particularly pleasurable, but I don't see photography as a shore, hence I don't see why a camera should go take pictures on its own.

[JohnMc]

... but I don't see photography as a shore, hence I don't see why a camera should go take pictures on its own.

Not even the James Webb Space Telescope does that, and it's about 1.5 million k from the nearest human.

[biz-engineer]

For what it's worth, I'm not overjoyed with the way equipment, software and the proliferation of content are developing either...

When I read or watch DPR content, I feel like someone is trying to push mirrorless 8K video and pets eye AF down my throat with a stick. It's like force-feeding geese to make foie gras (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foie_gras_controversy).

[BigMackCam]

I can see a place for robotic vacuum cleaners and robotic grass mower, because these activities aren't particularly pleasurable, but I don't see photography as a shore, hence I don't see why a camera should go take pictures on its own.

When I read or watch DPR content, I feel like someone is trying to push mirrorless 8K video and pets eye AF down my throat with a stick. It's like force-feeding geese to make foie gras (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foie_gras_controversy).

Thankfully, biz, as I and others have said, none of this need have any bearing on your photographic activities and enjoyment. Choose whatever you want to shoot with from the plethora of available equipment in a wide range of formats, and shoot with that - whether it's digital or film, new or used, semi-automated or completely manual - and ignore what sites like DPR and YT reviewers are discussing and pushing. Don't read or watch that stuff, especially since you know it frustrates you. Just crack on with your photography in whatever form it takes.

Given some of your previous posts in other threads, I sense you're frustrated because what you ideally want isn't readily available (and isn't likely to become available) for one reason or another, whether its due to image quality, sensor format, build quality, price etc. - in which case, with respect, the problem isn't so much the equipment but your personal demands and expectations. Anything you choose is going to be a compromise in one or more aspects, and if you should switch to 8x10 film photography (in which you've recently shown some interest), I'm quite certain you'll come up against some serious compromises once you've spent some time with it - lugging the camera around, taking time to set it up, working with a dim inverted view, making all the necessary adjustments to achieve accurate focus and focal plane most appropriate to the scene, long exposure times, developing the film, wet-printing or digitising etc. - not to mention the cost per shot of doing so. So, pick a medium and format, equip yourself as best you can within your budget, shoot with it and enjoy getting the best you can from it, accepting that some limitations and compromises were inevitable whatever you chose (and if you'd chosen something else you'd simply have a different set of compromises to work with)...

EDIT #1: By way of comparison... I dislike the way the motor industry is evolving. What I want is a mid-size 4x4 with a nice, torquey combustion engine that also gives decent fuel-consumption, without depending on engine management systems and other complicated electronics. I want the whole car to be based on a chassis, with panels that can be easily removed for repair or replacement. I want everything in the engine bay to be easily accessible, and serviceable by any garage without resorting to dedicated brand-specific diagnostics systems. I want it to have an interior that can be hosed down without killing electrical equipment. Basically, I want a brand new Series II or early Series III Land Rover, and I want it for GBP £20,000 ore less, please Sadly, such vehicles aren't being developed these days - everything's a lot more complicated, and increasingly expensive... so I make do with a modern, budget-conscious 4x4 crossover with way more electronics than I'm comfortable with, a car that really requires main-dealer servicing to keep it ticking optimally. It's no Land Rover... I've had to compromise significantly - but that's OK... it gets me from A to B pretty well, and I make the most of it...

EDIT #2: I used to love foie gras (pâté or, ideally, whole) until I understood the method for producing it It's particularly good with a well-cooked fillet steak (I speak from considerable experience )... but I haven't eaten it in years, and wouldn't do so again for obvious reasons. That aside, force-fed geese and ducks have no choice in the matter, whereas you have complete control over the content you view in relation to new cameras and associated technology...

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 05-27-2022 at 04:42 AM.

[luftfluss]

All this newfangled technology mustn't be very good; I still see photos posted that suffer from basic technical flaws such as missed focus, inadequate shutter speed, blown highlights, etc.

[BigMackCam]

All this newfangled technology mustn't be very good; I still see photos posted that suffer from basic technical flaws such as missed focus, inadequate shutter speed, blown highlights, etc.

The thing is, with all the clever jiggery-pokery, there's still a lot of skill required to achieve good results. I think we sometimes assume automation does everything for the photographer without their input, but that's not the case. For example, using auto-focus effectively on the latest cameras - with all the options and settings involved - is arguably so complex that it has become an individual skill in itself. In a recent thread about Canon mirrorless cameras, one of our members talked about using "three button autofocus" for birds-in-flight photography. Frankly, I find the whole idea exhausting and have no appetite for it - but I can respect anyone who takes the time to master it and get the results they're looking for. That takes some capacity for learning, lots of practise and real dedication...

[rpjallan]

I really don’t get topics like this. You don’t have to buy stuff you don’t want/need. All this stuff is market driven. If it wasn’t, none of these new cameras etc. would sell. The world doesn’t stand still. I don’t know how you can blame DPReview for any of this! 😳

I have just been on a topic about LX & MX’s predominately. No one is making anyone buy a new, do everything camera…

[repaap]

If I may draw a comparison to another hobby.

I am a dedicated cyclist.

The fleet ranges from a single gear brakeless 1926 Olympic training bike (almost 100 years old) to 2021 Euro team issue carbon bike with all the electronics. And quite a few more in between.

I try to ride 6 days of 7 every week. At least 25 or 30 miles.

Each day it may be a different bike, from a different era, with a different set up.

Why not the newest and greatest? Why use the semi-old, old and down right super old equipment? Other riders are dumbfounded...

Each of them provides a different experience. Sure, they all have to be pedaled. Sure, they all have to be turned. Sure, they all have to have the tires pumped up.

But once on them, each is a work of art by some frame builder who measured, cut, brazed tubing to build a machine that is meant to provide enjoyment excellence in a craft.

And it is that enjoyment that keeps me from ever saying "goodbye".

Well put. About bicycles, and about gear. Pleasure can come from various things. I only have one bike, actually 2 but one is so good that I rarely go for the other(ironframed single gear train bike vs. Light weight gravelbike(I go for gravel even if single is more about fun)). I’d love to have proper mountainbike thou since there is also nice trails around here…and going to buy one, some day.

Different gear for different purposes. What ever get you back on that saddle is worth it, I’d say…

Same goes for my camera gear.

About original statement about this thread. Guys who try to sell cameras/gear want as many customers as possible. Many cameras are very good and automatic things does save time and processing time/capturing . A thing which is easy to overlook. Especially if one is used to long process and dedication. Not everyone does have the time for that. Many even does use someone to help for that process. Because of the time.

Just to keep the focus in what you need/want to do

[StiffLegged]

Oh dear. Eeyore’s having another Gloomy Day.

[Dartmoor Dave]

I really don't like the idea of ILC cameras getting more and more automation, joining smartphones and drones gadgets mass produced in China, releasing disposable cameras and lenses every other year with cameras that judge what to modify on a picture.

My personal feeling is that the latest digital cameras have reached a level of such bland perfection that I've got no interest in shooting with them. But when someone like you, someone who in the past has always demanded more resolution, less noise, more sterile cleanliness, starts saying that things have gone too far then perhaps there's some hope. Perhaps others will stop lusting after what are basically supercomputers with lenses attached and vote with their wallets, and then manufacturers will be forced to start making cameras that require some real human input from photographers and that produce results with some character.

In the meantime, I'm having a hoot nowadays doing all my digital photography with the cheapest, crappiest old gear I can get my hands on. There's no greater pleasure in photography than creating an image that you can be proud of with a camera that cost less than getting a pizza delivered.

[BigMackCam]

I'm having a hoot nowadays doing all my digital photography with the cheapest, crappiest old gear I can get my hands on. There's no greater pleasure in photography than creating an image that you can be proud of with a camera that cost less than getting a pizza delivered.

I'm with you there, David. It may seem hypocritical of me to say this when I have access to some relatively modern and certainly quite nice cameras and lenses, but - as I've stated here many times (and folks must be bored of reading this by now ) - I get most pleasure from shooting my GX-10 and Tamron 28-70/2.8... and frequently enjoy shooting with much more basic gear than that. Getting the best from what we now consider to be very limited gear can be immensely satisfying

Larger feature sets and clever, configurable automation brings increased complexity... which is, in itself, another compromise; acceptable to (even welcomed by) some; unwanted by others. As always, we each do well to choose the compromises that suit us best...

[microlight]

I watched the video, and you know what, it totally made sense. Develop your skills but be willing to adapt to what your audience or market wants. If you are your market, great - plough your own furrow. If you’re aiming for social media or a client, then adapt. The only constant is change, and we need to work with it. It doesn’t make our equipment and knowledge any less valuable, it just gives us extra perspective on how we make photos.

With the exception of our recent holiday, I currently take more photos with my iPhone than I do with my K-3II, but the experience gained right back to manual MX days means that it’s not just lift and snap, it’s finding a good composition etc etc. Don’t despair!

[ffking]

I think that the time that ILCs were mainstream - mostly late SLRs - was a historical blip - serious photographers who like to be in total control have always actually been a tiny minority. We'll probably have to put up with even higher prices and investment going elsewhere once MILCs hit the diminishing return on onvestment barrier (if they haven't already, but as long as peoplecan see a difference (ie you're good enough to be better than the automation) or you just enjoy the process of making images that you can truly say 'I did that' about there will still be a niche left for M.

[Rondec]

I think there is much to dislike about modern photography. There is a sameness to many of the photos, as though they were all captured using the same techniques and processed using the same software. I suppose that is OK. There was a time not so long ago when, if you looked at the average photographer's scrapbooks, you would find a lot of poorly focused, blurry images, with exposures that were clearly off. Technology is good at fixing those sorts of things with better focusing modules and better high iso performance. Of course, most photographers aren't trying to make great art. They are simply trying to document for their kids and grandkids trips and fun times that they had together. Current cameras certainly make that easier than cameras did in the 70s and 80s and that's a good thing.

I do think there are a few things that come to my mind when thinking about the subject of "progress" in cameras.

1. Most of the current progress doesn't really lead to better photos. Just because you image is sharp and well exposed doesn't mean that it is particularly interesting to look at. The hardest part of image creation happens before you ever put the camera to your eye. Seeing the world in interesting ways and being able to capture that with your camera will let you stand out from the plethora of sharp but mediocre images that are generated each day.

2. Technology can be turned off. You can easily put any of these cameras in single shot mode, manual focus them, and shoot in manual exposure mode. Depending on what you are shooting and how much you want to slow down, this may be helpful. The K-1 has certain things, like composition adjust and astro tracer that I have used once or twice. It doesn't bother me that they are there. The same is true for any other feature on modern cameras.

3. Joy in the journey is really important. Any hobby can cease to be enjoyable. For photography to be enjoyable, I think you need to enjoy the process of making images and even post processing them. I have said before that I really enjoy waking up early (before my kids) and going out in the quiet and taking photos. Even if none of the photos turn out, the peace and quiet and beauty of those morning walks makes it worthwhile to me.

4. The important thing is that you, the photographer, are satisfied with your images. The point is not always creating art -- plenty of us will never do that -- but rather that we are pleased with the results we are getting and maybe, seeing progress. Technology is secondary to vision. "This is what I imagined when I saw this scene and I was successful in capturing that," is a good thing to think after the fact. A lot of images I see on Flickr don't click with me and that's OK, as long as the photographer making them is satisfied.

I do think that ILC photography is going to change a lot and I expect camera sales to continue to drop. People are satisfied with what they have and they don't really need 30 fps and 1 million iso and all of the other bells and whistles.

I also believe that the beauty of photography remains the same. Slow down and enjoy the process and photography will continue to provide satisfaction for years to come.

[ZombieArmy]

Companies just try to market garbage like this because there's no noticeable improvements in image quality. Even shooting a camera with the aging K-5 sensor no one would know it was over 10 years old.

You can make a career as a professional photographer easily on something like the 5D mk ii which launched in 2008. What's the point of even getting excited about new cameras in general.