Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

slip · 10-24-2015, 07:02 AM

If there was a perfect camera.... 100 fps in order to catch the perfect sports shot for example.. or a camera that always has the right exposure... would it take the fun factor out of photography or make it more enjoyable for you?
Sometimes I enjoy the challenge of getting a great sports shot with a less then perfect lens/ body combo just for the fun factor

What about you?

Thanks

Randy

**csa** · 10-24-2015, 07:36 AM

Well, I just moved up to a new K3, and I'm amazed at the high quality of the images, with no PP. Took 96 the other day of ducks, etc. All were keepers! Did this take the fun factor out of photography for me? Absolutely not; actually, it has increased the fun factor for me, that I don't have to fuss with different settings, etc., to get great photos!

**savoche** · 10-24-2015, 08:52 AM

I think timing and exposure are just two of very many factors that make photography challenging. Besides, what is "perfect exposure"? There are many correct exposures, and sometimes I want a creative exposure that is far from a technically "correct" exposure. Sometimes I want motion blur. Also, for me the main challenge is seeing what will make a good picture. No amount of improved technology will make that part of the fun go away.

Another thing; if everybody and her sister get "perfect" pictures, all looking the same, wouldn't the fun part be to be different?

derekkite · 10-24-2015, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by csa

Well, I just moved up to a new K3, and I'm amazed at the high quality of the images, with no PP. Took 96 the other day of ducks, etc. All were keepers! Did this take the fun factor out of photography for me? Absolutely not; actually, it has increased the fun factor for me, that I don't have to fuss with different settings, etc., to get great photos!

Indeed. Now instead of fighting to get anything at all you can try for something amazing; catching them in an interesting pose or doing something interesting.

If it isn't fun try for the shots you never have been able to capture.

Parallax · 10-24-2015, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by slip

would the perfect camera take the fun factor out?

The short answer, for me, is YES. I wouldn't get any more pleasure from a camera that I knew was going to produce a stellar picture every time than I would from buying a picture of the scene that was taken by someone else.

Fogel70 · 10-24-2015, 09:54 AM

Originally posted by slip

If there was a perfect camera.... 100 fps in order to catch the perfect sports shot for example.. or a camera that always has the right exposure... would it take the fun factor out of photography or make it more enjoyable for you?
Sometimes I enjoy the challenge of getting a great sports shot with a less then perfect lens/ body combo just for the fun factor

What about you?

Thanks

Randy

If the perfect camera ever come, you can always set it up so it will be difficult to get every shot captured perfectly. FI shooting sports with manual focus in manual mode with spot metering.

severalsnakes · 10-24-2015, 10:00 AM

I think the challenge would then become capturing stellar scenes/subject matter and drastically raising the bar of what makes an image "great". If everyone is taking technically perfect pictures of ducks

what is going to make YOURS stand out? You have to find some new je ne sais quoi... Which sounds fine to me, but I also enjoy struggling with my old, manual m42 lenses etc.

**Just1MoreDave** · 10-24-2015, 12:01 PM

I do see this with new sports cars. They are too close to perfection on normal roads at normal speeds. Older cars can be more interesting. I don't think cameras will approach that level for a while but if they do, I can just use an older camera.

**Rondec** · 10-24-2015, 12:35 PM

I can't imagine a situation where the camera would "see" the world for you or, for that matter, would wake up to shoot the golden hours for you, frame your images for you, etc. At this point, cameras really are very good. The issue often is whether or not you can afford a fast enough/long enough lens for a situation or, whether or not you are willing to make the effort you need to make to get the best light. A lot of the issues I see with photos these days have little to do with not having the perfect camera and have more to do with a lack of effort on the photographer.

**Canada_Rockies** · 10-24-2015, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by csa

Well, I just moved up to a new K3, and I'm amazed at the high quality of the images, with no PP. Took 96 the other day of ducks, etc. All were keepers! Did this take the fun factor out of photography for me? Absolutely not; actually, it has increased the fun factor for me, that I don't have to fuss with different settings, etc., to get great photos!

I am also impressed with the camera's take without post processing, but I am also involved in a project that requires balancing the exposure through a window with the exposure inside. After some testing, I find that 5 shot bracketing at 1 stop intervals with a 2 stop underexposure as the starting point lets me combine the images and retain all the detail both inside and out. I'm loving the one stop bracketing; I'm loving that I can do my bracketing with the RAW/Fx button reprogrammed.

To the OP: 100 FPS? How many people would you need to hire to review? Let me see, if I did that for one second for each of the 72 exposures a newspaper supplied film for a kid's soccer match allowed, I would have to review 7,200 exposures to find out if I got the shot!

officiousbystander · 10-24-2015, 01:18 PM

You could get one of the new 4k cameras. The Lumix G7 allows 30fps unlimited (except by memory of course). In effect you're able to choose an 8 megapixel photo from a 30fps videostream at any point. This would be great for sports photographers where the whole point is freezing the action. But it doesn't help with light or composition. Besides, once all sports photographers are using these cameras the web will be filled with these 'perfectly timed' photos and they won't seem special or remarkable anymore.

derekkite · 10-24-2015, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by Just1MoreDave

I do see this with new sports cars. They are too close to perfection on normal roads at normal speeds. Older cars can be more interesting. I don't think cameras will approach that level for a while but if they do, I can just use an older camera.

Essentially moving the limit into extremely dangerous speeds. I like driving on snow for that reason, you can have fun, even go off the road but the speeds are reasonable and not dangerous.

I don't see cameras getting near that. So many of the things we do are about the limits of the sensor. Or the limits of the lenses.

slip · 10-24-2015, 01:52 PM

This post was meant to be hypothetical... at what point does the cameras capabilities take the fun out of photography. Some great points so far!

Randy

osv · 10-24-2015, 01:57 PM

Originally posted by officiousbystander

You could get one of the new 4k cameras. The Lumix G7 allows 30fps unlimited (except by memory of course). In effect you're able to choose an 8 megapixel photo from a 30fps videostream at any point. This would be great for sports photographers where the whole point is freezing the action.

shutter speeds for video are usually around 1/60th of a second, way too slow for sports shooting, and video is usually compressed, with no raw capability.

a perfect camera would only be as good as the person using it.

6BQ5 · 10-24-2015, 05:27 PM

A camera's technical ability ought to enable the artist or craftsman. The more it enables the operator then the better the result can be (note - not will be).

I don't think there is a point where a camera becomes "too good". If a feature or technology doesn't enable anything then it is a useless element in the camera and it ought to be removed.

I would rather work with my camera than work around it.

10-24-2015, 07:02 AM	#1
slip Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,535	would the perfect camera take the fun factor out? If there was a perfect camera.... 100 fps in order to catch the perfect sports shot for example.. or a camera that always has the right exposure... would it take the fun factor out of photography or make it more enjoyable for you? Sometimes I enjoy the challenge of getting a great sports shot with a less then perfect lens/ body combo just for the fun factor What about you? Thanks Randy

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Q7 : The Perfect Travel Camera (very long + many images)	6BQ5	Pentax Q	24	09-02-2016 04:52 PM
Crazy way-out theory on the FF (just for fun).	pathdoc	Pentax Full Frame	17	05-13-2015 05:30 PM
Is the K-01 the perfect holiday camera?	LensBeginner	Pentax K-01	11	04-02-2015 05:53 AM
Breaking Out the "Crappy" Lenses (Take a Swing At Me - I can Take It)	OrangeKx	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	19	11-08-2014 06:09 AM
Fun Factor of the K5?	Rupert	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	60	07-26-2011 09:59 PM

10-24-2015, 07:36 AM	#2
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133	Well, I just moved up to a new K3, and I'm amazed at the high quality of the images, with no PP. Took 96 the other day of ducks, etc. All were keepers! Did this take the fun factor out of photography for me? Absolutely not; actually, it has increased the fun factor for me, that I don't have to fuss with different settings, etc., to get great photos!

10-24-2015, 08:52 AM	#3
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,312	I think timing and exposure are just two of very many factors that make photography challenging. Besides, what is "perfect exposure"? There are many correct exposures, and sometimes I want a creative exposure that is far from a technically "correct" exposure. Sometimes I want motion blur. Also, for me the main challenge is seeing what will make a good picture. No amount of improved technology will make that part of the fun go away. Another thing; if everybody and her sister get "perfect" pictures, all looking the same, wouldn't the fun part be to be different?

10-24-2015, 08:55 AM	#4
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	Originally posted by csa Well, I just moved up to a new K3, and I'm amazed at the high quality of the images, with no PP. Took 96 the other day of ducks, etc. All were keepers! Did this take the fun factor out of photography for me? Absolutely not; actually, it has increased the fun factor for me, that I don't have to fuss with different settings, etc., to get great photos! Indeed. Now instead of fighting to get anything at all you can try for something amazing; catching them in an interesting pose or doing something interesting. If it isn't fun try for the shots you never have been able to capture.

10-24-2015, 09:09 AM	#5
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Originally posted by slip would the perfect camera take the fun factor out? The short answer, for me, is YES. I wouldn't get any more pleasure from a camera that I knew was going to produce a stellar picture every time than I would from buying a picture of the scene that was taken by someone else.

10-24-2015, 09:54 AM	#6
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by slip If there was a perfect camera.... 100 fps in order to catch the perfect sports shot for example.. or a camera that always has the right exposure... would it take the fun factor out of photography or make it more enjoyable for you? Sometimes I enjoy the challenge of getting a great sports shot with a less then perfect lens/ body combo just for the fun factor What about you? Thanks Randy If the perfect camera ever come, you can always set it up so it will be difficult to get every shot captured perfectly. FI shooting sports with manual focus in manual mode with spot metering.

10-24-2015, 10:00 AM	#7
severalsnakes Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Kansas City, KS Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,612	I think the challenge would then become capturing stellar scenes/subject matter and drastically raising the bar of what makes an image "great". If everyone is taking technically perfect pictures of ducks what is going to make YOURS stand out? You have to find some new je ne sais quoi... Which sounds fine to me, but I also enjoy struggling with my old, manual m42 lenses etc.

10-24-2015, 12:01 PM	#8
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	I do see this with new sports cars. They are too close to perfection on normal roads at normal speeds. Older cars can be more interesting. I don't think cameras will approach that level for a while but if they do, I can just use an older camera.

10-24-2015, 12:35 PM	#9
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,666	I can't imagine a situation where the camera would "see" the world for you or, for that matter, would wake up to shoot the golden hours for you, frame your images for you, etc. At this point, cameras really are very good. The issue often is whether or not you can afford a fast enough/long enough lens for a situation or, whether or not you are willing to make the effort you need to make to get the best light. A lot of the issues I see with photos these days have little to do with not having the perfect camera and have more to do with a lack of effort on the photographer.

10-24-2015, 12:39 PM	#10
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by csa Well, I just moved up to a new K3, and I'm amazed at the high quality of the images, with no PP. Took 96 the other day of ducks, etc. All were keepers! Did this take the fun factor out of photography for me? Absolutely not; actually, it has increased the fun factor for me, that I don't have to fuss with different settings, etc., to get great photos! I am also impressed with the camera's take without post processing, but I am also involved in a project that requires balancing the exposure through a window with the exposure inside. After some testing, I find that 5 shot bracketing at 1 stop intervals with a 2 stop underexposure as the starting point lets me combine the images and retain all the detail both inside and out. I'm loving the one stop bracketing; I'm loving that I can do my bracketing with the RAW/Fx button reprogrammed. To the OP: 100 FPS? How many people would you need to hire to review? Let me see, if I did that for one second for each of the 72 exposures a newspaper supplied film for a kid's soccer match allowed, I would have to review 7,200 exposures to find out if I got the shot!

10-24-2015, 01:18 PM	#11
officiousbystander Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 916	You could get one of the new 4k cameras. The Lumix G7 allows 30fps unlimited (except by memory of course). In effect you're able to choose an 8 megapixel photo from a 30fps videostream at any point. This would be great for sports photographers where the whole point is freezing the action. But it doesn't help with light or composition. Besides, once all sports photographers are using these cameras the web will be filled with these 'perfectly timed' photos and they won't seem special or remarkable anymore.

10-24-2015, 01:30 PM	#12
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	Originally posted by Just1MoreDave I do see this with new sports cars. They are too close to perfection on normal roads at normal speeds. Older cars can be more interesting. I don't think cameras will approach that level for a while but if they do, I can just use an older camera. Essentially moving the limit into extremely dangerous speeds. I like driving on snow for that reason, you can have fun, even go off the road but the speeds are reasonable and not dangerous. I don't see cameras getting near that. So many of the things we do are about the limits of the sensor. Or the limits of the lenses.

10-24-2015, 01:52 PM	#13
slip Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,535 Original Poster	This post was meant to be hypothetical... at what point does the cameras capabilities take the fun out of photography. Some great points so far! Randy

10-24-2015, 01:57 PM	#14
osv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,080	Originally posted by officiousbystander You could get one of the new 4k cameras. The Lumix G7 allows 30fps unlimited (except by memory of course). In effect you're able to choose an 8 megapixel photo from a 30fps videostream at any point. This would be great for sports photographers where the whole point is freezing the action. shutter speeds for video are usually around 1/60th of a second, way too slow for sports shooting, and video is usually compressed, with no raw capability. a perfect camera would only be as good as the person using it.

10-24-2015, 05:27 PM	#15
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	A camera's technical ability ought to enable the artist or craftsman. The more it enables the operator then the better the result can be (note - not will be). I don't think there is a point where a camera becomes "too good". If a feature or technology doesn't enable anything then it is a useless element in the camera and it ought to be removed. I would rather work with my camera than work around it.