Process or product?

mohb · 05-31-2017, 02:23 PM - **2 Likes**

Does your heart beat faster at the thought of the Sony A9 enabling you to take 20fps using an untold number of AF points at 1/32,000 at ISO 204,000 and therefore capture the ultimate picture of a bee in flight? Or are you like me and quite happy to use an old and battered K50 with an even older 100 macro lens and wait until the bee settles and take a few shots and repeat the process till either the bee flies off or I have to go home?

I only ask because in all the verbiage spouted over the A9 the concept of the process we go through got submerged beneath the ability of the technology to do it all for us.

virusn3t · 05-31-2017, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by mohb

Does your heart beat faster at the thought of the Sony A9 enabling you to take 20fps using an untold number of AF points at 1/32,000 at ISO 204,000 and therefore capture the ultimate picture of a bee in flight? Or are you like me and quite happy to use an old and battered K50 with an even older 100 macro lens and wait until the bee settles and take a few shots and repeat the process till either the bee flies off or I have to go home?

I only ask because in all the verbiage spouted over the A9 the concept of the process we go through got submerged beneath the ability of the technology to do it all for us.

I take pictures as a hobby, and i take every challenge of it as a test to improve my technique; I do not need the best (i wanted it, but thats another history), if my income, profession or whatever was in need of the fastest and more easily maneageble equipment for the task (saying the Sony A9 was that equipment) i would not hesitate on invest in such gear.

**Pentax Syntax** · 05-31-2017, 03:11 PM

I look forward to see what art and wonders such technology produces. Our tools keep getting better and many will take advantage of it. I am still amazed that digital cameras exist at all! Like the OP I am quite satisfied with the tools now in my hands.

**mattb123** · 05-31-2017, 03:18 PM

For the bee I'd take the old SLR. Maybe even get a BIF shot but maybe not.

If I was shooting pro cycling, auto racing, basketball, or any number of other fast paced sports for a living I'd want the A9. But I only shoot sports on the side and I do ok with this gear but it certainly has limitations I need to work around. It's not too hard once I know a camera.

photoptimist · 05-31-2017, 04:39 PM

LOL!

Like you, I prefer a more deliberative process of making photographs.

Although firing off 20 fps holds no attraction to me, I do hope Pentax uses this sensor technology (tweaked for better DR than the A9 could ever hope to achieve) to create faster pixelshift operations. Grabbing the 4 pixelshift frames at 20 fps would drop the total time that movement might affect the fusion of the final image to only 1/5 sec.

AquaDome · 05-31-2017, 04:49 PM

When I need a camera that does what the A9 does, I'll get an A9. For now, I don't need one.

**clackers** · 05-31-2017, 05:03 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by AquaDome

When I need a camera that does what the A9 does, I'll get an A9.

You've got the money for one?

Why are we paying for our own drinks here? It's your round again, Aquadome!

**luftfluss** · 05-31-2017, 07:02 PM

If you are using auto-anything on your camera you are letting the technology "do it" for you to some extent.

DeadJohn · 05-31-2017, 09:25 PM

I'd like to have 20fps for bursts but it's not essential for what I do, and definitely not worth an extra $2000+ premium over the K-1.

High frame rates would come in handy when I'm trying to line up a fast moving target at just the right time. Here are 2 examples with my slow Pentax cameras where a faster frame rate might have given a prior or subsequent frame a slightly better positioning.

wildman · 05-31-2017, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by mohb

the concept of the process we go through got submerged beneath the ability of the technology to do it all for us.

For me technique is just a means to the end - the final image.
If the A9 is the ultimate tool for the perfect bee shot I want then, ideally, that's what I should be using.
The end justifies the means.

mohb · 05-31-2017, 10:25 PM

Originally posted by wildman

The end justifies the means.

If 'the end' means reducing the skill needed to a bare minimum is the enjoyment in just being able to say "I took that"?

wildman · 05-31-2017, 11:40 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mohb

is the enjoyment in just being able to say "I took that"?

Speaking only for myself - yes.

As a clarification I don't think I would ever say "I took that" but I would say here's a tiny piece of the beauty of the world and I hope my image conveys at a bit of that beauty to you or, at least, words to that effect.

**mattb123** · 06-01-2017, 12:52 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by mohb

If 'the end' means reducing the skill needed to a bare minimum is the enjoyment in just being able to say "I took that"?

Sounds like complaints from the film enthusiasts about cameras like the *istD.

Or what painters said about early cameras.

**RobA_Oz** · 06-01-2017, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by mattb123

Sounds like complaints from the film enthusiasts about cameras like the *istD.

…some still do.

Originally posted by mattb123

Or what painters said about early cameras.

True, but then the earliest cameras were about as slow as a good sketch artist with the same subject. Maybe a more appropriate comparison is between the fast food and slow food movements.

When you're working at 20fps, composition goes out the window, although probably only a tad more than at 7fps, with a moving subject, except by cropping during post-processing, and that's limited by the original FoV.

**mattb123** · 06-01-2017, 02:18 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

…some still do.

True, but then the earliest cameras were about as slow as a good sketch artist with the same subject. Maybe a more appropriate comparison is between the fast food and slow food movements.

When you're working at 20fps, composition goes out the window, although probably only a tad more than at 7fps, with a moving subject, except by cropping during post-processing, and that's limited by the original FoV.

Just because the camera can take a lot of photos quickly doesn't meant I'd forget how to take a good photograph. If I use a nail gun instead of a hammer I'm not going to just shoot nails everywhere simply because I can.
I'd probably still set up a well-composed image and anticipate the subject moving into the zone that would give the composition I want and then fire a burst of much less than a second to get several choices of images for that composition and moment.
That is exactly how I take sports images now but sometimes my buffer fills at a bad moment if things are happening quickly. Having a little more wiggle room there could come in handy even if you aren't just blazing away all the time.

I'm not even considering getting one of these cameras, but I'm also not going to knock what I see as another incremental advancement in imaging technology. It's not changing much about how a camera works or is used but in the right situation I bet it could be handy. If I was in a high pressure, fast moving shoot and that tool would be more appropriate (and the stakes were high enough to make the investment worth it) than my current gear I wouldn't hesitate get a hold of one.

05-31-2017, 02:23 PM - 2 Likes	#1
mohb Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,912	Process or product? Does your heart beat faster at the thought of the Sony A9 enabling you to take 20fps using an untold number of AF points at 1/32,000 at ISO 204,000 and therefore capture the ultimate picture of a bee in flight? Or are you like me and quite happy to use an old and battered K50 with an even older 100 macro lens and wait until the bee settles and take a few shots and repeat the process till either the bee flies off or I have to go home? I only ask because in all the verbiage spouted over the A9 the concept of the process we go through got submerged beneath the ability of the technology to do it all for us.

05-31-2017, 11:40 PM - 1 Like	#12
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	Originally posted by mohb is the enjoyment in just being able to say "I took that"? Speaking only for myself - yes. As a clarification I don't think I would ever say "I took that" but I would say here's a tiny piece of the beauty of the world and I hope my image conveys at a bit of that beauty to you or, at least, words to that effect. Last edited by wildman; 06-01-2017 at 12:17 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How would you process this image to bring out the Milky way?	bdery	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	21	02-12-2018 06:13 AM
Who/Where to Process B&W Film?	Church Key	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	22	08-18-2017 10:16 PM
Formal process to suggest product and/or firmware update ideas?	JBox	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	12-10-2016 06:28 PM
Black & White Oldschool collection in process	bakerking31	Post Your Photos!	9	04-19-2016 04:11 PM
Pentax 67ii time process issue	csanjay	Pentax Medium Format	5	01-18-2016 09:20 AM

05-31-2017, 03:10 PM	#2
virusn3t Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 676	Originally posted by mohb Does your heart beat faster at the thought of the Sony A9 enabling you to take 20fps using an untold number of AF points at 1/32,000 at ISO 204,000 and therefore capture the ultimate picture of a bee in flight? Or are you like me and quite happy to use an old and battered K50 with an even older 100 macro lens and wait until the bee settles and take a few shots and repeat the process till either the bee flies off or I have to go home? I only ask because in all the verbiage spouted over the A9 the concept of the process we go through got submerged beneath the ability of the technology to do it all for us. I take pictures as a hobby, and i take every challenge of it as a test to improve my technique; I do not need the best (i wanted it, but thats another history), if my income, profession or whatever was in need of the fastest and more easily maneageble equipment for the task (saying the Sony A9 was that equipment) i would not hesitate on invest in such gear.

05-31-2017, 03:11 PM	#3
Pentax Syntax Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Maryland Posts: 595	I look forward to see what art and wonders such technology produces. Our tools keep getting better and many will take advantage of it. I am still amazed that digital cameras exist at all! Like the OP I am quite satisfied with the tools now in my hands.

05-31-2017, 03:18 PM	#4
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	For the bee I'd take the old SLR. Maybe even get a BIF shot but maybe not. If I was shooting pro cycling, auto racing, basketball, or any number of other fast paced sports for a living I'd want the A9. But I only shoot sports on the side and I do ok with this gear but it certainly has limitations I need to work around. It's not too hard once I know a camera.

05-31-2017, 04:39 PM	#5
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,126	LOL! Like you, I prefer a more deliberative process of making photographs. Although firing off 20 fps holds no attraction to me, I do hope Pentax uses this sensor technology (tweaked for better DR than the A9 could ever hope to achieve) to create faster pixelshift operations. Grabbing the 4 pixelshift frames at 20 fps would drop the total time that movement might affect the fusion of the final image to only 1/5 sec.

05-31-2017, 04:49 PM	#6
AquaDome Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: New Carlisle, IN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,475	When I need a camera that does what the A9 does, I'll get an A9. For now, I don't need one.

05-31-2017, 05:03 PM - 1 Like	#7
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by AquaDome When I need a camera that does what the A9 does, I'll get an A9. You've got the money for one? Why are we paying for our own drinks here? It's your round again, Aquadome!

05-31-2017, 07:02 PM	#8
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	If you are using auto-anything on your camera you are letting the technology "do it" for you to some extent.

05-31-2017, 09:25 PM	#9
DeadJohn Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: New York Posts: 4,834	I'd like to have 20fps for bursts but it's not essential for what I do, and definitely not worth an extra $2000+ premium over the K-1. High frame rates would come in handy when I'm trying to line up a fast moving target at just the right time. Here are 2 examples with my slow Pentax cameras where a faster frame rate might have given a prior or subsequent frame a slightly better positioning.

05-31-2017, 09:49 PM	#10
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	Originally posted by mohb the concept of the process we go through got submerged beneath the ability of the technology to do it all for us. For me technique is just a means to the end - the final image. If the A9 is the ultimate tool for the perfect bee shot I want then, ideally, that's what I should be using. The end justifies the means.

05-31-2017, 10:25 PM	#11
mohb Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,912 Original Poster	Originally posted by wildman The end justifies the means. If 'the end' means reducing the skill needed to a bare minimum is the enjoyment in just being able to say "I took that"?

06-01-2017, 12:52 PM - 2 Likes	#13
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Originally posted by mohb If 'the end' means reducing the skill needed to a bare minimum is the enjoyment in just being able to say "I took that"? Sounds like complaints from the film enthusiasts about cameras like the *istD. Or what painters said about early cameras.

06-01-2017, 01:27 PM	#14
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Originally posted by mattb123 Sounds like complaints from the film enthusiasts about cameras like the *istD. …some still do. Originally posted by mattb123 Or what painters said about early cameras. True, but then the earliest cameras were about as slow as a good sketch artist with the same subject. Maybe a more appropriate comparison is between the fast food and slow food movements. When you're working at 20fps, composition goes out the window, although probably only a tad more than at 7fps, with a moving subject, except by cropping during post-processing, and that's limited by the original FoV.

06-01-2017, 02:18 PM - 1 Like	#15
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Originally posted by RobA_Oz …some still do. True, but then the earliest cameras were about as slow as a good sketch artist with the same subject. Maybe a more appropriate comparison is between the fast food and slow food movements. When you're working at 20fps, composition goes out the window, although probably only a tad more than at 7fps, with a moving subject, except by cropping during post-processing, and that's limited by the original FoV. Just because the camera can take a lot of photos quickly doesn't meant I'd forget how to take a good photograph. If I use a nail gun instead of a hammer I'm not going to just shoot nails everywhere simply because I can. I'd probably still set up a well-composed image and anticipate the subject moving into the zone that would give the composition I want and then fire a burst of much less than a second to get several choices of images for that composition and moment. That is exactly how I take sports images now but sometimes my buffer fills at a bad moment if things are happening quickly. Having a little more wiggle room there could come in handy even if you aren't just blazing away all the time. I'm not even considering getting one of these cameras, but I'm also not going to knock what I see as another incremental advancement in imaging technology. It's not changing much about how a camera works or is used but in the right situation I bet it could be handy. If I was in a high pressure, fast moving shoot and that tool would be more appropriate (and the stakes were high enough to make the investment worth it) than my current gear I wouldn't hesitate get a hold of one.