[wildman]

Looking at all the threads on gear has got me to thinking...


...I started out in photography over 50 years ago. In those days I had a Practica FX3, Nikon S2 rangefinder and a Rollieflex E. Anyway I asked myself what has been the single most important advance over all these years? By asking this question I mean:

What gear improvement has made the most real-world practical difference to the way I actually use a camera and/or what has actually most improved the final over-all image? - I'm not thinking narrowly just about technical quality but, rather, over-all technical and aesthetic quality.

The answer surprised me - The automatic diaphragm in a SLR camera.
I highly value gear that gets out of my way and just allows me to concentrate on the aesthetics of the shot rather than messing about with gear settings. The auto diaphragm was a huge improvement for this purpose.

Along the same lines and speaking in more modern terms has been the ability to shot in RAW. Shooting in RAW, like the auto diaphragm also frees me up to just think about the shot rather than worrying about precise settings at the moment of actually taking the shot. I don't have to think about WB, exact spot on exposure etc etc. Just get the exposure reasonably within the DR of the sensor and take care of the details later. Very liberating for someone who likes to work the way I do.

Looking into the future - sensors with better high ISO performance and improvements in zoom lens'.

Anyway what have you found that has really worked for you? - ignoring all the hype about what others have told you should matter.

---

Last edited by wildman; 10-19-2011 at 04:54 AM.

[RioRico]

I've considered a number of goodies: auto-diaphragm, autofocus, zoom optics, TTL metering, in-body stabilization, etc. But I have a winner:

The LCD screen, for immediate review, i.e. chimping.

Knowing IMMEDIATELY whether to adjust and reshoot has TREMENDOUS impact. Not long ago, 'serious' cameras had Polaroid backs so test shots could be reviewed within minutes. Now we needn't wait. THIS is what wiped-out film -- not digital alone, not all the digital controls, but free re-shoots. Whether on a 1mpx P&S or a 645D, the LCD screen is THE ubiquitous photographic tool of the 21st century.

[Northern Soul]

I agree with RioRico - 'digital' and all it entails has made the most difference. Being able to review your images *and learn from it* makes a huge difference. I tried writing down exposure information for each shot when I used film, but I was never very good at it, and learned little - as a kid I just didn't get through films fast enough for the feedback to be much use.

Look now at sites like Flickr - the quality and ideas shown there are miles ahead of what one could see being produced even 20 years ago. Dig out some old photo magazines if you have any, and look at the readers shots - you'll be surprised how poor many of them now look.

I think that's all to do with the ability to review as you shoot.

[wildman]

The LCD screen, for immediate review, i.e. chimping.

Not questioning your answer but asking for a clarification -

I was asking what you, personally, have found most useful for your day to day shooting based on your actual personal experience - not what you think was the most important development for photography in the abstract.

That is, for instance, I rarely chimp. If I do it's the screen that gives me the full print out of the technical details of the shot and I rarely look at the image as a image.

So which way were you answering the question - it makes a big difference.

---

Last edited by wildman; 10-18-2011 at 04:14 AM.

[Northern Soul]

My answer remains the same - free, instantly review-able images are great for learning and improving.

Not to mention the other advantages - such as having my entire photo collection since I went digital saved on an external hard drive that is easily portable and quickly searched.

[TOUGEFC]

I used to shoot film SLR's before digital, and I would have to say that the instant review was the biggest game changer.

[RioRico]

Ah, that's trickier. I've been shooting for over a half-century. What's affected me the most? Some prospects:

* Miniature cameras, from the 1934 Kodak Retina folder that really taught me to shoot, to the Olympus XA, to the Sony DSC-V1 that's still always with me. Being able to pull a cam from my pocket and shoot quickly without lugging major hardware has a real impact. No more 9x12cm Graflex!

* PaintShop(Pro), which I've used for PP since about 1995. Since I started digital editing, I consider everything I shoot not as finished products but just as grist for the shooping mill. It's changed my focus from photography to imaging. I don't see what the picture is, but what it could be.

* Online fora, like PFC here. The fast exchange of ideas, information, inspiration, and the process of researching questions and answers, has driven me to areas I hadn't explored in depth before. These exchanges shape my gear purchases, technical usage, ways to look at subjects, etc.

I'd say those are my top 3. Which is #1, I can't say. Gotta think about it some more.

[wildman]

Being able to pull a cam from my pocket and shoot quickly without lugging major hardware

It's changed my focus from photography to imaging. I don't see what the picture is, but what it could be.

Both of the above ring a bell with me. Especially the bit about PP.
More and more as I get better at PP I look at the image in the VF as just a rough approximation of what it could be given a bit of PP. The RAW file is just a beginning and may be far from what the final image will be.

[Digitalis]

I agree with wildman, Automatic diaphragm is taken for granted these days, especially amongst 35mm photographers. As for my take on the argument about LCD screens: as a large format photographer you learned not to take what you see at the back of the camera as the final product - because with view cameras the image projected onto the ground glass is laterally reversed and upside down I have never heard of a large format photographer chimping. I only look at my rear LCD for the histogram, and the occasional zoomed in view to check for critical sharpness but I never see the image as a completed whole - that is what my computer monitor is for.

[TOUGEFC]

Agree with you there, LCD image never viewed as the the final image, used for checking the exposure/histogram and correct focus.

[NaClH2O]

I'd have to say two different but somewhat related items. First of all, EXIF data, I'm not much of a chimper, like Digitalis above, I mostly just note the histogram. But once I download my photos onto my rig I've found EXIF data to be an invaluable tool in improving my photographic techinque. I now have a pretty good idea of what shutter speeds are hand holdable, the DOF of most apertures on most of my lenses, how fast the shutter speed needs to be to capture motion etc etc etc.
And like RioRico, I've found sites like this one to be invaluable sources of information, encouragement, support and as a venue to share my photos.


NaCl(I'd be lost without both)H2O

[wildman]

I've found EXIF data to be an invaluable tool in improving my photographic techinque.

Hadn't thought of EXIF data but come to think of it can be very useful especially when shooting with a wide variety of gear and/or conditions. Allows you to make quick and dirty comparisons.

[TOUGEFC]

Yeah exif is taken for granted very much by alot of people, gone are the days of taken a small notebook and pen!

[Digitalis]

once I download my photos onto my rig I've found EXIF data to be an invaluable tool in improving my photographic techinque.

While note-taking is a useful tool and habit to get into I don't have all that much use for EXIF data, I use it for image searches and as part of my key-wording structure in LR3. But in the end, it is just a heap of information which is quite meaningless unless you see the results. A personal beef of mine is when people incessantly ask for EXIF data when they are looking at images, as if by seeing the EXIF is going to reveal some great insight to how professional photographers work - it doesn't, it is just a post exposure guide to obtaining a particular result.

[reeftool]

For me, the most significant gear upgrade ever was the K10D, my first DSLR. I started in photography when the auto diaphram and open aperture metering was pretty much standard on every camera but I can understand how big an improvement that must have been to folks. There were still a lot of older cameras around in the late 60's - early 70's. Auto focus was a huge improvement also. For me, it has been digital. In the first year I owned my K10D, I probably shot more photos than in the previous 10 years and once I got over my old film habits, I began bringing my camera everywhere and shooting constantly. With film, I was always chained to the budget. I or 2 rolls and pick my shot carefully. I now can shoot what I want anytime without worrying which week of the month it is and whether I can afford to have the film developed.