Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Coffee With Mentors > Bill Pierce - Leica M photog and author

Bill Pierce - Leica M photog and author

 

“Our autobiography is written in our contact sheets,  and our opinion of the world in our selects”  

"Never ever confuse sharp with good, or you will end up shaving with an ice cream cone and licking a razor blade."  

 

Bill Pierce is one of the most successful Leica photographers and authors ever. I initially "met" Bill in the wonderful 1973 15th edition Leica Manual (the one with the M5 on the cover). I kept reading and re-reading his four chapters, continually amazed at his knoweldge and ability, thinking "if I only knew a small part of what this guy knows... wow."  I looked foward to his monthly columns in Camera 35 and devoured them like a starving man.  Bill has worked as a photojournalist  for 25 years, keyword: WORK.  Many photogs dream of the professional photographer's  life that Bill has earned and enjoyed.  Probably Bill's most famous pic is Nixon departing the White House for the last time, victory signs still waving. 

 

Bill  has been published in many major magazines, including  Time, Life, Newsweek, U.S. News, The New York Times Sunday Magazine, New York Magazine, Stern, L'Express and Paris Match.  :His published books include  The Leica Manual,  War Torn, Survivors and Victims in the Late 20th Century, Homeless in America,  Human Rights in China,  Children of War.  Add to that numerous exhibitions at major galleries and museums.  Magazine contributions include  Popular Photography,  Camera 35, Leica Manual,  Photo District News, the Encyclopedia of Brittanica, the Digital Journalist, and now RFF.  Major awards include Leica Medal of Excellence, Overseas Press Club's Oliver Rebbot Award for Best Photojournalism from Abroad,  and the World Press Photo's Budapest Award. Perhaps an ever bigger award is Tom Abrahamsson's comment: "If you want to know Rodinal, ask Bill."

 

I met Bill in person through our mutual friend Tom Abrahamsson.  In person his insight and comments are every bit as interesting and engaging as his writing.  He is a great guy who really KNOWS photography.  I am happy to say he has generously agreed to host this forum at RFF  From time to time Bill will bring up topics, but you are also invited to ask questions.  Sit down and enjoy the ride!

 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

What do you want?
Old 09-18-2018   #1
Bill Pierce
Registered User
 
Bill Pierce's Avatar
 
Bill Pierce is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,173
What do you want?

I am constantly amazed by the long life of film cameras compared to digital models. I know of many Leicas, Hasselblads and other well made film cameras that are out there working over half a century after their introduction and often through multiple users. While the final film models from Leica, Hasselblad and others were not that different from those models released in the 1950’s, it’s not that surprising. Film has been around since George Eastman switched from a paper film (1885) to a celluloid base in 1888 or 89. Film cameras are a somewhat mature technology.

On the other hand, digital imaging in readily available consumer cameras was pretty much something that started with limited image quality around 1990. And it’s somewhat surprising that by the early 2000’s, digital cameras were outselling film cameras. And it is not surprising that digital improved so rapidly that the SuperCam2 really was a marked improvement over the SuperCam1. And just a year later, the SuperCam3 was better than both of them. But the SuperCam4 - I’m not so sure I’m going to have to get it. No question that it’s a little better than the SuperCam3, but can I take advantage of the improvements?

Most of the improvements come in the sensor/processor arena of image quality, usually more pixels (higher res image) with an improved processor holding down noise levels of what are now smaller pixels. I don’t make mural sized landscapes and stare at them from close distances; so, that very real improvement is often lost on me.

I do, however, take pictures in dim light at slow speeds and wide open apertures; so I do love magnified Live View from the sensor itself and bounce free electronic shutters. And while manual focus with magnified Live View can be great, in moving, changing situations, any improvement in autofocus is a super welcome blessing. Simple manual controls and simplified menus make preparing to take pictures less arduous and more error free. And, of course, as digital cameras get better and it doesn’t make sense to replace them - better build quality.

I kind of think the megapixel race is pointless for a lot of folks, but anything that leads to better, easier, quicker handling when you are dealing the very basics - focus, exposure, viewing and pushing the button - will always be welcome. What do you look for when you are contemplating a new camera?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #2
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,680
Image quality. My trip through the digital world has been increasing sensor size, and therefore resolution, from an early Canon ELPH (1/2.5" 4MP), Canon G10 (1/1.7" 14MP), Canon G1X (1.5" 14MP), Fuji XE2 (APS-C 16MP), and now Fuji XT2 (APS-C 24MP). I'm thinking my next camera will be one of the GFXs. I am a deliberate still shooter and therefore do not need faster anything or video. It is really not about print size. At the native 360dpi resolution of my printer, the GFX yields slightly better than a 16x20 print-- not large by anyone's standards.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #3
Ccoppola82
Registered User
 
Ccoppola82 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 340
Maybe I’m a bit strange in that I think the limitations imposed by “lesser technology” often facilitated the creation of better works. I feel the same way when I oil paint. I work with a limited palette, and often work within a color/value gamut. Sometimes a full palette of endless possibilities leads to either lazy work and reliance on the technology or could potentially paralyze the creative vision by offering TOO many choices. Working within a set of known parameters helps to master the fundamentals and create a natural harmony. That being said, for what I do there really isn’t anything I would improve. I do wish that modern lenses were the size of earlier lenses.
__________________
Leica M2/M6
Hasselblad 500CM

Instagram
Coppola_Art
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #4
Deardorff38
Registered User
 
Deardorff38's Avatar
 
Deardorff38 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ccoppola82 View Post
Maybe I’m a bit strange in that I think the limitations imposed by “lesser technology” often facilitated the creation of better works.
For many decades......
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #5
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ccoppola82 View Post
Maybe I’m a bit strange in that I think the limitations imposed by “lesser technology” often facilitated the creation of better works. I feel the same way when I oil paint. I work with a limited palette, and often work within a color/value gamut. Sometimes a full palette of endless possibilities leads to either lazy work and reliance on the technology or could potentially paralyze the creative vision by offering TOO many choices. Working within a set of known parameters helps to master the fundamentals and create a natural harmony. That being said, for what I do there really isn’t anything I would improve. I do wish that modern lenses were the size of earlier lenses.
There is a difference between using a limited palette, and using inferior brushes, canvases, and paints. Not sure how the latter do anything to improve creativity.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #6
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,999
It seems to me that the newest digital cameras market higher resolution (pixel count), higher ISO, and faster autofocus. Not sure why those are needed. I look at what the masters did with 35mm & 120 film, at speeds from ISO 100 to ISO 400, with manual focus lenses, and am not sure that can be improved upon.

Would a Winogrand image have more meaning had it been shot at 45MP, ISO 12800, with 493-Point Phase-Detect AF? Or would David Douglas Duncan's work have moved you more being shot with the same? Or Herb Ritts, Richard Avedon, Diane Arbus, etc.?

Sure, the newest digital wonders make taking a picture simple and convenient, but if I am looking for simple and convenient I can just use my iPhone. Also simple and convenient has led, IMHO, to a saturation of mediocre images. Yes, they were simple and convenient to make, but does that make them images worth viewing?

Just some "late in the day" thoughts.

Best,
-Tim
__________________
http://www.timcarrollphotography.com

New Photo Books
Sturgis Stories
& Scenes From Sturgis
now available
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #7
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,392
I look not for mega pixels, not at all. But for the price and capabilities.
To me most capable cameras in normal price range and Ricoh GRII and Canon 6D.
Both are available new.

IMO, best Leica is used M240 (at this moment).
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #8
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,168
turns out the fuji xe3 is the perfect camera for me...not saying it's a perfect camera, just perfect for me!
since i bought my 2 bodies i have not looked at another camera, not seriously anyway. i have been concentrating on building up my lens inventory and plotting which lens will be next...so far the 16/2.8 will be the one, eventually adding the 10-24 and the 90. i have been using my 60 macro lots lately so wondering about the 80 macro instead of the 90.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #9
nickthetasmaniac
Registered User
 
nickthetasmaniac is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Pierce View Post
I kind of think the megapixel race is pointless for a lot of folks...
I agree, but it's worth noting that since the release of the A900 a decade ago, Sony has always had a 24mp full frame body in their line-up. Their hugely hyped recent A7III still sits at 24mp and generated more excitement than I've seen for a new release in a while. Likewise, Nikon chose to sit one of their new mirrorless options at 24mp, and Canon has their 6DII at 26mp.

My point being that yes, there is still a megapickle race going on at the top end of the market that doesn't make a lot of sense for a lot of us. But the industry seems to be well aware of this and has settled on mid-20mp as a sweet spot for keen enthusiast models. Personally, 24mp is a good balance of quality and file management. Going beyond that becomes a turn off as much as anything...

Going back to the original question - I look for a camera that I will enjoy using. Everything in the market segment I'm interested in has the image quality, performance and lenses I want, so it ends up being about the shooting experience.
__________________
Ricoh GRII | Pentax SV, SP-F, MX & LX | Leica M2 | Olympus Pen F + 35RD | Minolta Autocord | Hasselblad 500cm + SWC/m

Instagram @other_strange_creatures
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #10
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 6,032
I think 10 or 12 megapixels is about the Goldilocks "just right" number for me. After that, other things are more important, like an excellent viewfinder. Say, a Fuji X100 upgraded with a 24-90mm zoom would be great!
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-18-2018   #11
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,949
Not only is the life cycle of digital short, but none I've held, DSLR or Mirrorless has given me the tactile pleasure of a metal, mechanical, manual 35mm SLR. Even a Sears KS-500, a rebadged Ricoh KR-5, that cost me $5 has a more pleasant feel than my DSLR. And yes, the Ricoh/Sears has plastic top and bottom covers, but the body and film door are metal, the wind on is smooth and the viewfinder is large and easy to focus with the standard 50mm f2 lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #12
al1966
Feed Your Head
 
al1966's Avatar
 
al1966 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Age: 53
Posts: 706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
I think 10 or 12 megapixels is about the Goldilocks "just right" number for me. After that, other things are more important, like an excellent viewfinder. Say, a Fuji X100 upgraded with a 24-90mm zoom would be great!
I think you are about right, I can get a reasonable sized print from 10mp certainly A3 looks good enough. I feel for me the sweet spot was hit with the 16mp sensors but a fair bit of that was the overall output and how well they worked out for what I wanted to do (m43 especially).

I am hard pressed to think of anything they could do in a new camera that would make me want it. I shoot one frame at a time and apart from some occasional motorsport where 3-5 is fine that's no appeal. The dynamic range of all of them seem sufficient for my uses and as 16mp is plenty the idea of 100mp is more frightening making them take up more space and requiring larger HD space*. I remember when 800ASA film was pushing it 3200 as a usable sensitivity is wonderful and apart from the Green Room in Welwyn Garden City has been fine for gigs*2. So I am left wondering what would could they do to make me want something, perhaps a smaller sensor than 1" that is as good as m43 circa G3 EM5 era cameras for an even more portable system, don't know.

* Am doing a job that requires 50mp+ that is so the end user can zoom into parts and get the info they need, I was going to rent but a well priced cam has been bought on the gamble I should get the money back.

*2 What kind of damned fool puts a set of stage lights that illuminate the audience not the band idiots.
__________________
Life is a series of photographs surrounded by the worthless bits

http://jamesagrady.blog.com/
http://randompicture.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #13
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,078
I basically just want a Leica M-10P
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #14
pgk
Registered User
 
pgk is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 232
Ease of use. Simple UI. Easy to assimilate menus. A straightforward camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #15
:: Mark
Registered User
 
:: Mark is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyjoe View Post
Would a Winogrand image have more meaning had it been shot at 45MP, ISO 12800, with 493-Point Phase-Detect AF? Or would David Douglas Duncan's work have moved you more being shot with the same? Or Herb Ritts, Richard Avedon, Diane Arbus, etc.?
No, but there is a far greater chance of someone shooting a meaningful image today with a modern camera than, say, Winogrand's equipment.

To get those good images, Winogrand shot a phenomenal quantity of film. The cost and time to get those processed - not to mention the editing time - meant that shooting in the same way was never an option for many many people. By reducing the barriers to entry, digital has levelled the playing field.

Equally, better digital cameras get out of the way when shooting. I find shooting with a state-of-the-art digital Olympus *much* easier than with a film Leica, thanks to the what-you-see-is-what-you-get viewfinder and all the modern tricks that deal with camera shake, focus and exposure. This means that I can worry about the what of shooting instead of the how. Again this levels the playing field.

Better cameras give greater opportunity for more people to make unique and special images. Anything which improves that surely must be welcomed?
__________________
Mark
PhotoBlog
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #16
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,472
For personal work, this pretty much does it for me.


M-D and Coffee
by Vince Lupo, on Flickr
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #17
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,498
What do I look for when I'm thinking about buying a new camera?

User interface. Previously known as "ergonomics". And known prior to that as "handling".

The technical side of camera use is pretty simple, really. It's elementary geometry. It's shutter speed and aperture applied to the sensitivity of a type of media. After that, it can get hairy but with modern equipment all the hairy stuff has pretty much been shaven away. The hairy stuff had started balding even before the light meter was born. Simple. The only thing left is for the user to be able to...well, use it. Every single digital camera today is capable of excellent image quality and performance most of us will never need.

My main concern is how the camera handles because the rest of it has been taken care of.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #18
seagrove
Rich
 
seagrove is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 251
Right now, I have what I NEED. But I would love a Leica Monochrom and a series of Leica lenses (28mm, 50mm & 90mm)! My now gone Nikon D2H help rid me of G.A.S. when an image from one body was blown up to 6 FEET x 12 FEET and used on a billboard. Now retired I am making do with what I have. If a Leica M3 and 50mm Summicron was good enough for Cartier-Bresson, my current cameras (both film & digital) will challenge me enough.
__________________
Rich
http://meandmyx100s.blogspot.com
Yashica Electro35 GS, Fujifilm X100S (both silver & black bodies), TCL-X100, WCL-X100, sold everything else!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #19
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by :: Mark View Post
......there is a far greater chance of someone shooting a meaningful image today with a modern camera than, say, Winogrand's equipment.
More resolution, autofocus, faster autofocus, extreme low light capability....none of those things have a bearing on the creation of “meaningful”. Meaningful still depends completely on the meat sack holding the camera, be it a Zorki or the latest wallet draining temptation.

“Better cameras give greater opportunity for more people to make unique and special images.”

Well. The opportunities are indeed there, but the “special images” have not been concommittantly forthcoming.

They used to talk about giving typewriters to a room full of monkeys, and waiting for the eventual good novel to be written. The democratization of photography with the advent of ever more “capable”, do-it-for-you digital cameras has indeed “leveled the playing field” in a way. But all it has done is given those same monkeys electric typewriters instead of the manual ones.

Maybe that seems a bit harsh, but, if the criteria is “meaningful” as opposed to “sharp”, I have not seen any photographic evidence that our new gear utopia has been especially esthetically uplifting. But sharp, we’ve got all the sharp we can use. It may be pointless, but it’s sharp. And there’s a lot of it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #20
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by seagrove View Post
If a Leica M3 and 50mm Summicron was good enough for Cartier-Bresson, my current cameras (both film & digital) will challenge me enough.
Nothing stands still and that M3 and 50 Summicron were cutting edge at the time.
There is no reason to suppose that Bresson wouldn't be using something equally cutting edge today .
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #21
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,319
Actually, for my interests I really don't want anything.

I can use my digital cameras as I used a Canonet III QL-17 or a Zeiss Ikon M.

The prime lenses I have are excellent.

My digital cameras' analog dynamic range and low-light sensitivity are not limiting.

I rarely crop to achieve composition, so 24 X 36" prints are not a stretch.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #22
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Maybe that seems a bit harsh, but, if the criteria is “meaningful” as opposed to “sharp”, I have not seen any photographic evidence that our new gear utopia has been especially esthetically uplifting. But sharp, we’ve got all the sharp we can use. It may be pointless, but it’s sharp. And there’s a lot of it.
Possibly a bit harsh.
Yes there's a lot of it out there but people are having a lot of fun making photographs these days because the gear is so much easier to use.
I don't see that as a bad thing and I also see a lot of good work too..

When I started photography had too many gate keepers... fussy old guys and the only way was their way.

Now people seem more free to experiment, the cameras are easier and, of course, there is instant feed back.
Invaluable.

Whether we need more this or that…. I wouldn't care to say to be frank.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #23
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Lupo View Post
For personal work, this pretty much does it for me.


M-D and Coffee
by Vince Lupo, on Flickr
+1 ... All my work is personal now.

In addition to the M-D (my favorite M and quite possibly my favorite camera of all), I also need a TTL camera for macro, long lens, and precision tabletop work. I don't need a lot of fancy features: an accurate exposure metering system, an excellent viewfinder, responsiveness, good dynamic range and low noise at reasonable ISO settings. Good control ergonomics are essential. 24 Mpixel is a good resolution, depending on format. Format ... well, that depends on what I want a specific camera for. For close up, long tele, and macro work, APS-C and FourThirds format work nicely. For ultrawide and portraiture, FF and larger work better, giving more options in focus zone control.

A huge consideration for a camera purchase is the range of lenses available for any specific camera ... both quality and cost. I already have a full complement of Leica R lenses that I'm very happy with, same for Leica M lenses, so it makes sense to stick with Leica bodies that are well optimized to use them. My requirements led me to buy a Leica CL, replacing my Leica SL (which proved more camera than I needed/wanted), and I'm delighted with it: It proves a perfect complement to my M-D.

Of course, I have other cameras (Light L16, various Polaroid SX-70 and derivatives, Hasselblad SWC, etc) which suit either fun or specific niche uses better than the two Leicas. And I have a couple of film Leicas (M4-2 and Leicaflex SL) so that I have options for film photography as well as digital capture using my Leica lens kit.

The key, for me, is that once the cameras have passed a certain point of fundamental usability—a combination of resolution, dynamic range, sensitivity, control ergonomics, viewfinder/focusing system quality, and lens availability—I'm much more interested in using them than adding to them. What I really want is a camera that disappears when I use it, that lets me just concentrate on seeing what I want to photograph than distracts me by making me concentrate on managing it.

I have to admit, I don't look for new cameras—film or digital—anymore. What I have is more than enough. New cameras will come along now and then, I'm sure, but whether I buy one or not is purely up to the whim of the moment. I'm much more interested in using the cameras I have now and making photographs...

G


Seagull, Steel Water, and Horizon - Eastham, MA 2018
Leica CL + Summilux-R 50mm f/1.4
ISO 100 @ f/5.6 @ 1/320
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #24
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
More resolution, autofocus, faster autofocus, extreme low light capability....none of those things have a bearing on the creation of “meaningful”. Meaningful still depends completely on the meat sack holding the camera, be it a Zorki or the latest wallet draining temptation.

“Better cameras give greater opportunity for more people to make unique and special images.”

Well. The opportunities are indeed there, but the “special images” have not been concommittantly forthcoming.

They used to talk about giving typewriters to a room full of monkeys, and waiting for the eventual good novel to be written. The democratization of photography with the advent of ever more “capable”, do-it-for-you digital cameras has indeed “leveled the playing field” in a way. But all it has done is given those same monkeys electric typewriters instead of the manual ones.

Maybe that seems a bit harsh, but, if the criteria is “meaningful” as opposed to “sharp”, I have not seen any photographic evidence that our new gear utopia has been especially esthetically uplifting. But sharp, we’ve got all the sharp we can use. It may be pointless, but it’s sharp. And there’s a lot of it.
This is the point I was trying to make, you made it more eloquently Larry, Thanks.

Best,
-Tim
__________________
http://www.timcarrollphotography.com

New Photo Books
Sturgis Stories
& Scenes From Sturgis
now available
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #25
lynnb
Registered User
 
lynnb's Avatar
 
lynnb is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,487
When I look at a new camera, it's usually a used camera, more often than not from a camera market or charity store . What I look for is some lens that I want to use or some camera/format that I'd like to play with or use for a specific purpose. If budget were no problem I'd look at a Monochrom or a Foveon, as I like the output from both.

If the camera's going to be a carry-everywhere-user, size/weight and ergonomics are important, but I'll compromise if the lenses are desirable (desirable to me, that is), or if the camera is a beautiful instrument, like my Barnacks.

If I were looking to do paid portrait work and budget was no barrier I'd probably go for one of the new Canikon mirrorless models due to their system capabilities (lenses, flash). The new Canon f/2 standard zoom looks interesting.
__________________
Lynn
happiest when shooting 35mm and 120 film
RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #26
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Markey View Post
Possibly a bit harsh.
Yes there's a lot of it out there but people are having a lot of fun making photographs these days because the gear is so much easier to use.
I don't see that as a bad thing and I also see a lot of good work too..

When I started photography had too many gate keepers... fussy old guys and the only way was their way.

Now people seem more free to experiment, the cameras are easier and, of course, there is instant feed back.
Invaluable.

Whether we need more this or that…. I wouldn't care to say to be frank.
My thoughts were only in relation to the word “meaningful” as it pertains to what easier, more modern cameras allow, in the sense that neither creativity nor “art” (fraught word, that) is made more plentiful by newer cameras, as neither of those things can be democratized. More people having fun, sure, maybe.

As a no talent hack myself, I do get some shots with more modern cameras that are different than those I might get with older cameras, and I do sometimes enjoy just being able to fire away and see what happens. Results just not meaningful in a Winogrand way, that’s the only point I was attempting to make.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #27
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,949
These comments by Larry Coletta and Timmyjo pretty much sum up this cranky old mans feelings. I probably sound like a broken record but....I keep thinking of the work done by two still current working photographers, David Burnett and Michael Kenna. Both use several cameras but both have also been using a Holga to good effect. A more simple, even crude 120 rollfilm camera would be hard to find, but their work with it is excellent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #28
JeffS7444
Registered User
 
JeffS7444 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 179
What do I look for these days? Mostly:

-Features
-Form-factors (look & feel)
-Novelty

Technical excellence is something of a commodity these days and can be had cheaply from the likes of Target or Best Buy.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #29
Deardorff38
Registered User
 
Deardorff38's Avatar
 
Deardorff38 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 814
"What do you want?"....... less gear love......more great photographs. No number of $10k (w lens) M10s.....can equal an Edward Weston photo taken with a $5 rapid rectilinear & contact printed with a lightbulb hanging from a wire.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #30
Mcary
Registered User
 
Mcary is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Virginia USA
Age: 58
Posts: 1,784
Nothing really, and by that I mean the M10 isn't enough of an upgrade for me to justify spending that much money and I simply don't feel like starting over with another system so I will simply keep plugging away with my M9 until the price of a used M10 or M246 reach a level that I'm comfortable spending on digital body.
__________________
M. Cary
Trying to see something new whither I'm visiting someplace new or a place that I've visited many a time before.


  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #31
Harry Lime
Practitioner
 
Harry Lime's Avatar
 
Harry Lime is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,675
1) A digital Leica M with an advanced matrix metering system and a dual gain readout sensor that will give me the same highlight roll off as film. It also shouldn't be priced like a used car, because I need 2-3 bodies and pile of batteries.

2) The return of mid priced professional, dedicated film scanners like the Nikon 5000ED/9000ED. (I'm looking at you Kodak..., this should be a no brainer to a company wanting to sell film in the digital age)
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #32
Contarama
Registered User
 
Contarama is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,249
I'm still yearning for a 12-16mp digital back for F2. Powered by battery that fits in the battery compartment of said camera. Someone once said if you're going to dream then dream big
__________________
Art is the ability to make something...even if it is a big mess...
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #33
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
My thoughts were only in relation to the word “meaningful” as it pertains to what easier, more modern cameras allow, in the sense that neither creativity nor “art” (fraught word, that) is made more plentiful by newer cameras, as neither of those things can be democratized. More people having fun, sure, maybe.

As a no talent hack myself, I do get some shots with more modern cameras that are different than those I might get with older cameras, and I do sometimes enjoy just being able to fire away and see what happens. Results just not meaningful in a Winogrand way, that’s the only point I was attempting to make.
Ah …. I understand.
Thanks.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #34
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by zuiko85 View Post
.I keep thinking of the work done by two still current working photographers, David Burnett and Michael Kenna. Both use several cameras but both have also been using a Holga to good effect. A more simple, even crude 120 rollfilm camera would be hard to find, but their work with it is excellent.
I agree …. I admire both those photographers.

David Burnet though has recently swapped out all his Canon bodies for the latest Sony bodies.
I rashly commented that I thought he would find it liberating and he agreed that it had been.

I`m always one or two generations behind digitally and can`t envisage buying any of the new offerings but I never rule anything out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #35
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,908
Prime lenses that are reasonably priced for the advanced hobbyist that DO NOT need to have distortion correction in camera.

A converter that uses the Nikon AI tab to communicate the aperture to the camera and the close-down lever that closes down when the camera wants to take the picture and opens up after for a Z-Series camera.

A Nikkormat level Z-Series body, sort of a M-D version if you will. Keep the kick-a55 EVF from the Z6 and keep it simple. You might want to keep the internals the same for keeping cost down, just stop me from getting access to it for other than ISO/Shutter/Aperture/Shutter-Release. Oh, and it needs to have a street price of $1,000 please and thank you.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #36
froyd
Registered User
 
froyd's Avatar
 
froyd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyjoe View Post
It seems to me that the newest digital cameras market higher resolution (pixel count), higher ISO, and faster autofocus. Not sure why those are needed. I look at what the masters did with 35mm & 120 film, at speeds from ISO 100 to ISO 400, with manual focus lenses, and am not sure that can be improved upon.

-Tim
True, in part, but I doubt Winogrand would have taken the same pictures he snapped with his 35mm Leica had he used a wooden field camera. Fortunately, he did not care what the "masters" before him did with sheet film and slow emulsion and instead used the tools of his time to help achieve his vision ---and deliver memorable images.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #37
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 1,331
I'm not on the look out for this 'cos it ain't going to happen... but I want a digital camera

• with a >50 MP cutting-edge sensor
• optimised for still images only (no video)
• for manual lenses only
• manual control only (no autofocus, autoexposure, auto-white balance, etc.)
• with real knobs and dials (not menus) for important controls.

Something like an Olympus OM1 with a high-end digital sensor stuffed in it – along the lines of what Epson did to the Bessa R3A to create the Epson R-D1 (albeit it's sensor was poor).

In short, a completely manual digital camera but with useful stuff like in-body image stabilisation and an electronic viewfinder (the new ones are now superior to optical viewfinders).
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #38
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Contarama View Post
I'm still yearning for a 12-16mp digital back for F2. Powered by battery that fits in the battery compartment of said camera. Someone once said if you're going to dream then dream big
I dream that dream to, except its for a OM-1n and the battery/electronic part is in a thing that resembles a winder attached to the bottom of the camera. I figure that would have enough room for the necessary additional stuff required for a sensor.

When they (just who are ‘they’ anyway) bring that to market for less than $1K you can also watch me flap my arms and fly to the moon.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #39
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,298
I'd like some new knees.

As far as equipment, I'm more than happy with the X1D, looking forward to one of the long lenses for it in the near future. After 25 years with the 8x10 I think I am going to be selling off the bulk of that kit, the X1D betters it - something I didn't think I would ever see.



__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2018   #40
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
.... After 25 years with the 8x10 I think I am going to be selling off the bulk of that kit, the X1D betters it - something I didn't think I would ever see.
WOW!

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:46.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.