I wish I'd had a camera with me...

R

Roger Hicks

Mentor
Local time
6:41 AM
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
23,920
...at the reception given by our new deputé (M.P.) Or rather, I wish I'd had a camera that took sharp pictures. This one didn't.

Who else thinks it's a lousy idea to carry a second-string camera just to save a few ounces?

Cheers (for a given value of cheers),

R.
 
I had this in cycles. I would have camera I'm comfortable with. To me it is film Leica or FED-2. But then I switch to something more reasonable as "camera to have with me". And I'm getting skunked or I'm not satisfied with what I'm getting even if it is sharp. And then I switch back to Leica or FED-2. And then again, why I'm taking everywhere my precious? Switching to something cheap or(and) auto, the moment arise and I'm skunked, not satisfied again.
 
Nowadays with the phone I am well served. I use it as a visual journal and it prints nicely up to 8x10 (or larger but shows some artifact). The fact that a thin slab packs so many devices that would startle the 1990s self is astounding.


I do have dilemmas about Digital m43 vs 35mm vs Medium format, about packing and shooting. That is for deliberate photography however.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I had this in cycles. I would have camera I'm comfortable with. To me it is film Leica or FED-2. But then I switch to something more reasonable as "camera to have with me". And I'm getting skunked or I'm not satisfied with what I'm getting even if it is sharp. And then I switch back to Leica or FED-2. And then again, why I'm taking everywhere my precious? Switching to something cheap or(and) auto, the moment arise and I'm skunked, not satisfied again.
Click to expand...
Similar here. I hadn't tried it for years, but I remember it from long ago. But I'd used a couple of cheap, pocketable digis (property of a deceased friend) so I bought a new battery for my own cheap, pocketable digi. Never again!That's why I'll stick with decent cameras from now on.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Why?

At the end of the piece I say that I can't see much point in spending more money on a camera which certainly won't deliver better results than the proper cameras I already own.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Because you weren't the operator of the camera right? And this was a focus situation? If it was AF, most likely the person making the photo would have done better? Perhaps we are misunderstanding the point.
 
What's it focused on? A mote of dust in the foreground?

Yeah probably better off handing someone a manual camera that you've already set exposure and zone focus for. Then they just press a button.
 
It's a small camera that can be taken anywhere. It can also be set on full auto quickly so that when you do hand it over to someone, they can just point it at you and click the shutter

Roger Hicks said:
Why?

At the end of the piece I say that I can't see much point in spending more money on a camera which certainly won't deliver better results than the proper cameras I already own.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...
 
Arbitrarium said:
What's it focused on? A mote of dust in the foreground?

Yeah probably better off handing someone a manual camera that you've already set exposure and zone focus for. Then they just press a button.
Click to expand...
This is very much my feeling. Auto-anything is likely to screw up more often than the approach you describe -- and using the cameras I already own is a lot cheaper too. As for "go anywhere", I'm not so old and feeble that I can't carry a Leica or even a Nikon Df. At least, not yet.

Cheers,

R.
 
One of the nice things about it being winter in the south right now is that I usually wear a jacket when I leave home. And that means I have my folding Voigtländer Vitessa with me in a jacket pocket. I do use it at other times of the year, but it frequently gets a start in jacket months, because it's compact, quirky, beautiful, and its Ultron 50mm f/2 lens is so good. Any other time I'll have something handy, often my Contax and 50mm collapsible Sonnar.
Cheers,
Brett
 
I agree what in OP situation the mobile phone is the best solution these days if no serious camera present. But the "I wish I'd had a camera with me" sometimes is not as simple as picture of three persons staying still under good light in comfy weather....

How many times I pull mobile phone out to find it shutting down on me because they made it sissy and it shuts itself if it is too cold for it (Like -5C). I still could take picture, all I have do is to take off my hat, put phone on my head and wear hat for few minutes. This dinky IPhone 5C is turning back on after it. :)

AF? Will it focus on the car glass or on my object in five meters away. AE? Will it measure bright or dark, but not where my object it...
 
Sounds like there has been a lot of your problem going around. Maybe something in the air?

A while back I decided I had to stop carrying my Super Press 23 due to back problems. Same for my entire Fujica ST901 kit. I tried carrying a camera and at most one lens, but it didn't feel the same. Nor the XA, nice as it is.

Ironically, I don't so much mind carrying my old Sony 6 meg digital zoom. Nor a Mimiya Six although it is pushing for weight.

If you find a cure sir, please pass it on. :p
 
Roger Hicks said:
..Who else thinks it's a lousy idea to carry a second-string camera just to save a few ounces?...
Click to expand...

I´d like to contradict in the guess that the unsharp picture is the result from buying a cheap camera, Roger.

Accordding to the EXIF Data, the picture is carrying, focus was set to infinity.
There is no hint if that camera was switched to manual focus or if it was just a autofocus failure.
Guessing that another camera would have done better is same as asking a glass sphere here.

User setting of cameras date was "Zeitpunkt Aufnahme: 13.09.2023 22:15:35" which suggests that the confrontation
user-camera was not very intensive at all :D
 
Iphone is always with me, but in 90% of situations I have a film camera with me. When I go "light", it' Contax T2. Not exatly a pocket size, but works for me.
 
I don't differentiate between good cameras and what I take with me. If I'm going to bother carrying a camera, and, as my wife points out, I always do, it will be manual focus, film, and with a couple of lenses. It doesn't have to be heavy - a IIIa with wide Elmar, normal Summar, and 90 Elmar doesn't weight much. Old as that set is, it can still do super work. As to 'one camera, one lens,' I've tried it and don't like it much.
 
Good little article Roger. I'm pretty certain many of us have very similar experiences.

It is easy to forget that much of our photographic prowess (such as it may be) is often the direct result of how familiar we are with our equipment.
 
This summer, I took with me only M 4/3 with one lens (twice). I did not feel that I was creating a "sharpness problem" or that images would come out as being inferior. I wanted to go light. I guess, it depends what kind of priorities you set. I used what I already had at home.
 
Pioneer said:
Good little article Roger. I'm pretty certain many of us have very similar experiences.

It is easy to forget that much of our photographic prowess (such as it may be) is often the direct result of how familiar we are with our equipment.
Click to expand...

Totally agree about that Pioneer. Knowing a camera tricks and strong points really help one to get the most of it.

Regards

Marcelo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top