5 ms·

Interesting article on learning to shoot but.... To me, taking SLRs everywhere turns you from a participant to a documentarian. Additionally, and I say this as

Interesting article on learning to shoot but.... To me, taking SLRs everywhere turns you from a participant to a documentarian. Additionally, and I say this as a former professional assistant and current serious amateur, SLRs for family stuff are really inconvenient, and often times just collect dust. Lastly, SLRs can take intimacy away (though they can add gravitas). You know, photographing people is really equal parts psychological and visual. Avedon was a master of the psychological for instance, shooting people repeatedly in the same style, but with wildly different effect. SLRs to me up the psychological stakes taking what you're doing from photography to capital P Photography with a whole raft of associations there between you and your subjects. Lastly, from a technical perspective, sensors and lenses on cheaper cameras are pretty good these days, and generally when you shooting you don't want full manual. I can shoot using the zone system if I need to (well, if I hadn't sold my light meter years ago), but with digital photography these days, the two controls I really use are Aperture or Shutter Priority and exposure adjust. If I really want to lock the exposure (for a complex strobe setup or super-consistent color) manual's nice, but it's rarely that important for casual photographers. That said, learning to shoot an SLR is fun, just beware the significant risk that it'll wind up rarely used on a shelf. Here's some more compact cameras I'd recommend: Panasonic Lumix LX5 Nikon S95 Canon Powershot G12 Fuji X100 (My baby, but pricey, and it's a camera with some intentional limitations many may not like).

adyus 15y ago
I agree with your last statement. The main reason Cartier-Bresson and others were able to create such powerful images was the fact that their cameras didn't get in the way. The X100 is a good example of the principle working in the other direction. While the subject can relax more when approached with a more modest device, the photographer is also influenced by camera choice, and the X100 is a perfect example of taking better photos simply by feeling good about the camera. (edit) Used 'camera' too many times :)
donut 15y ago
> Nikon S95 Doesn't exist, AFAICT. Do you mean Canon S95? If so, the Canon S95 is excellent.
- freemarketteddy 15y ago
  I think Nikon P7000 is what he meant!
numlocked 15y ago
Two things to add to this: 1) A way to mitigate the risk of winding up with a camera sitting on the shelf is to start off with a used SLR from a few years ago. If, six months in, you don't like it, you can almost surely get your money back out of it on Craigslist. 2) As to bringing it everywhere, this quote from Jay Maisel jumps to mind: "You should always carry your camera with you because it’s easier to take pictures that way." Just depends on the attitude I guess. That said, I completely agree with the documentarian comment - if you become "that guy" (the photographer), you have to consciously remember to participate in things like family events, and not just shoot them. It sounds ridiculous, but it's true.
- adyus 15y ago
  There should be a collection of Jay Maisel sayings published as a book. Throw in a couple of Arnold Newman quips, and you've got a bestseller :) All humor aside, there is much wisdom in these sayings. W.Eugene Smith's "Available light is any damn light that's available!" comes to mind. I think technological development in photography is both a blessing and a curse. Sometimes it gets in the way of taking really great photos, despite its intentions.
keenerd 15y ago
Just want to add one to your list - Nikon P60. It has all sorts of awesome features like a great viewfinder and 8 second exposure time but you can get it for under $200. And uses AA batteries, so your camera will keep on working through the day. But if you are looking to try a DSLR, go with a Pentax Kx. It is the only entry-level DSLR to use standard AA batteries, which is pretty much invaluable if you only use it once a week or when traveling or if you plan to keep your camera for more than three years. The whole intimacy/gravitas issue is easily resolved - don't be the only person with an SLR at a family gatherings (if you are, back off 50' or so when shooting, the angle will be better anyway) and don't carry it around your neck the entire time.
rimantas 15y ago
> Lastly, from a technical perspective, sensors and lenses > on cheaper cameras are pretty good these days, and > generally when you shooting you don't want full manual. True, but focus speed and low-light performance are still very lacking compared to SLRs. And I'd say these two are quite important for family stuff: just try to take photo of playing kids with camera which is slow to focus or has substantial shutter lag. Not all family dinners are brightly lit either.

adyus 15y ago

I agree with your last statement. The main reason Cartier-Bresson and others were able to create such powerful images was the fact that their cameras didn't get in the way. The X100 is a good example of the principle working in the other direction. While the subject can relax more when approached with a more modest device, the photographer is also influenced by camera choice, and the X100 is a perfect example of taking better photos simply by feeling good about the camera. (edit) Used 'camera' too many times :)

donut 15y ago

> Nikon S95 Doesn't exist, AFAICT. Do you mean Canon S95? If so, the Canon S95 is excellent.

freemarketteddy 15y ago
I think Nikon P7000 is what he meant!

numlocked 15y ago

Two things to add to this: 1) A way to mitigate the risk of winding up with a camera sitting on the shelf is to start off with a used SLR from a few years ago. If, six months in, you don't like it, you can almost surely get your money back out of it on Craigslist. 2) As to bringing it everywhere, this quote from Jay Maisel jumps to mind: "You should always carry your camera with you because it’s easier to take pictures that way." Just depends on the attitude I guess. That said, I completely agree with the documentarian comment - if you become "that guy" (the photographer), you have to consciously remember to participate in things like family events, and not just shoot them. It sounds ridiculous, but it's true.

adyus 15y ago
There should be a collection of Jay Maisel sayings published as a book. Throw in a couple of Arnold Newman quips, and you've got a bestseller :) All humor aside, there is much wisdom in these sayings. W.Eugene Smith's "Available light is any damn light that's available!" comes to mind. I think technological development in photography is both a blessing and a curse. Sometimes it gets in the way of taking really great photos, despite its intentions.

keenerd 15y ago

Just want to add one to your list - Nikon P60. It has all sorts of awesome features like a great viewfinder and 8 second exposure time but you can get it for under $200. And uses AA batteries, so your camera will keep on working through the day. But if you are looking to try a DSLR, go with a Pentax Kx. It is the only entry-level DSLR to use standard AA batteries, which is pretty much invaluable if you only use it once a week or when traveling or if you plan to keep your camera for more than three years. The whole intimacy/gravitas issue is easily resolved - don't be the only person with an SLR at a family gatherings (if you are, back off 50' or so when shooting, the angle will be better anyway) and don't carry it around your neck the entire time.

rimantas 15y ago

> Lastly, from a technical perspective, sensors and lenses > on cheaper cameras are pretty good these days, and > generally when you shooting you don't want full manual. True, but focus speed and low-light performance are still very lacking compared to SLRs. And I'd say these two are quite important for family stuff: just try to take photo of playing kids with camera which is slow to focus or has substantial shutter lag. Not all family dinners are brightly lit either.