Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

What do you shoot with?

I'm actually interested in reading what people use, and why they use it, and I don't think this thread is one where fanboys discuss their equipment at all. Rather, it is a low-key, thoughtful discussion which deals with what the OP asked - what do people shoot with, and why they choose that particular equipment over others….

While I have always liked SLR cameras, in latter years, especially with the advent of digital cameras, they became too large, too cumbersome, and frankly, too heavy to carry around comfortably.

For my part, I never wanted a point-and-shoot, as the quality wasn't good enough, and I had found (from the time I had the Nikon F100) some of these SLR cameras simply too heavy to wish to carry them around all of the time.

Thus, I have long been interested in that area where quality of images taken and ease of portability meet; I actually had it with my first ever SLR, the Pentax ME Super which I referred to in an earlier post. Indeed, even earlier, as a teenager, I had been given an ancient Minolta rangefinder, which took terrific pictures, and was also very portable.
 
Currently, I shoot Fuji X-E1 and 2 Pentax K-01s. I shoot mostly on a tripod, and those cameras are much better than most DSLRs for that. In my opinion, the Fuji (X-E1, X-Pro, etc.) and Pentax (K-5, K-01) also have the best image quality (noise and dynamic range) of any APS-C cameras. Fans of other brands will cry about that, but there's plenty of measurement data and plenty of high contrast photographs to illustrate it.

I shoot the Fuji with the 18-55 and one of the Pentax with the 55-300. The other Pentax is used with my assortment of Pentax primes and Mamiya 645 primes.

I sold a Pentax K-5 earlier this year because it was less convenient to use on a tripod than the K-01. Sometimes, I regret that when I shoot handheld, but trying to remember how to operate 3 different cameras under trying circumstances is no picnic. In that regard, 2 cameras are better than 3.

I shot a Mamiya 645/Kodak 645M digital back combo for 8 years. Loved the image quality. Leagues better at 100 ISO than any FX camera today, and possibly forever. There's no substitute for large pixels. Ultimately, it was too heavy to continue carrying, lacked a 3" LCD monitor, was useless in high ISO situations, required a lot of time cloning out dust spots, etc., so I sold it in 2012. I took a hit in terms of image quality, but the 2x3 frame is better suited to widescreen display than the square.

I've also shot Nikon D80, Nikon D2h, Canon EOS Rebel (the first Rebel DSLR), Kodak 14n, Panasonic GH2, Sigma SD9, Sony 707. All were sold because of significant failings…too many artifacts, too few megapixels, lack of dynamic range, too noisy, junk camera body, cheap body, too clunky, too gadgety, lack of features, etc.

If I shot sports or moving subjects frequently, I'd own one of the better Nikon or Canon cameras, but I don't, so I don't.
 
I tend to agree with compuwar on this... too many people talk about what brand of equipment they have as if it actually means something to everyone listening. Quite honestly, telling me that someone has a Nikon K2001 or Canon DXP444 means nothing to me, since I don't follow the tech reviews on equipment that I don't own. I have a camera, I use it.

That said... my main camera is a PhaseOne - a medium format DSLR based on the Mamiya 645 system. The 'why' of it may be of interest however.

Back in the days of film, I had the Mamiya 645 system. I liked the size of the negatives... I tend to crop, and it left me lots to play with. And I really liked the way the camera worked. It would become a natural extension of my hand, and I could put all of my attention on the subject and basically ignore the workings of the camera.

Then the digital revolution hit. And I observed that my colleagues were working twice as hard as usual to pay for the constant upgrades they continually needed in order to stay in the same place. In those days there was actually a big and noticeable improvement in the quality of the images produced with each new version. You had to have the latest version in order to keep up with your competitors. Plus you had to upgrade your computer every year or two to keep up with the huge changes in software and file sizes. Someone I knew was donating his computer every two years to a hospital in Montreal. The computer that was no longer capable of dealing with his photos ended running the entire patient records department at a major hospital. Every two years.

So I sat it out... who needs to work that hard just keep upgrading your tools just to stay in the game? I stay with film for as long was convenient, and then I ran a photographic art gallery for a few years. Oh, and I picked up a bunch of speciality lenses for my Mamiya system for cheap at swap meets and the used equipment sections in camera stores. The pros were dumping their medium format film systems to pay for their digital gear.

Once digital finally got to the point that for all intents and purposes that most improvements were not really discernible to the human eye, I got back in the game. I had this great collection of lenses, and they fit a camera that worked pretty much like the old Mamiya 645 system did so the learning curve was minimal. I still really like the way the camera works, and I can still pay all my attention on the subject instead of the camera.

It has minimal features, and not a great ISO range. I actually had more ISO choices with film. But what do I care? If I'm working in the studio I control the lights - and if I'm outside I own a tripod. For the kind of work I do I don't need high ISOs. I did get the databack that allows for exposures up to an hour. That is a really cool feature. And the databack has big fat pixels - so the noise is minimal. And if the camera is not able to take a particular shot under some conditions... so what? There are plenty more opportunities somewhere else. I'll just enjoy the moment.

Now my biggest challenge is educating my clients about what 'good' photography looks like. There is some much crap out there that is being lauded at 'great' - well, I'll just say it's an uphill battle.

Oh.. and I have a Lumix of some sort. It's mirrorless so I can use it in a theatre without disturbing anyone... occasionally I get asked to take photos during a performance of some sort and I need something quiet and with a long optical zoom.

Sorry for such a long story...
 
Sony Nex-7 because I like the size of the mirror less format. It has a nice sized sensor.

iPhone 5 because it's always with me.
 
Apple fanboy said:
Nikon D7100
18-55mm VR
70-300mm VR

And some nice goodies I'll tell you about in a few days.....
Click to expand...

So in addition to the above, I just picked up the following from work. All second hand, but at a really good price. All Nikon
D300
70-200mm 2.8 VR
24-70mm 2.8
14-24mm 2.8
10.5mm 2.8
60mm Macro 2.8
2 x Teleconverter
SB900
R1C1 Macro flash rig.
Going to make packing my bag interesting over the summer!
Excuse quality of photo, didn't really have anywhere big enough to show it all, and had to be quick due to needing to put boxes in the loft etc.
 

Attachments

  • 20140614-_DSC3438.jpg
    20140614-_DSC3438.jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 122
Apple fanboy said:
So in addition to the above, I just picked up the following from work. All second hand, but at a really good price. All Nikon
D300
70-200mm 2.8 VR
24-70mm 2.8
14-24mm 2.8
10.5mm 2.8
60mm Macro 2.8
2 x Teleconverter
SB900
R1C1 Macro flash rig.
Going to make packing my bag interesting over the summer!
Excuse quality of photo, didn't really have anywhere big enough to show it all, and had to be quick due to needing to put boxes in the loft etc.
Click to expand...
Wtf?! :eek: how much did all this cost?
 
Olympus omd em1 because it beats my cell phone camera and it's the best piece of photographic equipment I've ever laid my hands on. A very well made well engineered and well thought out camera. I have 6 kids and I have a blast taking pictures of them.
 
Hi Guys, Therapy time...

before we start, "My name is Ken and I am an addict..."

I started with a desire to take better pictures of my daughters so went to Jessops and came out with a Canon 1100d, kit lens and nifty fifty.

Then I took a fancy to taking moon photos and so needed telephoto so I bought a sequence of 70-300mm range Canon consumer lenses then caved in and bought a Canon 100-400mm L. Oh, and I bought a EOS 650D to go with it. Then I realised my kit lens sucked so bought a 24-105L. I was a happy camper, getting decent moon shots and lots of snaps of my girls.

Then the Canon 70d arrived and a moment of weakness in Heathrow Airport saw one of those being added to the list.

Alongside this, (I travel a lot with work) I got a point and shoot in the form of a RX100 so I could carry it with me. Afterall, the best camera is the one you have with you. This little gem continues to blow me away.

Then I noticed I only really used the RX100 because I didnt want to take my precious Canon further than a 500 yard radius of the house. In other words, I never took it anywhere and hardly used it so it was pointless having it.

So I sold my Canon gear and got a Sony A7 - thought was that it would be more portable so I may take it with me more. I do - slightly - and I love it but my RX100 is still the one I nearly always have on me.

I am now bought into the A7 system with a few lenses. I miss my Canon gear especially times like last night when we had a crystal clear moon in a velvet black sky as there is no economically feasible telephoto solution for A7 right now IMHO.

Now, why am I telling you all this? well basically, I have all the gear and no idea! I have found to the detriment of my wallet that chasing the latest and greatest instead of focusing on the art continues to prove that the equipment is not as significant as one would think. The person using it is the difference between a happy snap and a masterpiece. I hope to progress beyond happy snapper at some point... :)

Thank you for reading.

Ken.
 
OK, now I'm going to give you my favourite cameras and let's see if you know them:

Olympus XA
Olympus XA2
Olympus Trip 35
Olympus OM2n

just an iPhone 5c as digital thingamagic and a film scanner for my negatives....
 
MiniMoke said:
OK, now I'm going to give you my favourite cameras and let's see if you know them:

Olympus OM2n

just an iPhone 5c as digital thingamagic and a film scanner for my negatives....
Click to expand...

I have an OM-1n. I thought about getting the 2n, but I have no need for an auto-exposure system. Lately I have been shooting mostly with my Fuji GW690II, partly because it is easier to take with me on my bike than the Mamiya RB67. Most of my photography is done while I am riding, so the choice of camera comes down to where I am headed, how much I feel up to carrying, and how much time I have. I mean, taking the 4x5 means two panniers full of kit, plus set-up and break-down time for each shot. And conversation time--if you are on the side of the road with your bike and a 4x5, there will be questions.
 
Oh great, a fellow film shooter! WTG

I never got the hang of MF or LF cameras. I love my stealthy, pocket sized XA's, and my OM2n not for the automatic exposure but as it's the best OM camera I could find.
 
Bfg2.JPG


BFG 9000. Large scope and vast distance range. Also has auto focus features for the stray enemies. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back