Let's open another can of worms to rant on. Way back for 50+ years the only camera I had was a Nikon Ftn, all manual everything. You had to know your stuff, you had to be quick, focus, click... with no previews of your shot to look at. You had a box of filters for every occasions, than you were at the mercy of the lab to do a good job or do it yourself, print it yourself, fix it yourself. Now even a $5000 camera can point and shot. Times have change. I feel like an old fighter pilot with all the glory story's in the past. Young wepersnapers don't have a clue what its like to really be good with the old stuff. Really missing that old Ftn, but someone really wanted it, so I sold it all. Now armed with digital for 15 years, the old cockpits where all analog, mechanical. Now the new cockpits are glass, computers etc. Camera have gone the same route. They take.... I mean capture (sorry) scenes better then the eye can see. Point...&... Shoot. That was easy. Do some creative photoshop and voila, better than the real thing. OK I'll let someone pick this thing apart now. And I still like B17s better than Tanks.

When you get right down to the basics of photography, nothing has changed all that much. Once you cut through all the high tech automation, unnecessary bells and whistles, advertising hype and techno-babble there are only three controls of any significance in every adjustable camera and lens; aperture, shutter speed and focus. If the “photographer” is really a photographer and fully understands and MASTERS the multiple and interrelated functions of theses three adjustments, he or she can produce, create and enable a myriad of effects, moods, and images only limited by one's imagination. Many great and even iconic images were made with simple decent gear. Many photography enthusiasts are just too preoccupied with gear and would do better (photographically) to concentrate on simplicity and really learning their craft.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with today's high tech automated equipment. It just makes things more convenient at times. The savvy photographer knows how to maximize the usage of this automation by manipulating it to their own requirements or totally bypassing theses programs and adjusting things manually.

There is no automation to replace artistry. Elements such as composition, aesthetics, “seeing” and applying the dynamic of light are all talents, perhaps inborn traits, however, even those who are fortunate enough to posses theses attributes still need to develop theses talents and learn the craftsmanship and technology.

I have spent many decades in the film era and admittedly, I do miss certain aspects of the craftsmanship. There is little use, however, in pining for the good old days, perhaps, in retrospect they were old but not all that “good”. Besides, how can one revert to the film era when most of the film, fine papers and chemistry are no longer in production. One would spend more time trying to acquire whatever is still around, mixing scratch chemistry and basically living in the past, than shooting and creating images.

All of the camera handling and image management of film cameras can be related to digital gear and all of the aesthetics of analog darkroom work can be translated to post processing and editing.

There is still no technology to replace patience and hard work.

Let's open another can of worms to rant on. Way back for 50+ years the only camera I had was a Nikon Ftn, all manual everything. You had to know your stuff, you had to be quick, focus, click... with no previews of your shot to look at. You had a box of filters for every occasions, than you were at the mercy of the lab to do a good job or do it yourself, print it yourself, fix it yourself. Now even a $5000 camera can point and shot. Times have change. I feel like an old fighter pilot with all the glory story's in the past. Young wepersnapers don't have a clue what its like to really be good with the old stuff. Really missing that old Ftn, but someone really wanted it, so I sold it all. Now armed with digital for 15 years, the old cockpits where all analog, mechanical. Now the new cockpits are glass, computers etc. Camera have gone the same route. They take.... I mean capture (sorry) scenes better then the eye can see. Point...&... Shoot. That was easy. Do some creative photoshop and voila, better than the real thing. OK I'll let someone pick this thing apart now. And I still like B17s better than Tanks.

I see posts like this from time to time and wanted to throw this out there. As someone who started with film, shooting thinking like Pentax K1000 and Nikon FM2 bodies - as well as 6x7 Pentax cameras, I'm no stranger to manual only operation.

And I wouldn't go back for anything.

Sure, the cameras were simpler, but the truth is, they just weren't capable of the consistent captures that today's cameras can do in the right hands and with the right configurations. I love action / bird in flight shots, but my hit rate is WAY higher today than it was in the film and manual focus era. Sure, you'd get a great shot here and there, but it just wasn't possible to get the consistency and number of keepers we get today. Plus, with the camera doing some of the heavy lifting (like focusing for instance), I'm free to concentrate on things like composition, watching backgrounds, etc.

IMO, we are in the "good old days" of photography right now.