le boecere

Harry, from your reply, it appears that you've read some of Mike's blog. I doubt that many who've posted on this thread have ~ at least not his blog entry from yesterday (30 Jan 2019). If you've not read it, I commend it to you, as it puts much of my opening post in context.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2019/01/do-pros-use-pro-gear.html

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

When I started I used my dad's Speed Graphic. Talk about heavy.

kmohr3 Loc: Rockford, IL

Yes, a year seems excessive. Most of the time when I've decided to order a new camera, I've downloaded the manual and have already read about half of it. Especially what pertains to me. ie focusing systems, metering, bracketing, and things like that. Helps me to get up to speed quickly.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

In my opinion the definition of “up to speed” is variable. One year is not a long time if “up to speed” means knowing most everything about the workings of the new camera in order to use it proficiently. A new user may have a steeper learning curve than one who has experience with a similar product line. Most people according to Mike’s article are happy to settle for using it “out of the box” and never truly get “up to speed” before they get tired of the camera. Many also IMHO decide to “upgrade” without truly getting “up to speed” on what they already have. These GAS attacks create a nice used market for others.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Absolutely true... Whatever gets it done.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Yeah. I did use those.

le boecere

Ron! You read the blog post! Good! (I'd bet most, here, have not)

kmohr3 Loc: Rockford, IL

I know this is getting away from the original question, but people will learn their cameras if they really 'want' to. When I bought my first DSLR, (used), I knew almost nothing about them. I delved into the manual, and bought the David Busch book for my camera. I spent most of my spare time reading the books with camera in hand, until I understood how everything worked. Within 2 or 3 weeks I knew and understood my camera. And continued on from there.

I'm now in a local camera club and can't believe how many of these folks know almost nothing about their expensive cameras. There's probably less than 25% that are proficient with their cameras. My feeling is if they really wanted to know they would figure it out. (This is not meant to be a criticism, just an observation).

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

Rond check out my post about Micro Contrast it is here. It is about different lens like zeiss etc that
make very different photos. Rich with tonal quality that is why we like the older gear.

BebuLamar

As you said if you don't know about your camera then you don't. It took you 2 or 3 weeks from nothing. Now if someone who is using a Nikon D4 and knew it well how long does it take to get used to a Nikon D5? I bet in a couple of days. So if someone started with a Nikon D1 then D2 and so on as soon as they came out it wouldn't take any time to get used to the new ones.

HardwareGuy

What I think is most fascinating, is that all you hear about is the demise of the camera as we know it. Yet, there is a boom of new and interesting cameras that just keep getting technologically better and better.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

There is always room in the market for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt to creep in.

I think we have to be realistic. The market evolves continuously, faster and faster, as technology matures. There will always be surprises and paradigm shifts and left or right turns from the status quo. But pessimism is a self-fulfilling prophecy. I wish Canon well, but I also wish they would just shut up and find a new CEO who'll take reasonable risks. Nikon, too, for that matter. Both should have done that a long time ago. Their stagnation over the last decade of their habitual, conservative incrementalism has left them gasping for market oxygen.

There is no point in worry, or wishing things would stay the same. Tomorrow, the beach brings a new day of waves to wash away our sand castles. A new group of tourists will build new ones.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

Yes it was a good post. Thanks.

Bipod

I'm afraid the number of full-time professional photographers in the USA
has decline steeply over the last 30 years. So has the number of camera
retailers, repair shops, finishihng labs, and other photo-related businesses,
especially galleries.

The number of people supporting themsleves though fine art photography was
never large, but now it is vanishingly small.

When I first visited the Photography West Gallery in Carmel, in the early 1980s,
it was full of prints by Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, Brett Weston, Wynn
Bullock and Morely Baer. All those photographers (except Bullock) were still
living and several lived in the area. The last time I visted that gallery, a couple
years ago, different prints by the same photographers (now all dead) were for sale.

Collectors and museums have collectively decided:
* The 1920s through 1970s was a good period in photography
* These types of prints are permanent (or relatively so)
* Such prints are fairly difficult to forge
* Most are rare, some very rare
Therefore, they fetch high prices (in some cases at auction, astronomical prices)

Like all art markets, the photographic print market is segmented. The market
at the top (the kind of stuff that sells at aution at Southeby's and Christie's) is strong.
But that's almost all the work of famous dead photographers (nearly all optical prints
from film negative) and maybe a dozen famous living ones. In the entire world.

Some of the living photographers use digital cameas and make computer prints.
But one in SF uses a digital camera and prints on a tranparency, then contacts
prints that on to handmade platinum paper (which is oh so permanent and would
be very hard to forge).

The rest of the market has crashed. The piece of gear responsible is the computer printer.
A computer printout is inherently not something collectors cherishes--might as well print on
toliet paper. Worse, there is no such thing as an "original" computer print.

To duplicate one of Ansel Adam's prints, I would have to somehow obtain the negative
from the Ansel Adams Foundation-- not likely to happen. (And they would notice if it
went missing.) Then I would have to have an enlarger capabel of handing a 4 x 5" or
8 x 10" negative. Then I would need Adam's printing instructions. And correct brand of
photo paper from the correct era. And paper developer. Then all it takes to make one
forged print is a deal of time and skill.

Edward Weston contacted printed--a much simpler process. But the most contact prints
he ever made of one image was, I believe 12 (of one of the green pepper series). And
you'd need his negatives, which he burned. And you'd need to develop the prints in
amidol (not that common anymore, and rather toxic).

However, from any high-res image posted on this website, I can push a button, and my
print will spew out identical "originals" until it runs out of paper or ink. They are as
alike as peas in a pod.

Print collectors tend to worry about stuff like that. Like all buyers, they are adverse to
risk and uncertainty.

Personally, I will not buy computer prints. If I did, I would pay exactly what I would pay
for a high-quality litho of the same size.

To get people to regard photographs as art rather than as keepsakes (and to be willing to pay
art prices for them) required the lifework of three generations of brilliant photographers:
from Stieglitz to Adams. It has only taken one generation of technology enthusiasts and
to undo it all.

Painters are bit more savy--they did not all switch to using Microsoft Paint or PaintShop Pro.
They know the value of hands-on creation, permanent materials, and proven techniques.
Innovation in painting does not consist of buying the latest new paintbrush.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

While I would agree that moving to the next generation of a camera with which you are familiar doesn't take as long as getting used to the first one, I find it takes me about 3 months of constant shooting to really become 'in sync' with a new body. Even after time pases, I'm amazed at the tips I pick up from others or by reading the manual or UHH. On example of something that takes me a while is the (usually) faster frame rate. I was very happy with 8fps with my F5 bodies and now have become accustomed to the 12fps of my D5. Upon occasion I may get a better shot, but I also have to look through 50% more images. Best of luck.