E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Each of us has our unique ways of participating and enjoying this forum. My particular kinda fun is helping folks with certain technical and aesthetic problems or issues that they are encountering in their applied photograhy. When I log in, I scan through the topics and try to find questions in areas where I can provide advice or suggestions. Frequently, I find folks trying to untangle what seems a complex problem with one of the many advanced and automated features in their cameras and/or flash equipment. Oftentimes, the answer is somewhere in the instruction manual that came along with the equipmet in question. Oftentimes again, the OP is admonished for not reading the manual or consulting Google. Sometimes the solution is a simple flip of a switch, a particular menu setting, or a small oversight on the part of the photograher. Many other times it is actually an unnecessarily complex situation of one feature cancelling out another, incompatible accessories, or an instruction manual that seems to be written some kind of linguistic code. The comprehensive manuals that accompanied someof my cameras are "thicker" than the one languishing in the glove box of my car.

The solution to the issue can be a time-consuming, complicated procedure that makes me wonder if the photographer will have any time or energy left to make photographs. I can see going through a lengthy procedure when photographing a static subject under controlled conditions, however, so many folks shoot wildlife, sports, and more animated subjects- how can they get spontaneous images with all that fussing about just to get automation to work?

I am not intimately familiar with all the latest and greatest mirrorless wonder-cameras. My question to the aficionados of these machines is, if desired, can they be switched onto MANUAL mode and enable settings strictly independent of any and all automatic systems?

I have observed that many problems arise in flash usage. It's not enough that the camera has a virtual onboard computer. The photograher mounts yet another "computer" on the hot shoe to control the flash system. At that point, nothing seems to operat properly if at all. Perhaps the entire falsh system was not purchased intact and piecemealing a system after the fact can be problematic. The question is usually something like " my ABC flash is not working with my XYZ triggering system on my QRX Camera- WHY??? More confusion ensues wehn the same gear is marked under different brand names.

Now, I am an old guy with a grey beard but I am not anti-automation- I too love my "gadgets" but more in the kitchen than in my studio. I don't pine fort he passed and old equipment and material that is long gone, however, I am reminded of someof my "old school" methods will still apply. There was a trend back in the late 1950s and 60s in wedding photography to shoot stereo slides on Kodachrome 25. That film had very little latitude. At first, we shot with flashbulbs and later on with electronic flash. We shot fast candid shots, needed to retain detail in white gowns and black tuxedos and texture in white weddg cakes. I shot with multiple flashes and learned how to control ratios. We learned to estimate distances and manually set apertures. We learn to compensate for large and small rooms and use flash fill out-of-doors. it was not "rocket science".
Modern digial equipmet is fantanstic. There are great built-in metering systems, TTL flas operation, and more but how much more complexities do we need and wehn does it get to the point where mastering all the electronics, overtakes the artistry and spontaneity?

What do y'all think?

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

E.L., it might also be that some simply purchase a camera and expect it to do all the photography for them. There's a certain amount of knowledge, especially of exposure, that's required of the camera operator. Add to that the lack of interest in reading the manual.

Likewise, the camera manufacturers want to sell cameras to everyone and provide equipment that takes a lot of the "need to know" away from the camera operator. Those advanced capabilities require acquiring the knowledge contained in the manual.
--Bob

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

"I am not intimately familiar with all the latest and greatest mirrorless wonder-cameras. My question to the aficionados of these machines is, if desired, can they be switched onto MANUAL mode and enable settings strictly independent of any and all automatic systems?"

Of course they can. I shoot in manual mode all the time. Sometimes I use auto ISO, and sometimes I use manual ISO. Other than the fact that the viewfinder experience is different, shooting with my Nikon.Z fc mirrorless camera is very similar to using my Canon 7D Mark II DSLR. Of course the size of the camera, the layout of the buttons, and some features may be different but other that the basic experience is almost identical. Some people prefer an optical viewfinder (OVF) over a mirrorless camera's electronic viewfinder (EVF), but that is more or less the biggest single difference between the two types of cameras. Depending on how a camera is used, for some people the OVF is superior, and for others the EVF is superior. Frankly, I really enjoy using the EVF, although I don't shoot fast action or birds in flight.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

You certainly dont have to abide to my, or anyone elses opinions. But all the fancy automation in today's gear can be turned off. You can shoot full manual, no auto anything. Light meters. Flashes. etc. You can still shoot film and use your own dark room (some still do). Or use full auto, let the camera make the decisions. The only thing that counts is the image. If you were to look at a classic painting by a famous artist do you care what kind of brushes did he used? Some art critics probably do. Did Mike Angelo A famous roman ceiling painter, when he did the Sisteen Chapel job say, "pull my finger" before he got paid?

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Personally, the only auto thing I use is auto-focus. Then, it's only when I'm using a lens that has that feature. The other features are things I paid for and never use.
--Bob

BebuLamar

The cameras of today can be switch off of all automation and on manual and I do prefer it that way in most cases. However, automation helps in situations where you don't even have a half a second to make the shot. But one should know exactly what the automation will do and which rules it follows. You shouldn't use automation because you don't know how to do it manual but rather you use automation because you can't do it fast enough manually.
One thing I miss about automation available today is lack of programmability. The user can not program the logic on how certain auto feature work.

BebuLamar

Perhaps the other automation you don't use you didn't pay for. Because I believe if you insist on not having those features your camera is going to cost more not less.

User ID

All my mode dials are marked, by me, as seen here. (Photo attached.)
.

Acoarst some advanced cameras don’t use an external dial for mode selection.

(Download)

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I'm sure having one custom build, leaving out the "whiz bang" extras would cost quite a bit more then the stock version.
--Bob

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Ed--I agree with you in principle. In my experience, photography is an endeavor which is quite straightforward at its core, but which can be pretty complex in "full flower." It is further complicated by a society in which everyone wishes to be an "instant expert," and no one seems to have time or energy to devote to the necessary learning process. And maybe the equipment does contribute to that, but I don’t think it's totally fair to let it serve as an excuse.

My first camera was a borrowed Hawkeye Brownie. No adjustments, except it did have a lever that would engage "Bulb" setting for the shutter. So the only thing to learn was to make a "go or no go" decision before pressing the shutter release.

Next, when I was about 12, I was allowed to use an Argus C4. It had split-image focusing, but no exposure meter. Our "family film" was original Kodachrome. ASA 10. Shutter speed was always 1/50, and the insert that came with the film was my best friend. The only apertures that usually mattered were f/8 and f/5.6. Sometimes I'd go way out on the edge to f/4 or f/11, but that was pretty rare. I still have a lot of good transparencies from that era.

When my dad got a Minolta SR-7, I got his Voightlander Vitomatic II. Wow! It had a built-in match-needle exposure meter, but I lost the rangefinder and had to learn how to estimate distance.

The first camera I bought for myself was a Minolta SRT-201. It made photography a whole lot easier, but didn't really cause a lot of improvement in my photographs. Neither did my final string of film cameras, an Olympus OM-1n, OM-2n, and OM-2s. I did take some college photography courses during this time that did provide additional understanding of what I was supposed to be doing and accomplishing.

By the time I got my first digital camera at work (sometime around 2004) and at home (2006), the transition was pretty seamless. But, after 40 years of "practice," I was free to focus on the new technology. And yes...I was pretty ommersed in the manuals, but they made sense, because I understood what I was trying to accomplish.

What's largely missing today is the patience to learn. Of course, since many of us are older now, many may feel that they don't have time to learn...don't have time to be patient. But in the long run, stopping to take a deep breath and learn a little bit usually shortens the path instead of lengthening it.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

My first 35mm film camera was a matched needle, manual everything else model. I learned to anticipate conditions where even that simple automation would be fooled. I appreciate the ever expanding list of automated features, knowing where they will also be fooled. They make my photography quicker and, in some cases, possible.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I'm glad to hear that all the latest cameras have a true manual mode. The only reason began to doubt that is that many folks seem to be endlessly working around and compounding their automatic features and thereby compound and confound their issues.

Obviously, I have all the usual features on my camer and use all of them, there's a time and place for manual settings, priority settings or even fully automatic programmed settings. If one understands the basics of manual settings, it becomes easier to understand what your camera is doing in the various automatic modes and how to make adjustments to accommodate special circumstances.

I have no issues with different technologies. I have used everything from a cellphone camera to an 8X10 view camer and just about everything in between. I can work with an electronically generated image or an optical image in the "viewfinder". After a bit of practice, one can adjust their eyesight and perception to deal with either. I am not seriously "anti" anything in so far as operating modes. I never say never about shooting Raw or Jpeg, or auto or otherwise. I just operate by the old philosophy that the more stuff you have to mess around with, the likelihood of equipment failure or bollixing things up on important shoot increases oftentimes simplification is the best approach.

Most of the over-engineering I have noted lat is in flash accessory technology. Someof the latest flash gear is incredibly good and versatile. Many monolights offer high-speed synchronization, can be used to make stroboscopic imagery, maintain the colour temperature at various power settings and have unbelievably short recycling ties. The outboard control units that are supposed to calculate ratios and remotely control power outputs of multiple units always seem to cause problems. Does anyone have any experience with those kinds of devices? Whaddaya think?

BebuLamar

You see that many people tried to work around the automation because most people today like it that way. For example, if I think the meter isn't indicating the exposure that I want I would switch to manual but most people would want to use the exposure compensation. The exposure compensation today became the only mean to control exposure so much so that if this control isn't under the right thumb people would say it's a bad design.

therwol Loc: USA

My Nikon DSLRs have several metering modes such as matrix plus more than one center weighted and spot option. The exposure you get in these modes can be very different, and you HAVE to choose one. I'm starting to realize the power of that little "bracket" button on the body. Bracketing is an old concept that still has value, even if you're shooting manual. And by the way, if you shoot in the manual mode and just rely on the onboard metering, you've accomplished nothing but doing what the camera wanted you to do in the first place and wasted a lot of time doing it yourself. Manual metering requires some thought. Think of the zone system.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Some ofhte problems of exposure compensation probably stem from folk not knowing exactly how to apply their camera's mastering system. They may not receive the full potential of the TTL if the system doesn't know when or how to employ spot, matrix or other functions that may be on the menu. For example, in a backlight situation it many before effective and accurate to take a spot reading of the subject, lock in the read and recompose rather than use an average read and the compensate. If the compensation works in full stop incriments, that may be too much- sometimes 1/2 a stop will make the difference.

I am not saying that there is only one way to do these things. I know that some folks spent endless hours testing their lenses for sharpness and performance at the various apertures, worrying about the physics of the sensors, and counting pixcels. The problem is that unless they upgrade their lenses, or buy a new camera, they are stuck with the performance of the existing gear. Their time would be better spent practicing with their cameras- doing dry runs and putting each system or feather through its pances in order to full master how everything works. By the time they are out there shooting important stuff, they will have full control over eaach situation. After a when they will be able to do things more instinctively and have more time to concentrate on their subjects and creativity.