Downsizing (Page 5): I have a GRIII and absolutely love it. It is not my only camera but it is one of my best. And I do use it a lot shooting with one hand. I have had 3 Ricoh's during...

bonjac Loc: Santa Ynez, CA 93460

I have a GRIII and absolutely love it. It is not my only camera but it is one of my best. And I do use it a lot shooting with one hand. I have had 3 Ricoh's during my life and each has been excellent. Enjoy it! You've mad a good choice. However, I am sorry about your wrist accident which put in this position in the first place.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Architect1776 wrote:

Why?
I was wondering what relevance breaking a wrist has to do with using a DSLR?
I say no relevance, thus why mention breaking a wrist as the reason for being forced to cease using a DSLR.
If on wishes to not use a DSLR fine, but breaking a wrist is irrelevant, from personal experience as so many here demand one have before commenting.

You are not him. He chooses to manage his health differently than you, as is his right.

Do you like people telling you that you have to wear a mask, or that you have to get a shot?
If you don't like that, then don't be a hyprocrite, don't tell other people how they should respond to injuries.
It's their choice not yours.

Swifty Loc: Canfield Ohio

Made good stuff way back when.

Hope your wrist heals well enough to enjoy your new gear !

bobfitz Loc: Kendall-Miami, Florida

None of the most important photo gear includes hardware. The eye and creative vision of the person holding the camera, by far, outweigh the most elaborate equipment, otherwise cameras could take their own beautiful photos.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

bobfitz wrote:

None of the most important photo gear includes hardware. The eye and creative vision of the person holding the camera, by far, outweigh the most elaborate equipment, otherwise cameras could take their own beautiful photos.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Jbrustrom wrote:

After recovering from a badly broken left wrist (6... (show quote)

Good question. Haven't heard of Ricoh in ages. We bought my dad a Ricoh Hi-8mm movie camera for Father's Day one year, because the store owner told us that Ricoh made the 8mm movie cameras for Sony and there was a huge price difference between the different brand names. Not sure if that was true or not.

Boris77

Jbrustrom wrote:

After recovering from a badly broken left wrist (6... (show quote)

Unfortunate way to get where you are, but sounds like a good solution.
I do not generally read what camera equipment is used for posted photographs, and certainly do not remember it. I just viewed the results of a cell phone contest, and thought that the majority of those contest pictures were excellent. It is the vision of the photographer as translated by the equipment in hand that counts.
Many UHH pictures are not works of art, but interesting to look at for many other reasons.
Shoot on and post if you like to share.
Boris

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Jbrustrom wrote:

After recovering from a badly broken left wrist (6... (show quote)

Sony RX100m7 ??
.

Burkley Loc: Park City

My most precious picture was taken of my young boys on a long hike in Teton NP by my cousin with a Ricoh. They have an outstanding tradition.

Boone Loc: Groundhog Town USA

Jbrustrom wrote:

After recovering from a badly broken left wrist (6... (show quote)

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

bobfitz wrote:

None of the most important photo gear includes hardware. The eye and creative vision of the person holding the camera, by far, outweigh the most elaborate equipment, otherwise cameras could take their own beautiful photos.

While the Photographer is most important with content and composition, equipment is very important aspect of photography. If you don't have a clue what you are doing, (my wife for example) the best equipment on earth won't help much, and in fact, probably would degrade her poor photography skills. However, when I see particularly outstanding quality resolution photo I often look at the EXIF info to see what camera and lens were used. Close to 100% of the time it will be camera's and lenses costing over $3000 and up.

As a matter of fact, just today I saw two such photo's and the gear cost a ton.
https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/nt/2023/3/20/17904-l2a1014_edit.jpg
https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/nt/2023/3/19/754383-_towhee_our_yard_3_15_2023.jpg

Look up the camera's and lens used and you will see many thousands of dollars worth of equipment. Doesn't matter if you like the photo's or not, those pictures could not likely have been taken with a $19 Vivitar.

These photo's are not special, in most instances, high quality resolution images are taken with high quality, high dollar camera's and lenses.

Here's another one: https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/nt/2023/3/20/416222-dsc1112_edit.jpg

Give me $9000 worth of equipment and my pictures, at least quality resolution, will improve dramatically.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

BigDaddy wrote:

….Give me $9000 worth of equipment and my pictures, at least quality resolution, will improve dramatically.

A common belief here is that expensive equipment equates to a higher quality result.

That is like saying if I buy a Stradivarius violin my music will sound better but that’s only true if I am a virtuoso violin player to start with.

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

JD750 wrote:

A common belief here is that expensive equipment equates to a higher quality result.

That is like saying if I buy a Stradivarius violin my music will sound better but that’s only true if I am a virtuoso violin player to start with.

I doubt few, if any thinks they'll become a great photographer simply by buying a high quality camera. About everyone probably believes higher quality results can be obtained with higher quality equipment. Otherwise, only a fool would buy expensive equipment, and all the pros would be using the cheapest crap they could find.

Saying the camera doesn't matter is like saying Richard Petty could have won all his races in a stock Ford Pinto...

Next time you notice an especially fine resolution photo here in full download, look up the EXIF and see what the gear costs. You will find most of the time it's not cheap stuff, over $2k for camera and lens, often way over. The last one I looked at was around 9K for camera and lens. The one before that was 5K and before that was 3K.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

BigDaddy wrote:

While the Photographer is most important with cont... (show quote)

The Ricoh GRiii is a high quality camera - there is absolutely no question of that.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

BigDaddy wrote:

... About everyone probably believes higher quality results can be obtained with higher quality equipment.

That's exactly what I said. Many here believe that.

BigDaddy wrote:

Otherwise, only a fool would buy expensive equipment, and all the pros would be using the cheapest crap they could find.

I drew a distinctive difference between pros and others. Pros can definitely make use of the higher performance gear.

BigDaddy wrote:

Saying the camera doesn't matter is like saying Richard Petty could have won all his races in a stock Ford Pinto...

I am willing to bet that with both you and him driving either the Pintos, or race cars, Mr Petty would beat you hands down, no contest.

BigDaddy wrote:

Next time you notice an especially fine resolution photo here in full download, look up the EXIF and see what the gear costs. You will find most of the time it's not cheap stuff, over $2k for camera and lens, often way over. The last one I looked at was around 9K for camera and lens. The one before that was 5K and before that was 3K.

I guess that's what Im doing wrong. Unless the resolution is noticeably poor, I don't really notice the resolution. I look for emotional content, composition, lighting, story. That sort of thing. Of course proper focus and exposure are necessary conditions but not sufficient in and of themselves to create a great image.