stanikon Loc: Deep in the Heart of Texas

You make a good point, but to me (and, I suspect, a lot of others) it is pointless. As a rank amateur of, at best, the "duffer" class, most of the features you mention are of no use to me. As an award-winning pro of 48 years I can see how they would be essential to you and your craft. To me they are just a lot of expensive toys that I would never be able to use to full advantage. For example, when would I ever need a completely silent camera? I have been taking photographs since the mid-50s (20 or so years before you even turned pro) and cannot think of a single situation when I ever needed that.

No amount of new gear or the "latest and greatest" is going to make me a better photographer. I am, if nothing else, a realist. I am through throwing money at dreams and I still maintain that what is behind the camera is much more important that what is in the camera. I still aspire to be better, but to be better with what I have, not be the same with something new or different.

rlscholl Loc: California

Nonsense! When I moved from film to digital cameras (the first one was mirrorless), my photographic skills did not change, (other than for the learning period to familiarize myself with the menus system, during which I was less skilled), neither did they change when I moved from one brand of digital camera to another, nor when I changed from mirrorless to DSLR. What I had learned over the decades about composition, exposure, etc. were not affected by changing cameras or camera technology. Some things did change (changing from film SLRs to DSLRs significantly increased the size and weight of cameras and (especially) lenses, and convenience changed (bigger and heavier was bad, time reduction from exposure to “print was good). None of those changes made me a “better” photographer.

stanikon Loc: Deep in the Heart of Texas

Well said.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Likey Sony as Nikon is dependent upon Sony to survive now.

greekd214

Really? The type of camera you have makes you a bad or good photographer? I have a dslr so does that mean Ican't be a better photographer?

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

Wrong way to look at it...

Film cameras are viable and are highly respected as their own medium. I am amazed by what was produced 150 years ago during the Civil war for example.

Garry Adelman, The Director of History and Education at the American Battlefield Trust is also vice president of the Center for Civil War Photography. He says about the quality:

“The reason we can blow up on these photos, whether they are prints made from glass plate negatives or the negatives themselves, is that Civil War negatives are huge — 4”x10”, 7”x9”, 8”x10” — 25 to 50 times larger than the 35mm negatives that most of us grew up with” Adelman said. “Unlike those grainy 35mm negatives and unlike even the best digital camera, it cannot approach the resolution on a Civil War glass plate negative from 150-plus years ago. Therefore, you can blow up and see great details within photos. You can catch people smiling in Civil War photos. You can read names on gravestones in Civil War photos.”

https://www.timesnews.net/living/do-civil-war-photographs-match-today-s-digital-images-in-showing-details/article_3281d122-c14b-11ea-b1b5-0fcc76112510.html

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The best thing about film is your memories get better even if the pictures didn't.

Dwiggy Loc: Dunedin, FL

[quote=Soul Dr.]What do think about it?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/shopping/the-demise-of-nikon-and-canon-dslrs-is-a-good-thing/ar-AAZD9VT?cvid=76fe6857c4964c70bb128e8622f4ef3d

Will[/quote

Really? You're going to believe MSN before you do a reality check? I can't believe people listen to this stuff.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

Yes they are a business and will continue to produce as long as it is profitable and does not prevent them from producing and selling more profitable items.Production lines are limited.

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

You really believe that?

therwol Loc: USA

You've been around here for a long time. You surely know he likes to be sarcastic.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Said another way from therwol, you're here most every day, Spirit Vision.

What do people ask every day in some form of: I want to be a better photographer, what camera should I buy? You'll typically get two pages of responses before anyone even asks, "why do you think you need a new camera to be better?" I'm just distilling the UHH community's collective knowledge into easy to read, easy to understand, and easy to act declarations, applicable to July 2022:

If you want to be a better photographer, there are two things you must do above all others: buy a mirrorless camera and use it.

gwilliams6

BTW I started taking photos in the late 50's stanikon as a young boy, and have been a paid pro since 1973 .

I have taught photography to hundreds of students at a state university, many of them beginners in photography. The proper use of gear can make you a better photographer, a better master of your craft.

Most of my courses in Digital Photography, Photojournalism, 35mm B&W film photography are about the aesthetics, the art of seeing, the rules and fundamentals of image making and how my students can break the rules and find their own vision, their own creativity.

But I also need to teach them about the gear and how to use it to best achieve their creative vision for any subjects they shoot.

Even when shooting wildlife as simple as something in your backyard, or even covering a meeting or quiet event, it can be of advantage to shoot silently. Not having that mirror flapping noise is a real feature that all photographers can benefit from, not just pros. If you dont realize that, you are missing something stanikon.

A photographer that has gear with better autofocus, a better viewfinder that gives them more and clearer information, more creative options to try, better ergonomics, less weight to carry, better low light performance and more , CAN be a better photographer, getting better results and having more fun and success in the process, with less frustration and disappointments, ask any of my photography course students .

That is just a fact stanikon, whether you think it applies to you or not.

Cameras can be tools and can be toys, it is up to you. My gear is both to me LOL. . Mirrorless gear costs no more then DSLR gear at all. There is great mirrorless gear for any budget. Check it out if you doubt that.

This isn't throwing money at dreams at all, you are being overly dramatic here IMHO. This is about getting the gear that works best for your needs and stays within your budget. Easy, peasy with today's mirrorless gear.

None of this is pointless at all. They are countless good points to using mirrorless gear. But also no one is saying you have to change gear and buy something you dont need for what you want out of photography.

My Digital Photography and Photojournalism students learn photography with both DSLR kits and mirrorless kits we have for them to use at my university. They learn photography equally well using either. At the end of my digital photography and photojournalism courses then they have an idea whether they prefer their creative experience better with DSLRs or mirrorless, and then they are free to choose what they may wish to own and use going forward.

Most are choosing mirrorless for their first camera purchases. After all, the world is now used to taking photos with smartphones and those cameras inside all smartphones are mirrorless cameras.

Old habits are hard to change and stanikon there is no reason for you to change what is familiar and comfortable to you. But at the same there is no reason for you to diss the new reality for photographers today. I am a child of rangefinders and SLRS (I still teach a SLR 35mm B&W film class, wet processing, darkroom printing and all and love it), but I also have embraced all the advantages along the way of both DSLRs and now mirrorless.

Cheers and best to you stanikon.

stanikon Loc: Deep in the Heart of Texas

But that is exactly what you are saying.

I don't mean to "diss" anyone or the gear they choose to use. To each his/her own and more power to them. All I am saying is that I don't think changing cameras will make ME a better photographer. And when I say "throwing money at dreams" I mean that spending money I don't have on gear I don't need with the dream of becoming the next Ansel Adams is a futile exercise, to say the least.

Do you still have the very first photograph you ever took? I do, and it's not a very good photograph but it's the reason I got interested in photography. I had a choice: try to improve and learn or forget all about it. I wanted to know why it did not turn out as I thought it would so I worked on it. If I had it to do over again, I could produce a MUCH better photograph with the same little Kodak Brownie I used back then or I could use my D500 and get about the same result.

I am happy with what I have, I will stick with it and enjoy the journey. Don't diss me for that and please don't be so patronizing. I have been around the block a few times and I'm old enough that I don't need that.

User ID

(Download)