So... advanced cameras in the hands of "happy snappers" creating problems?

KillRamsey said:
As for the bike analogy, I've never been in a hurry, so money spent getting lighter / faster is usually just not my bag. I chuckle at the guys who drop $3k on a featherweight thing, only to ride it around town over pot holes, dodging cabs. This country LOVES to romanticize.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about lighter, faster, more aggressive or anything of the like. I was always more of a tourist and recreational rider. I did a couple of mtb races in the early-'90s and quickly decided that racing wasn't for me. But bike fit and frame design mattered a lot for guys like me too. I did like to do a lot of long rides, including a few centuries each year, and being both comfortable and efficient mattered a lot for riding like that. FAST never entered into it, but efficiency and not working any harder than I needed to for a given speed made a big difference after 5-6 hours in the saddle. And after buying a number of frames and getting close, I finally broke down and got a custom designed Spectrum frame designed after having ridden for several years. I spent a couple of fit sessions in Tom Kellogg's barn with him watching me on a fit bike, adjusting my position slightly, interviewing me about how I liked to ride, etc, etc, etc. And when I built that frame up and started riding it, it was worth every one of the very many dollars it cost. Not for the racer down the street, but for me and how I rode. Best tool I ever owned for that activity and even though I'm nowhere close to being in shape to ride it well these days, it hangs in a prominent spot in my basement so I can look at it and think about whether I'm ever likely to get back there. But I rode more efficiently and in more comfort on that frame than I ever got close to before it.

I've bonded more with some cameras than others, to be sure, but I don't think I'd do that much better with a custom camera designed specifically for me. With a bike frame, it made all the difference.

-Ray
 
Duane Pandorf said:
Lose 5 pounds of body weight and you've saved a lot of money compared to what lighter titanium parts cost!
Click to expand...

I rode at both my optimal weight (or at least what I weighed in high shcool) and at 5-15 pounds over that weight. The right bike, the right position, the right weight distribution mattered a lot regardless. Again, it wasn't about speed. And when we're shooting Leicas and RX1s, I don't think we can judge people who spend a bit more on bike parts than absolutely necessary! :D

My favorite bike was always a steel fixed gear anyway...

-Ray
 
Yeats said:
It would be useful if every camera came with a simple instruction booklet or video to explain and demonstrate basic photographic concepts... things that would be necessary to understand even if the consumer never even planned to take the camera off "Auto" mode.
Click to expand...

And if it was comprehensible to the "layman!"
 
Duane Pandorf said:
My Leica M-E manual goes into quite a bit of detail in explaining how to use the camera in an easy to understand way.
Click to expand...

My Nikon D40 (which of course, is obsolete now) was designed by agile geeks who also designed the menus and wrote the manual. For instance, the bleeping thing only has three focus zones, and according to the manual you can choose between them (if you're in the right focus mode) conveniently with one hand, but it takes me both hands. I must look like a poorly trained monkey. And I had to do a Google search to extract THAT info from the technical jargon of the manual.

Starting to sound a little like Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory here, but I've been tested for a learning disability, and I seem to have one I'd never heard of before - I read fluently and retain little of what I read. So that doesn't help, either. But the fact the third-party website made sense and the manual didn't still makes me feel justified in grousing about Nikon!
 
I`m not sure i understand the motivation behind this thread. Elitist snobbery? Happy snappers & "problems". Really? Show me your serious photographs. It`s great if people have hobbies and enjoy them. Skills and talent may vary. So what is the problem. Fast cars are only for licensed race drivers, top of the line kitchen ware for price winning chefs only..................... I don`t think so.
 
retow said:
I`m not sure i understand the motivation behind this thread. Elitist snobbery? Happy snappers & "problems". Really? Show me your serious photographs. It`s great if people have hobbies and enjoy them. Skills and talent may vary. So what is the problem. Fast cars are only for licensed race drivers, top of the line kitchen ware for price winning chefs only..................... I don`t think so.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody in this thread is expressing any kind of snobbery. I don't understand why you're taking such an aggressive tone.

What I've seen happen is that we now have fairly large sensors crammed into small bodies, bodies similar in size to a pocketable P&S, and this has... "misled" some people into thinking they were buying a really expensive, really good P&S camera that behaves similarly to a typical small-sensor camera, and when it doesn't, people get frustrated.

I'll give an example:

Last year, Chris is taking snapshots at family events - picnics, dinners, etc - with his Canon Elph. Chris starts thinking, hey, I want to be able to take low-light pictures without using flash, I want pics with less noise, that sort of thing. Chris does some research online, and sees how good the Sony RX100 is, and buys it. One month later, at the family reunion, Chris has everybody line up in 3 rows and takes some pics. Later that night, looking at the photos on the monitor, he sees that the folks in the front row are well-focused, but the folks in the back row are a little blurry. He never had this kind of problem with his Canon Elph, why is this happening with his happening with his new $700 Sony RX100?

So Chris joins Serious Compacts and poses the question... and that's when he finds out about aperture and depth-of-field and the impact of sensor size. So now we come to the metaphorical fork in the road:

1. Is Chris annoyed, because all he wants to do is snap nice pics and not worry about messing with his camera because he has other things to do, or

2. Chris is intrigued by the craft of photography, and wants to learn more?

Both answers are perfectly acceptable, and one is not "better" than the other.

An aspect of the OP is that these large-sensor compacts are not exactly what they seem, compared with the last decade (and more) of digital photography.

PS - I'm not using the term "happy snappers" as a pejorative. I mean people who just want to take a pic and move on to something else, the way one takes an hors d'oeuvre from a tray.
 
Yeats said:
I don't think anybody in this thread is expressing any kind of snobbery. I don't understand why you're taking such an aggressive tone.

What I've seen happen is that we now have fairly large sensors crammed into small bodies, bodies similar in size to a pocketable P&S, and this has... "misled" some people into thinking they were buying a really expensive, really good P&S camera that behaves similarly to a typical small-sensor camera, and when it doesn't, people get frustrated.

I'll give an example:

Last year, Chris is taking snapshots at family events - picnics, dinners, etc - with his Canon Elph. Chris starts thinking, hey, I want to be able to take low-light pictures without using flash, I want pics with less noise, that sort of thing. Chris does some research online, and sees how good the Sony RX100 is, and buys it. One month later, at the family reunion, Chris has everybody line up in 3 rows and takes some pics. Later that night, looking at the photos on the monitor, he sees that the folks in the front row are well-focused, but the folks in the back row are a little blurry. He never had this kind of problem with his Canon Elph, why is this happening with his happening with his new $700 Sony RX100?

So Chris joins Serious Compacts and poses the question... and that's when he finds out about aperture and depth-of-field and the impact of sensor size. So now we come to the metaphorical fork in the road:

1. Is Chris annoyed, because all he wants to do is snap nice pics and not worry about messing with his camera because he has other things to do, or

2. Chris is intrigued by the craft of photography, and wants to learn more?

Both answers are perfectly acceptable, and one is not "better" than the other.

An aspect of the OP is that these large-sensor compacts are not exactly what they seem, compared with the last decade (and more) of digital photography.

PS - I'm not using the term "happy snappers" as a pejorative. I mean people who just want to take a pic and move on to something else, the way one takes an hors d'oeuvre from a tray.
Click to expand...

"has mislead", "some people", "they". No snobbery in this language? Or are we really concerned if others buy harmless tools which have yet to grow on them?
 
retow said:
"has mislead", "some people", "they". No snobbery in this language? Or are we really concerned if others buy harmless tools they have yet to grow on them?
Click to expand...

No, none at all. I don't know why you would think so...

I am genuinely concerned if someone buys a camera that he/she expects to act in a certain way, and it acts in a different way than expected... kind of like buying a rubber mallet when you meant to get a hammer.

Edit: it just occurred to me: is English your second language? Maybe there are some nuances that are not translating well?
 
Yeats said:
It would be useful if every camera came with a simple instruction booklet or video to explain and demonstrate basic photographic concepts... things that would be necessary to understand even if the consumer never even planned to take the camera off "Auto" mode.
Click to expand...

Some companies do that. It would be great if all did.
But on the other side, who reads manuals? ;)



From the Samsung NX100 manual:
Tips
Concepts in Photography
Shooting postures ....................................................................... 10
Holding the camera ......................................................................... 10
Standing photography ..................................................................... 10
Crouching photography .................................................................. 11
Aperture ....................................................................................... 11
Aperture value and the depth of field ............................................... 12
Shutter speed .............................................................................. 13
ISO sensitivity .............................................................................. 14
How the aperture setting, shutter speed, and ISO sensitivity
control exposure ......................................................................... 15
Correlation between focal length, angle, and perspective ....... 16
Depth of field ............................................................................... 17
What controls out-of-focus effects? ................................................ 17
DOF preview ................................................................................... 19
Composition ................................................................................ 19
Rule of Thirds .................................................................................. 19
Photos with two subjects ................................................................ 20
Flash............................................................................................. 21
Flash guide number......................................................................... 21
Bounce Photography ...................................................................... 22
 
Yeats said:
I am genuinely concerned if someone buys a camera that he/she expects to act in a certain way, and it acts in a different way than expected...
Click to expand...
Really?

How does their failure to use a camera in the way you think they ought affect your life?

A re there not bigger things in the world to be concerned about?

As retow says, some of the posts in this thread seem to demonstrate quite a level of snobbery, albeit that I suspect it is unintentional, to the point that it looks like the thread has been written in its entirety by Mr Flores for his ncn site.

The truth is that people can buy whatever cameras they damn well like and use them however they damn well please.
 
pdh said:
The truth is that people can buy whatever cameras they damn well like and use them however they damn well please.
Click to expand...

Right on.

I am not concerned at all for anyone that can afford to spend $2795 on a RX1, but has no idea what DOF is. I believe most blokes who don't know what DOF is likely wouldn't buy a RX1 to begin with. But if someone can afford a RX1 without any knowledge of basic photography, go for it! The more RX1's sold means that Sony will keep on developing nice cool cameras. If Sony is only able to sell a handful of RX1's to the folks that spend way too much time in photography forums (ie, anyone that posted on this thread), we would likely have never seen the RX1s or A7/r.

Note how no one has come forward on this thread and said, "why can't I get everything to be on focus on my RX1?" And if someone did, I would take the Luke approach -- "buddy, your camera is broken. I'll pay $1000 to get that piece of junk off your hands. Plus, I'll even give you this awesome Canon Digital Elph S10."
 
I don't think you can legislate for people buying technological equipment which ultimately proves to be beyond them, or beyond their willingness to invest time and effort in using it properly.

But maybe it would help if some cameras were more clearly labelled as "enthusiast" - then at least there's an implied warning that if you're not an enthusiast perhaps you should buy something else.

Of course, some people are just plain daft. My father used to work for a lighting manufacturer, which made flash bulbs back in the days before electronic flash. He once told me about a customer who tried to sue the company because he had burnt himself while using one of their products. It turned out he had been holding the camera back-to-front and was looking through the camera lens instead of the viewfinder when he pressed the shutter release and the flash bulb fired ... and stuck to his forehead.

-R
 
"use it properly"

That's the bit that is so wrong-headed.

I could not be so arrogant as to suggest I know what is proper or improper for someone else to do with their camera - photographically speaking, I mean
 
This kind of conversation crops up with motorcyclists all the time:

"Did you hear about that kid that got his motorcycle endorsement and then went out and bought a 160 horsepower Ducati?"

"How about the one where the fifty-something who's never ridden before takes his bonus money and buys an 800# cruiser!"

In that community, you wouldn't call the language condescending. It's more like horror, because both of those riders might die as a result of their poor decision. Yeah, it's their life and all, and they can do as they damn well please, but as humans we can empathize a little, can't we?

In this discussion, I think most, especially the OP, have been rather respectful. Sure, there's been some chiding, but that's par for the course. Can a non-enthusiast buy a serious compact? Yeah, it's their money and all, and they can do as they damn well please, but as humans we can empathize a little, can't we?
 
I someone wants to take pictures that are not blurred and are in focus, and they are failing to do so because they find their camera too complicated or because they are unwilling to take the time and effort to get to grips with it, then I don't believe they are using it properly. Assuming it's a camera that other people are generally OK with.

I'm not saying it's their fault. I would fail to use a set of bagpipes properly.

-R

pdh said:
"use it properly"

That's the bit that is so wrong-headed.

I could not be so arrogant as to suggest I know what is proper or improper for someone else to do with their camera - photographically speaking, I mean
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

christilou
    • Like
A handful of cameras
Replies
18
Views
2K
adanac
adanac
AzPete
    • Like
New camera in hand...
Replies
12
Views
2K
Streetshooter
Streetshooter
B
Fuji Problem of the tripod socket
Replies
13
Views
879
Safari
S
Back
Top