Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (
More info?)
Roy wrote:
> A bad tradesman always blames his tools, and someone who does nothing except
> praise his tools, probably does nothing.
Many years ago I worked as a newspaper reporter of sorts, and began
taking my own photographs rather than bother with locating an available
photographer every time I needed a picture. I did just fine using
"amateur" equipment, even winning a photofeature award while relying
exclusively on a Yashica SLR. Later I was able to justify upgrades to
Pentax and eventually Nikon gear; my photos improved because I gained
experience in taking photographs, not because my cameras sported more
prestigious namesplates.
These days the film cameras are gone and my current main camera is a
Canon Powershot A20 -- not only an entry-level point-and-shoot digital,
but one with only a 2-megapixel sensor. By exercising a little care I'm
able to get pretty good results from what many would consider a very
limiting piece of equipment. Granted, there are things I can't do with
it, and other things I could do more easily with a different camera, and
I will be getting a new "main shooter" in the near future -- but it will
probably be an advanced-level compact rather than a DSLR because I'd
rather keep things simple and give up a few opportunities than load
myself down with lots of gear to cover every possible opportunity. What
brand will I buy? I haven't decided yet, but I'm looking at all of the
"usual suspects". The brand doesn't matter to me nearly as much as the
camera's ability to do what I want it to do; in all honesty, just about
any advanced-level compact made today can probably do more than I'll
ever demand of it unless I specifically look for difficult shots.
> I happen to use Nikon and Epson, and I do not care if you happen to think
> that Canon is better. Just give my eardrums, or eyes, a break from your
> infantile bragging.
Nikon and Canon both make good cameras; the also make some that, while
perhaps well-constructed, are designed and engineered to be nothing more
than "good enough" at a specific price-point. I think of them as the
photographic equivalent of Ford and General Motors -- as you go up in
price, you get more for your money, and whether you need all that
capability is nobody's business but your own.
To me the ideal digital camera would have, among other things, a
35mm-formfactor image sensor in a body no larger than a Canon Digital
Rebel XT/EOS 350D -- or better still, that big sensor in a
compact-camera package. Since the ideal camera doesn't exist (and
presumably never will), I have an excuse to own more than one camera ...
and as a gadget freak I find that prospect even more attractive than
actually having a single "ideal" camera.
--
Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA
Amateur curmudgeon, equal opportunity annoyer
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram