January 18th, 2012, 09:29 PM
I buy cameras because they are beautiful/intriguing/interesting and then scour the internet to find reviews that support my purchase decision with high technical scores.
January 18th, 2012, 11:41 PM
That's the smart, safe way.
E-pm1 and OM 50mm f3.5 Macro or Vivitar 24mm f 2.8
The following member thanks snkenai for this post:
January 19th, 2012, 01:52 AM
I like that. It lets you justify any decision you make :)
Originally Posted by flash
The following member thanks kyteflyer for this post:
January 19th, 2012, 09:29 AM
Gordon, I like your style.
January 19th, 2012, 09:30 AM
He's got it spot-on ... I reckon that's how almost everybody works, whether they realise it or not ...
My photostream at Flickr.com is here
"We can not shake the illusion of the truthfulness of photography" - William Gedney
January 19th, 2012, 10:06 AM
I'm really just starting on this journey of photgraphy, so this might be taken with a grain of salt.
I remember when the G1 first came out. I thought that it would be a good move up from my point and shoot camera. The biggest complaint I had was the size. I loved the ergonomics though. Then the E-P1 came out. For a few months I mulled over buying the camera. At the time, the image quality was acceptable even by the "dpreview forum standards"(two and a half years later, 12mp sensor is now utter crap ). Sight unseen, I pulled the trigger. Sure I looked at dpreview samples and DXO mark scores, but at the time anything was better than my point and shoot. Six to eight months after owning the camera, I ended up having a bi-polar relationship with the camera. I loved the image results, but the camera became frustrating for me to work with. The ergonomics for me were always off. The only thing I loved about the camera was the verticle thumbwheel. In my hands the camera seemed off balance. The AF was slow, especially with the kit lens. But I loved the kit lens compactness. Of course, its an utterly crappy kit lens along with the 17mm pancake
Fast foward another year and I picked up an E-PL2. Ergonomically, in many ways, much better than the E-P1. The camera doesn't feel out of balance now. But drats, I no longer have that verticle thumbwheel. I'm also stuck with the same 12mp that now is being touted as 2 year old technology. The AF is much better with the kit lens, and slightly better with the pancake. The image output is almost as good as the E-P1(I don't know. They played with the jpeg engine and I still seem to get it right. The AWB is better, but the images from the E-P1 still seem a tad bit punchier).
At the end of the day, ergonomics for me plays even a more important role than Image output. It's, at least for me, buying a tiny sportscar. I'd rarely drive it because I'm too big to fit comfortably in the car.
February 1st, 2013, 06:47 AM
I have had terrible advice from camera stores in the past and find that the combination of online reviews and blogs enables me to form an opinion sufficiently robust to make a buying decision. My last three compact camera purchases ( G1X, X100, DP2M) were in fact all made with the full knowledge of the cameras shortcomings and in every case I found the camera better ( in the case of the X100, far better) than I was led to expect.
The following member thanks Chrissearle23 for this post:
February 1st, 2013, 11:07 PM
Gorgon has got it in a nut shell. You can use all the justifications you like, but people buy cameras because they think they are cool.
I really don't like to have lots of gear. I find a two camera system ideal. I like each camera to bring something unique. I go to places like DP Review and just check there is nothing wrong with the camera. Whether it is the bestest or mostest, I really don't care--the photographer is more of a factor to whether the camera will take good pictures than anything else. There are a few criteria I find important. But AF speed and how many pixels are not among them. I don't rank personal experience very high--most of those folks are really not evaluating the camera, but flattering their ego. The nitpicking drives me crazy (is packaging really that important?). As far as personal experience, I really enjoy The Camera Store as they really give the camera a far shake and you know that Chris just loves the gear, no matter what it is.
But I am also in a fortunate position. I have had years experience with a variety of camera types and formats. I really don't have to handle a camera before I purchase it. But even when I have the opportunity, it is really not important. It always takes me a few months to come to terms with a new camera. I usually need a project to really know how the camera works. Beyond obvious technical limitations (but AF is not one of them), it is never the camera that could not get the "shot," but the lack of the photographer's skill. I really don't believe a good craftsman blames his tools.
The following member thanks Hikari for this post:
February 2nd, 2013, 01:17 AM
A good craftsman is more likely to blame him/herself for choosing the wrong tool in the first place.
P.S. +1 for The Camera Store videos
Nic (Canonite, Olympian, Panasonian, Samsunite) ~flickr~
February 2nd, 2013, 01:49 AM
I echo Hikari. Additionally, I am more concern about the system behind the camera than the camera itself. I feel that the differences in IQ between between, Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, et al, is insignificant. I shoot a lot of action so I look at AF/CAF speed and FPS. I shoot a lot of low light, so high ISO noise is important. But most modern, high level cameras, easily tackles fast AF, high FPS and low noise at elevated ISO.
Originally Posted by Hikari
I purchase on a 'need' basis, my shooting needs. Those needs mainly revolve around lenses and accessories. All things being equal, then I measure the physical looks of the camera, (yes, I am shallow), and finally ... maybe handling and feel.
I don't believe the grass is greener... Once I buy into a camera system, i stick with it for years and even decades. It is more important for me to use the same equipment repeatedly, to a point when camera manipulation is automatic, an extension of my hands and eyes, than shift to other systems in order to gain an insignificant advantage in dynamic range, or noise, et cetera. Hikari is right, it is the photographer that misses 'The Shot', not the camera. Staying with one system, learning that system inside out, increases the chances to consistently capture 'The Shot' day-in and day-out.
Last edited by Gary; February 2nd, 2013 at 02:09 AM.
"Everywhere you look there are photographs, it is up to us photogs to see them."- Gary Ayala
My Snaps are Here: Unsharp At Any Speed
This site uses affiliate programs and referral links for monetization.