611: Unleashed, Indeed

I’m also an amateur photographer but I’m seriously considering getting the new Nikon pro camera Z9. Expensive but should carry me a long time.

Do you like electronic viewfinders?

Not my preference but it may be a compromise in order to have the advantages of a mirrorless system. I haven’t decided to buy but if I upgrade, this is likely the camera I’ll go for. There are a lot of articles regarding the pros and cons, here is one example:

That’s why the ideal reader would be a compromise between SD and CFExpress.

Both Photoshop/Bridge, and Capture One Pro 21. But I’m thinking about going with Lightroom because of this past Tuesday’s update. The masking is brilliant.

1 Like

Yep, electronic viewfinders have one massive advantage. No mirror. No slapping compromising sharpness. You see what you get. And optical viewfinder knows nothing about how the sensor is reacting to the scene. I was a photojournalist for 35 years. And if I had the tools back then that we have now, I dream of how much better life would have been. (Not breathing noxious chemicals for one.)

The latest cameras have viewfinders that don’t black out when you shoot. Unlike with DSLRs where there is a period where you don’t see what’s being taken. And it’s the exact moment of exposure. Sure, they can show you after the fact.

We make do with the level of technology that we have when we have it. If you like mirrorless cameras, which many people say are the future, that’s great. Talk them up. Buy them for your own use. Recommend them to all your friends and forum readers. But there’s no reason to diminish technologies like film and DSLRs which have given us decades and more of fine photography (and are not done, by the way). A mirrorless camera is not brand new technology. It stands on the shoulders of those who pioneered in film and digital photography.

I bought my 35 mm camera (Bell and Howell with a Canon lens) for a George Harrison concert. Huge fan. We sat first row center. I didn’t know how to use the camera! So I took an outrageous number of shots. I got one shot of George dancing with Billy Preston and I caught them in mid air with huge grins on their faces looking at each other. That is the best shot I have ever taken. (And concerts are very hard to shoot but it was luck).

Anyway, most shots didn’t turn out but I kept the prints thinking maybe just maybe someday I might be able to fix them up. It boggles my mind that that day has arrived!

Camera is still working last I checked. I have always taken loads of photos…

Wow! How I wish I would have had my entire life to play around and work on photography with the kind of software and cameras they have out there now. I probably have a couple of dozen photography apps on my iPad.

Apple’s Photos app has gotten quite good and that is essentially what I use.

Are you familiar with any intermediate level apps or great ones without the subscription?

I am mostly using Photoshop Elements recently. I bought Affinity for the iPad and tried to get a refund from Apple. I was utterly clueless and if I was clueless there are thousands of people out there who bought it who are clueless as well. I use to read manuals cover to cover. For me they are harder to read online for some reason.

Of for sure DSLRs are going to be around for many years. But development on that front has pretty much stopped at the professional end of things, and amateurs have always followed the lead of professionals from time immemorial.

Film, on the other hand, is outclassed by even amateur digital cameras now. Doesn’t mean people won’t be using it. I was greatly distressed when Kodachrome was discontinued. I was even a beta tester for Kodak to test TMAX P3200 film and TMax Developer.

The first time I did a studio shoot with digital, the results were so much better than what I had been getting with film (even using a Mamiya RB67 medium format camera) I called up a colleague and gave him all the film out of the studio’s refrigerator. He was a multiple winner of the Nikon Small World’s photo contest by the way. He didn’t switch his Leica film-based microscopes to digital until quite late.

People still use daguerreotypes, and other forms of 19th Century image capture. But that doesn’t mean those formats are still viable. DSLRs are far from that stage of irrelevance. And it will be a very long time before they hit the wall. But I don’t have to be Nostradamus to see the future.