|
Forums >
General Industry >
Old vs new equipment...
I did a shoot today and used my digi. Afterwards I asked if the girl would let me shoot her with my Argus 75 to test it... then the energy went way up! It went from dull to extree fun the moment I pulled out my new/old dual lense toy. Models: How do you feel being in front of an obviously vintage camera as opposed to new? Does it bring extra energy? Less? More/less relaxing? Other? Photographers: How do you feel using a vintage camera as opposed to new? Does it bring extra energy? Less? More/less relaxing? Other? Forget about image quality, expense, all that junk for a min and focus on atmosphere and energy. Oct 14 06 05:24 pm Link Depends greatly just on WHAT newer or older technology we're referring to. Most of my favorite equipment is 90s vintage (with modern lenses based on old formulae and quality, old-style optical glass, but modern lens coatings) and relatively modern ergonomics but based on the older, manual-focus control layout, with large, bright viewing systems, not the compromised dimmer, smaller viewing systems they mostly designed for AF, and without need to navigate by LCD, which I'm not fond of. Why? So intuitive for my way of working, and the beautiful image visible in the viewfinder is inspirational. A lot of this equipment is made to a high standard. I use newer AF and digi stuff and I use true vintage stuff as well (which I enjoy, design-quirk-wise, and workmanship-wise). But that's my main preference. Different equipment DOES bring a different feel to the shoot, which has its effect on the shoot, though usually minor. Models generally don't care much what I'm shooting them with. Oct 14 06 06:40 pm Link your catching on , girls love vintage cameras so do men. i go to public events with my f1 all the time , girls think its fun to see if they can focus it . sometimes i show them how the ball/needle works and they have fun posing and shooting each other. while i take pictures of them with my eos a2. i have gone out with 2 friends one has a d200 the other a 20d. while im playing they stood around bored. the fact is if your a photographer any fricken camera is a damn riot. its only the technology junkiies that get hung up on , latest and greatest. i have tons of cool pictures from my old vivitar aps camera and sure shot. i badly want a nikon fm with a 100mm off ebay its a really cool camera , plus i can hand it to people and let them have fun too. i used a mamiya c330 it was sweet and stopped a crowd that was geeked to pose in front of it. its a fact in a crowd a vintage camera looks like fun a 20d with a 17-85mm looks normal. i want a 4x5 monorail so i can set it up and let girls take pictures with it of each other. sometimes finding a hot guy is cool than i can draw a crowd of women going ( is he a model ) i guess im just a people person. ive photographed everything from a 4yo black and asian girl to a 70+ year old eskimo man and loved every bit of it. Oct 14 06 06:54 pm Link i just had to add , there is nothing like looking into the waist level finder on a rolliflex and watching a image snap into focus. thats something even a eos 1ds cant beat. Oct 14 06 06:58 pm Link darkfotoart wrote: Absolutely. That was a big part of my point above. Big viewfinders bright, waist-levels, even view camera ground glass (especially), though view cameras are not a good working method for me generally. There's a feel to working with this stuff that gives a little "oomph" to your image making. I've been shooting snapshots around the house of my 14 month-old with a Yashica TLR and a 500CM Hasselblad. It feels good. (Of course I have to guesstimate my exposure, too.) Oct 14 06 07:36 pm Link If it takes photographs, I love it. And I think Marco is posterbating today. Oct 14 06 07:40 pm Link Webspinner wrote: Thank god for Mayhem that Marco is doing whatever he's doing today. Oct 14 06 07:58 pm Link Webspinner wrote: Wait for it!!! Wait for it!!!!! Oct 14 06 08:00 pm Link You haven't lived till you have a dark cloth over you looking at the image on an 8x10" ground glass upside and backwards! But THEN you have to pick up the 100 Lbs of camera, lenses, spot meter, tripod and holders and move! Mike Oct 14 06 08:08 pm Link I saw a local spot on PBS about a SF landscape photographer (in the postmodern "mundane" tradition) who uses a trailer-sized homemade view camera with a format that measures in feet, something like 5x7 feet. And I don't know what he used for photo material, but it's super slow, he dodges and burns during the exposure. After he spends like a half hour racking out the focus. And crawling through like 10 feet of dark cloth to load his film. And then develops his material in an 18" sewer pipe converted to a processor. Brings new meaning to the word "working slowly." In public I usually get most oohs and ahhs when working with some vintage or more distinctive med format gear. Among amateur photographers, though, the most comments come when shooting with a Canon and a big L zoom. Assumably because they've been looking at them in photo magazines, I guess... Oct 14 06 08:12 pm Link When I set up my 4x5 camera, female will come around and strike up a conversation, curious to what type of camera that you are shooting with. Interesting how that happens. Oct 14 06 08:12 pm Link Mike Walker wrote: my argus 75 is waist level ground glass and backwards. Wtf is with the backwards thing? It's a pain in the butt. Oct 14 06 08:14 pm Link Cspine wrote: An image coming through any lens is upside-down and backwards. When it hits a mirror and is reflected to a ground glass, that corrects the upside-down portion. A prism is necessary to turn it back around. (Which virtually all "eye-level" SLRs incorporate). If you're looking through a waist-level, there's no prism, so it's backwards, but not upside down. If you look through a ground glass on a view camera (which is direct from the lens) it's upside-down and backwards. Oct 14 06 08:17 pm Link it's still a pain in the butt :p Oct 14 06 08:29 pm Link Why the hell would I care what a model thinks of the gear I choose to use? Frankly, if the "energy level" changes with the nature of the camera, then I suspect there is some problem involved. Oct 14 06 08:35 pm Link Doug Lester wrote: Well in your case the problem would be your attitude and failure to understand a simple question. Re-read my post. Oct 14 06 09:05 pm Link |
