A rant about cameras... (Sony A7R5 & Leica M6)

[@jbram63]

I recently upgraded to a Z50 from a 10+yr old Olympus e-series camera with 7 auto focus points and ISO that looked like a lava field at 1000. Let me tell you, once I upgraded, I was getting shots I never could’ve dreamed of getting before…tac sharp in low light, fast birds, my kids running around indoors… I even became my kids’ soccer club’s official volunteer photographer for all 10 of their teams. It was a blast! Seeing such clear action shots that I took was an incredible feeling. A year later, I was actually gettin bored of nothing but clear shots. Whereas with my Olympus, I’d get maybe 10% hit rate, with the Z50, I hit over 90%! I was dreading going through so many photos every week and losing the love of photography. Until one day a parent came up to me and told me how much the photos of her kids that I took meant to her. Then another parent and another. I’d provided thousands of free photos because I loved getting the results but then the results became normal and mundane until I saw the impact my photos were creating on these parents and players who never would’ve gotten such “pro” looking photos (and for free!). I guess my point is that it’s easy to think the gear is becoming too involved in the process of capturing moments. (Which I agree it can), but what’s more important is the impact your photography and the process has on others and yourself, and why you shoot. If I could afford to upgrade to a Z6ii or even Z9, I would! Getting better shots of more kids to provide their families with lasting memories is what has reawakened my love of photography. A camera that makes getting clearer shots easier is just the means to get there (for me). It’s also easy to forget that such a camera still needs competence and experience to capture “good” photos, not just “sharp” photos. Thanks for the insightful video!

[@harrison00xXx]

Absolutely with you! But how can you get bored with "too good keeper rate"? Despite i had a huge upgrade from EOS 550D to EOS RP to EOS R7 in wildlife, i still would wish a better keeper rate because sometimes THE ONE POSE in the 15 fps burst is affected by shutter shock and ITS ANNOYING AF! The real issue i think is - after a while, you had many good shots already and the process of photography is getting even better, but there is a point where it get really hard to "get better", so you are "stuck" (with gear and/or skills) and then it gets boring/"always the same". At least i always tried to improve until the point where i realized im stuck heavily with the gear, mostly old and bad, and every time the new gear was miles ahead from the existing one and improved my photography definately. It could be for example: - with a proper 1.4 prime and full frame even night photography handheld was finally possible in the city for example or wide field astrophotography - telescope.... i had a little bit fun with regular camera gear on a basic tripod in AP, but only the telescope upped and automated it nicely - with "proper" tele(zoom) lenses i was able to get jumpy birds and wildlife, impossible without more or less - wide angle lenses.... i refused for a long time to buy one since they were expensive and big, since i got one i can try and enjoy it at least (even if im bad with it)

[@lost-245]

z50 is a great camera

[@JamesPopsysPhoto]

I don't know why I've taken this out on the new A7R, but I've been thinking a lot recently there's too much tech now. I don't really want to shoot film but I like the idea of being more connected to the process rather than basically shooting with a computer. I'm going to go and think about this more with wine in the bath... P.s sorry about the overexposed images. They don't look like that when I export them from Lr, premiere pro is winding me up... P.p.s the comment sections in these videos are just the best. I love reading about other people’s set ups and thoughts. Looking forward to reading them all!

[@TristanColgate]

I took up photography recently, (bought an lx100ii and an a GX9, and still love both). But, I also randomly decided to buy some old russian film cameras, and an olympus om1n. Now, Those cameras cost me less than the MFTs (less than one of them), and they really just make life hard, BUT, they have one major feature. They slow me down. And that's exactly what I need. Especially as a learner, it forces me to think ahead, chimping is impossible, I have to plan. I have to have intent. And some people can learn that with digital I guess, but it's something I've struggled with. Film make it happen, I have to slow down, and it has helped no end. I'm loving shooting film, and it's making my digital better.

[@tubularificationed]

So far, I always thought, that it is the old (e.g. retired) guys who start to reject further camera technology advances. I thought one of the reason for this is that an aging brain becoming overwhelmed with learning or coping with additional complexities. You (and your brain) are still young obviously, so you wouldn't fall into that customer category 😉 I'd say though that an autofocus never can be "too good" or too sophisticated. If you are in a (somewhat agile) situation which benefits from AF, then the AF should better be damn good, shouldn't it? If you are in slow situations (typical: landscapes or other stills) then that's a different thing, then it is 'legitimate' to enjoy the process of e.g. working out focus points manually, e.g. for focus stacking a landscape shot. My threshold of "enough is enough" would be, if some AI suggests perfect compositions within a wide-angle frame, to zoom into. Unless it is educationally smart to suggest WHY it recommends a certain framing, then at least there would be a tangible benefit for beginners?

[@RJCichocki]

You need to shoot one roll on a mechanical camera and I think you'll love the process more.

[@danielhenzphotography]

From a pure technical standpoint, I am fascinated by the tec. But form me, I chose a camera that feels great rather than the pure image/AF quality. I enjoy the process and that's why I value a good felling camera system.

[@oliversteiner0815]

The M6 seems to be handmade in Germany, which would at least partially explain the high price tag, I guess.. As for the A7r V, I don't need actual 61 MP. But I want to be able to switch seamlessly between FF and crop-mode and the smaller 26 MP FF files are awesome for my stuff. And so are the general AF improvements, the better IBIS (I basically handhold everything) and the tiltyflippydoeverything screen. Or at least welcome additions which really make me think hard.. Next Year. Or so.. :D

[@alb1rdy547]

I for once welcome our "way to expensive for me too ever consider buying" camera-overlords. Maybe in 10 years I can afford one of them used

[@raybeer5213]

way TOO expensive, not TO.

[@Dorde.]

@@raybeer5213 And the most aggressive looking correction goes TOO……..

[@BabyBackManiac]

Totally agree. I think in terms of videos instead of pictures but same thoughts. The reality is better cameras plus computation videography plus algorithms predicting what people will watch (not to mention the fake engagement on all these platforms that don’t care whats in the videos) plus all the stock footage available (including every video on this platform means we (as creators) could lift out entirely eventually …and it’s only going to get worse as they try to conform the platform into shorts…which all feel the same even when they are different. probably in about 5-10 years, we will just press a button and choose our characters and our computers will render soulless formulaic “content” like preprogrammed music tracks. I’m hoping when that time comes originality and creativity will feel more valuable as all the “content” starts to feel the same.

[@TheGroovyGuitarDude]

I actually just recently got a used Leica Q for the a lot of the same reasons you describe here. It has most of the modern convenience features that make it easy to snap beautiful quick shots; but also has incredible manual focusing and modes for when I want to have that more “analog” experience, but without the hassle of film. All with the GORGEOUS glass and image quality Leica is known for. I feel like it hits that perfect balance, and I was able to be acquired for a decent price (in Leica terms).

[@atkpjdv]

I too re-mortgaged the house and got a Leica Q2 and really do love the “analog” feel of the camera. I find I have to think more about every element of the image especially given the fixed lens. But this has proved a joy and I believe also improved my photography skills. Which dovetails into James’ comments about the golf clubs. There is a great satisfaction to be had for getting something right when you know there is so much that could go wrong!

[@GeertKuster]

I’ve recently bought a Q-116 as well. Oh bugger. It’s my favorite now, rest of the (expensive) stuff is laying there, looking at me walking out the door with the Q.

[@fredoswego]

I think for most people, we don't want our hobbies to get too easy. Part of the fun of doing anything not "real" work, i.e. taking pictures, woodworking, driving a manual transmission, is the exercising of a skill set to get it done correctly and suffering the mistakes when we don't do it properly. Take that away and there's little point in doing it.

[@manilamartin1001]

Yup. My guitar playing is testament. I wouldnt want a self playing guitar.

[@alberich3099]

yea I think you nailed it. It's not the question of is it good or bad. It is rather what is it I want to acchieve. I don't want my models to be painted by themself, I want the creativity, the process to reach the final result - which for me often loses it's appeal the moment it's done. (I still love em, as they are my creation but I'm more interested in trying something new with the next - damn I sound like an addict) But for work, I would not want to be tied down with the process but I want the result I need, to work with. I could calculate stuff myself, but that would tie my down and I would not get my actual work done. James hinted as taht with the idea of the wedding-photographer, where teh process it not the primary goal but the satiscaftion of the costumer, and for that technology can realy help to not miss something important for them.

[@jaybradley9083]

A large part of the joy I get from my photography hobby is learning from my mistakes. When I finally get an image I am proud of, I feel like I, and not my camera, have accomplished something.

[@soundscape26]

@@manilamartin1001 Fortunately guitars don't have the ability to get as technologically advanced as cameras... no replacement for your fingers and brain.

[@kevins8575]

Unless your goal is the best result.

[@dan_brett_rosenthal]

Great video and discussion. I used to shoot digital and film along side each other. Then just film. Now just digital though I do miss film. Anyway I choose a Nikon D700 which is out of date but gives me everything I want - 12 mp (plenty..) an optical viewfinder (I don’t think ppl realise how much information overload you’re faced with in mirrorless models..), and no video.. I’m tempted by the Df too. I’m about to start shooting commercially again after a break and will need video and *all the megapixels* for some clients but as an artist, where my heart lies as a photographer, I just want to be in the moment. That’s the enjoyment and joy of photography for me and if I get paid to capture those moments or they are for my own art, that’s what it’s all about for me. A film Leica gets you there, and so does a Mamiya RB67. I guess you need to experience the total lack of automated assistance to see if you enjoy it or are frustrated by it. I think it comes down to you as an “artist’ or “technician hired to create an image” and where you put yourself on that spectrum. And then shoot how, and with what, you enjoy.

[@andrewcarter4046]

I still shoot micro four thirds. There’s a big difference in capability if hardly any difference in technology between the G9 and the G85. When I need to get the shot, taking pictures for other people, I use the G9. When I’m by myself walking around town or hiking I use the G85. Same lenses. Coaxing a shot out of the G85 is most of the enjoyment, more than doing anything with them later.

[@jeffolson4731]

I think the "too much technology" line will be different for different types of photography like you eluded to in video. I am a hobbyist wildlife photographer so animal eye autofocus is very helpful for me. I still have the challenge of finding the subject and framing it in a pleasing way. Since the moment may be fleeting, if I have an autofocus that can find and focus on the eye I will embrace the technology. You probably don't care if your camera can do 30 fps, but I do. I guess what I am saying is that for me, once the camera can aim the lens and frame the animal before I see it, then it will have crossed the "too much technology" line for me. I love your photography. You have an ability to frame the landscape and pick your focus point that I struggle mightily with. You are an artist creating art. I am sure you could use a fully manual film camera and still create great art.

[@daveychainsaw961]

I used to use film a lot for work as a field archaeologist using Nikon FM's and FM2's and my own Pentax K1000 and later a Nikon F3 as a hobbyist. i used to develop and print. I always said i'd stick with film. But once digital became good enough i jumped and have no regrets. The immediacy of it, being able to see the results and adapt to get what you want. Have shot a range of DSLR's but am now very happy with the Sony A7IV having upgraded from a Canon 5DIV. I set it up so that i can take advantage of the technology when i want or need it with user modes for Portrait , Action and Landscape. saves a ton of time but if i want to replicate the mindset of film i just stick it in manual and use the dials and lens aperture ring. The technology is just a tool for us to decide how/when to employ it. I agree with you about incremental gains, we just have to be careful not to get sucked into feeling the need to upgrade every generation. But the mind-blowing AF we have now is just too useful for portraits, action, street etc.

[@Feeris]

The advancements in technology is frankly crazy and the people behind it clearly worked very hard to make it. For me, the enjoyment comes from the process. And to me the process is researching a location, lugging my gear up a mountain/round a city etc, setting up. Magic autofocus won't turn a bad photo into a great one, just a bad one into an in focus bad photo

[@therealbonj]

exactly

[@LXDV]

I totally get your feelings. As a full time working professional commercial photographer, a camera for me is a tool and the better that tool is, the better I can do my job, the better outcomes I can provide for my clients. Advances in technology make my job easier and allow me to provide better service. This doesn’t take away from my creative process instead for me it expands the horizon of what’s possible and raises the standards required to be successful. Yes the bar is lower and competition is higher but it also means that the people who are genuine about doing this rise to the top and those who are not willing to put in the work and develop their craft are weeded out ever more quickly. It’s all progress as far as I’m concerned👍

[@golljoll]

Honestly never comment, but I think this video warrants one! This has been my exact feeling for years, although I could never figure out why. I was obsessed with photography around 2007-2014, but after a while I lost all motivation, I sat with tens of thousands of pictures without caring to do anything with them, it became a chore. About a year ago I bought an old medium format camera and started taking film photos, developing and scanning myself and I don't even touch my digital camera unless it's for scanning. Sure you miss a lot of pictures you wouldve been able to take digitally, but you cherish the ones you have, and that's enough for me. It becomes a challenge.

[@takoflame4948]

you could do the same with digital. I only shoot around 300 shots during a shoot. most photographers mindlessly shoot 1000 of photos in hopes of getting a couple good ones which is terrible

[@caloster7664]

I've been doing strictly film photography for the past year now. I follow this channel solely for the wisdom and the concepts you provide. I've found that although I don't shoot digital, almost all of your tips can be applied to film photography because at it's core, photography is photography. I dabbled in digital for roughly one summer a few years back but was never hooked the way I have been with film and I think you've nailed why. For me, digital isn't enough of a challenge, and I think there are a lot of people that can agree with that. Well done James.

[@alylyshua74937]

Very interesting point of view, thanks for sharing! I'll add my two cents: I very much enjoy film's slow approach. It makes for more deliberate photography imho. It taught me (as a beginner) to take the time to properly set everything correctly on my camera, make sure my composition is great, etc. I mostly shoot in single-shot mode, and I use burst to get a clear shot when I'm using a slow shutter speed. Film taught me to slow down and not be so trigger-happy. At $0.75 per shot, I want to make sure most of them are excellent.

[@caloster7664]

@@alylyshua74937 Agreed 100%. I've considered trying out digital again now that I've had some film experience, maybe trying to go about it the same way. But also, as a mechanical engineering student one of the draws to film photography is the cameras themselves. There is something magical about a well designed fully mechanical camera. It's why, while I have no use and may not afford, I have a very healthy respect for the Leica M6. It's not just an icon, but a real marvel, as with many other film cameras.

[@frederickmcdonald6636]

and there's this one thing with digital that bugs me when I see photographs that are over edited to a point that the colours are hyper-colourized! Not a word, but then the images that are like that are not real either. Thanks for the interesting thoughts James and Cal - take care and be safe out there....

[@anthonyzbikowski529]

@@IAmR1ch Roofers. Hand nailed shingle roofs are better according to some. Pneumatic nail guns punch through roof sheathing too easy in many cases and there are a lot of people that roof (which is slow miserable work) the older slower way as it yields better results for them and the customer. There are people who shape metal with a hammer and heat instead of a six axis CNC macine. The analogy isn't apt though. Carpentry isn't art. I mean, heck, there are people still shooting wet plates and doing albumin prints for a living or as a passion. In the end photography, even diluted down in pure commercial work, is a form of art (art being an expression or application of human creative skill and imagination) and whatever works for the artist is what works for them, be it the latest and greatest digital body or a large format camera that takes an entire cow's worth of gelatin and a half ounce of silver salts per image. Oil painting and watercolors didn't go away with the advent of the Kodak Brownie, and apparently film itself will hang around for as long as people find it as a useful means of expression just fine art painting still exists.

[@j.k5654]

Cal, You nailed it my friend. I have been following this channel since 2015 when I started with digital landscapes. After 2 years, I got tired of the lack of challenge and the super sharp almost fake look of digital. Also I hated editing the tons of images I took on digital. Been shooting film now since 2017 and never going back. It’s interesting how different people are, some like the challenges, some hate them.

[@alexelley6283]

For me you have hit the 'nail on the head', if you have a camera that does everything, wheres the enjoyment, as another professional photographer said there's only five things you need to take good photographs, I only wish I could remember what they are...Thank you for sharing your views.

[@TechnoBabble]

So which camera does everything? Which one is choosing your composition and lighting?

[@SamueltloganVideos]

Great video. Looking back, I remember feeling like this when one of my cameras had the ability to automatically crop the photo to try and make it a better composition.

[@Jackswildphotography]

The ability to compose a photograph is what makes or breaks an image. It’s what I find the most difficult but most enjoyable aspect of photography. Any technological improvements that allow for me to focus more on that process is a win in my books. Different styles of photography is just that, different not better or worse.

[@DavidFlowerOfficial]

I've absolutely been feeling this for a few years now and it pushed me back towards using vintage manual lenses to give back some of that control, possibility of error and just pure enjoyment of photography. With that said, if I'm gonna be shooting for a client I'll take all the autofocus help I can get in order to have a greater selection of usable images at the end of it. I get where you're coming from, but with a camera like the A7R5, just stick a nice vintage lens on it and it's all about the photographer again. Great video, James.

[@kodithebear]

Hence why I use 1950- 90's film cameras for personal work and digital (and flippy screen, brilliant focus. dynamic range) for commercial. Don't forget though that connection to subject/ environment, vision, composition and colour/ tone balance is also a vital part of photography that separates image makers.

[@JoeL-yf4ee]

I am one that has gone back to the old days of film. Over the years I have collected many old cameras fixing many of them. Instead of using them once in awhile I have mostly been using just film. It is more of a challenge and make one think more of everything. Good vid today.

[@clarson2916]

I’m 66 years old. I’m also a retired commercial photographer, but that is largely irrelevant to my point. I’m not sure of the number of times I have heard this same set of comments during my life, in relation to various disciplines, but it has been numerous. Everything from compound bows in archery, carbon fiber everything in bicycling (now replaced by evil electrical assistance in bicycling), to computer image editing in photography. Now, imagine for a moment going back 100 years in time, and experiencing all the technological advances in every aspect of life up to this moment. Wow… mind blowing right? And yet, the world has still not come to an end. People still fish with hand made bamboo fly rods and hand tied flies… sonar scanners be gone! :)

[@antwon8902]

The discussion of “you took a great photo cuz you have a better camera” is starting to become a lot more of a true statement than i would like it to be

[@colinjudge1261]

This might be part of why I enjoy artificial lighting so much. Being able to shape a beautiful scene in the blink of a strobe still feels much more like a type of magic than simply a technological feat. I experience a far greater sense of ownership over a well placed shadow than I do a tack sharp pupil, when I know that my modern pro camera and my modern pro lens completely took take of the latter.

[@TheWutangclan1995]

Yeah I see that more instead of why do you love that camera and equipment.

[@willprice7475]

I was thinking the very same thing!

[@SkiwithMike]

@@Sidowse Archer not the arrow

[@Ungabunga27]

@@SkiwithMike 2 Equally talented photographers will not get the same quality of photo if one was using an A6600 APSC camera and the other was using an A7III/IV/V full frame But you can keep arguing that it's the "Archer not the arrow" while you're likely using an A7 IV

[@jonmnelson]

I tend to side with you and your thoughts about this new Sony, but I also believe a great photographer will make great images with any camera, film or digital, and a not-so-great photographer won’t make great images even with the newest, best camera. My grandfather once told me we only truly appreciate that which we have to work hard to achieve. That seems to apply here as well, at least for me.

[@MikeStevens]

Each to their own, I suppose. I tend to think that the more advanced the camera, the more you're being freed up to focus on other aspects of a shoot, and spend less time to get that done (which, let's be fair, is hugely valuable to working photographers). In the case of this more advanced AF, it's creating opportunities to jump into moments that would otherwise have been harder to capture, with older cameras requiring more time to prepare for unexpected moments. Of course, as you noted, it depends greatly on the type of work you do. Your work is largely in capturing landscapes, which doesn't demand much in the way of advanced tech, and generally does allow more time to prep. If you're an action shooter, or even just a kindergarten photographer, that clever new AF is insanely valuable.

[@taylorhickman84]

pretty much anything that improves my keeper rate encourages me to shoot more.

[@CalzNL]

I agree, especially for professionals. But at the same time if something becomes too easy it becomes less satisfying. If all your shots are awesome that becomes the standard and boring.

[@ThatNorma]

Like you said, for professionals it makes sense. But for example for me that just loves to grab his camera and go into the wild and shoot, I just love the process of composing, setting my desire aperture and shutter speed and then focus, all done by me and not some automated AI system. Especially for enthusiast photography I think most people tend to run away from these automated systems as it takes the joy out of the hobbie. For professional use, completely agree with you

[@juanQuedo]

A truly professional photographer that does it for a living day in and day out, they know their cameras extremely well, they know where to be, when to be and all the things to get the required image. They probably don't need this tech in most of the cases. And I hear the voices: _"no but sports photo..."_ Have you seen the incredible shots of the Olympic games? or F1?.. _"no but wedding photogr..."_ Have you seen the work of seasoned wedding photographers, the ones that earn awards?. Let's be real. This tech ain't for them, they would do the same with the M6 all manual as it always has been. This is for the content creators, the advanced hobbyists and similar. Those are the ones that are going to talk about it more than shoot with it. I mean if anyone thinks that with a burst of 20 images per second (and that's nothing for today's cameras) even if only 5 or 6 where on focus you are going to be missing "the perfect shot" because it was in between. You are just lying to yourself.

[@TechnoBabble]

@@juanQuedo this entire argument is completely disconnected from reality. The number of those "incredible shots" from the past that are just straight up out of focus is astounding. Those photographers weren't these incredible manual focus savants, it was just all they had. There are far more incredible photos around nowadays because the camera gets out of the way and allows you to focus more on composition and lighting. If what you are saying was true all of the seasoned professional wildlife and sports photographers who started on film wouldn't use large pro-bodies like the Canon 1DX or Nikon D(X). There are so many photographers I see that spend thousands and thousands on cameras from Leica and Hasselblad and take absolutely garbage photos, but the entire personality of their photography is that they shot it fully manually. Doesn't matter how it was captured, a bad photo is bad, a good photo is good.

[@elkayakfish]

This started. You did your disclaimer about I was thinking that. We got 3 mins in and i said this is why I like this guy. And my wife said, I can see why. Then I said. I was thinking this already. Growth mindsets ftw thanks for another great video. 🎉❤

[@MrRettich1]

As a wildlife fotographer I am more than happy about the technical improvement. Sometimes it is still a pain in the ass to get to the places where the wildlife is and then, you only see it for a few secs. If you can`t rely on your gear, you loose the moment.

[@tomtrevatt3286]

As a professional portrait photographer I use exclusively manual focus, vintage lenses adapted to a Fujifilm GFX50sii - one major draw for me is the restrictions this places on me and the character that the almost 50 year old lenses give to my work - I moved away from "optically perfect" new lenses because I found them too digitally sharp. Maybe I'll be swayed by other lenses in the future, but for now, I find manually focusing is far more enjoyable and I have far better control of what's in focus. In fact, for someone who shoots wide open, such a small sliver of the frame is in focus that relying on the eye autofocus wasnt good enough (I had a Sony A7ii before), it would often focus on the eyelashes not the iris. But now, I can be much more precise - which is, of course, ironically, offset by the slight softness of the lens.

[@christinakipfer8086]

You make some very valid and interesting points. Craftsmanship is the reason many people have these hobbies and interests. I can buy a sweater from the store, but knitting it myself is so much more satisfying (sometimes).

[@ashsphotolounge]

As one of the first pro photographers who went over to digital back in the super early 2000s - what you are talking about is the reason why I have now abandoned digital to the point where my Sony mirrorless now only scans images taken on my analogue Leicas, Nikons, etc and otherwise - seldom ever comes out of my photo bag - it's just too boring.

[@skara392]

I started with an A7 original in 2020 that I bought new. Also got not cheap but not high end glass for it, both Sony and third party like samyang. loved it for a year but wanted more so ended up getting an A7C for the better focusing funnily enough but found myself enjoying it less, feeling much more left out of the process. I also got my partner into photography who lives across the globe, he got a 2nd hand Olympus OM 5 mkII with two lenses. By mid 2021 I had started dabbling with film with cheap cameras like holgas and point and shoots, which moved on to older cameras like the lubitel 166B. But the tipping point was earlier this year when my partner stayed here for two weeks, when he first arrived i got him his own point and shoot with some simple and reliable HP5+ film but one week into our holiday we where heading to the museum in town when I glanced into a charity shop window and saw some old SLRs, a praktica BMS and a Zenit 11. After a bit of convincing we bought them and when to the pharmacy to grab some basic Kodak colour negative film, for that last week we would take our SLRs and digital cameras with us but would be so engrossed with the slow process of the film cameras and having much fun with them we didn't even touch the Sony's. And getting those scans and developed film back a month later was a wonderful experience, we shot 11 rolls of 35mm film and a couple of medium format. Now I shoot with my canon 50e with Basic EF glass and have way more fun than with the Sony, I also got a D30 (not to be confused with a 30D) and looking for maybe an original 5D or 1DmkII for when I need digital. But for now I just adapt EF to e. I also have 100 year old cameras just chilling on my shelves that I shoot with now and then as well. As for my partner, he's looking to move here and once here is looking to get into even more vintage photography like dry plate which is amazing. Also I have no doubt when it comes to the "perfect camera" scenario companies like Sony wouldn't hesitate to make sure they keep returning a profit by doing what so many other industries do, some form of subscription... You will not own your camera and you will be happy.

[@naturligfunktion4232]

I am new to photography, so in an effort to save money but still try out different focal lengths, I started to buy old vintage lenses. Didn’t realize they couldn’t autofocus until I had one. Thing is though, I really like them. As of such, I am not using the ”modern” kit lens that much (even though it is a great lens too!). In essense, the manual lenses help me focus on the important, fundamental part of photography: composition, subject and the light. Everything else is a distraction, to be honest. (Still love autofocus now and then, but you get my point)

[@AleksPlaysMc]

I'd rather a camera entirely quickly do all the work for me to capture the exact moment I want. Photography for me is capturing a beautiful scene to enjoy for myself later and for anyone else who may have an interest at that moment unless it was personal. I'd gladly take any camera that could perfectly do all of the work quicker than the snap of my fingers if it meant the exact look I wanted is the look I got. If I could have the look of my Leica D-Lux5 updated to capture quickly and take better pictures in low light quicker? I'd be stupid to deny that. I care for the moment, not the camera. A great video discusses this "Photography is NOT your hobby. It’s an excuse."

[@stanleyfamUK]

Great, thought provoking post and really stirred my brain at 7AM! I used to race motor bikes, two wheels, an engine, front and back brakes, sitting on a seat facing a highly inflammable tank… fast forward 15 years and i recently road a ‘modern’ high tech bike, self levelling suspension, cornering control , adaptive cruise control, rain mode ( to help prevent sliding) etc etc and this was on a 200bhp sports bike… OK yes it is safer as the bike manages the risks and its brain is monitoring everything 20,000 times a second, but honestly it was the most boring experience I have had. On the track others riding this bike, with me on my old race bike, were way ahead of me, average riders (as one discovered when he rode mine) and when I rode this bike I was miles ahead of the pack, but bored. My older bike with a mere 150bhp has no computer to manage the conditions, he needs me, I am in control, I am the one that has to think, to set the bike up right for a fast sweeping bend. So James, I totally got your post. Now should I order an M6…. 😮

[@keithspillett5298]

As a 'partially retired' pro with 50 odd years experience, over half my career was completed with manual everything film cameras. Our Nikon F and Canon F1 camera systems still produced stunning images, without access to modern technology, and our clients were still happy with our results. I still have my old nikkor lenses from the 1970s, but now use them adapted to olympus EM1 and EM 10 mk3 bodies. We shot sports without motor drives at a rate of around one frame per second. We knew our gear, which was updated approximately every five years instead of what currently seems like every five MINUTES,,and still managed to produce good clean images. So, would I ditch my modern equipment in favour of a 30 year old design? Certainly not, but it's still quite gratifying

[@brettszypulski7584]

james what a great video i used to ride bicycles alot and i went to buy a new bike one time it was lighter and had all the upgrades, the sales person said to me you still have to push the pedals, it hit me... that's the whole point to ride a bike not get on it and off you go... and photography is the same.

[@TheYuhasz01]

Use whatever level of technology you are comfortable with. The final results, the photo and what it conveys for viewer, is what matters. One can imbed humanity, compassion, passion in any image no matter how produced. I use digital and film photography for different reasons and different purposes.

[@besperus4475]

Finally. You got it! You have skills to use. Use it. A Canon R3 lets your eye focus. Why? Making a sharp image, in focus…that’s all there is. I like your work, most of the time.

[@alexisstember]

This is incredibly on point and was my exact experience a year ago. It was the entire genesis of my channel and I haven’t looked back a single day. I pretty much don’t own a modern camera anymore. The passion and joy of the challenge was gone but I am in a similar camp to you - I do this for my own pleasure. My husband is working professional and the Nikon Z9 serves him brilliantly.

[@najwansalaymeh3621]

amazing video! i would listen to you rant about cameras for HOURS !

[@MiguelMorenoGP]

I got a Sony camera recently to record better clips of my actual job (playing guitar and sound engineering), and have used it more for photos than anything else because I fell in love with it. Your rant is really valid - I have, for the time being, the crappy kit lens and a manual prime. Some days I really enjoy using the kit lens for the awesome autofocus. Other days I can't take it out of the camera quick enough, and get most of my images out of focus with the manual lens. I think we all ebb and flow between that, the enjoyment of results we didn't work that much for, and/or enjoying the process of getting it.

[@Aroundtheworld-ew6rx]

I thought I would never see the day I would upgrade from the A7ii, but you sold me on the A7RV and getting it in two days.

[@tomjolly7990]

Totally understand the logic. The perspective is important. A key factor for me, being an amateur photographer with hardly any time to enjoy it is that technology allows me to spend less time creating images and that is a good thing. The irony is that the best and latest technology is far too expensive for most part time hobbyists to justify. Maybe that’s why I bought a vintage Olympus OM1D film camera recently. It’s a pretty cheap way of enjoying full frame photography with excellent lenses that don’t cost a fortune to acquire.

[@rilijn]

First off, I'm a hobby photographer. My photography changed once I had a kid. Before, I shot with mostly manual lenses and enjoyed a slow, analog process. I loved wildlife, macro, and astro. After having a kid, I've grown to love documentary style photography as well as portraiture. After I borrowing my friend's R5, I was blown away. I immediately sold off a bunch of gear I wasn't using and bought an R6 and a couple of (EF) primes (My price ranges don't allow for the R5 + RF glass, but I can appreciate how amazing they are). The autofocus on this thing is an absolute gamechanger. Being able to successfully capture images of my wild toddler in action has led to some of my favorite photos I've every produced. Our walls are covered in beautiful action shots of our family adventuring. Even my wife, not into camera gear AT ALL, can now track me and my son while we play. I WANT a high keeper rate. I don't want to say, "man, that could have been a cool shot if he had been in focus." So, while I get what you are saying, I am eternally grateful for the gear that I have and I treasure the moments I've been able to capture.

[@Token_Nerd]

I kinda get this sort of perspective, but at the same time, the new af systems of cameras as of late (specifically on the R5 with me), has actually further encouraged me to take part in my photography hobby. This kind of happens for me for 2 reasons. Logically speaking, if you don't find challenges with certain types of photography without having to worry about AF, you just move to other types of photography. For me, I found it very daunting getting into astrophotography because of the huge learning curve. Now I enjoy it immensely because of new camera tools that make focussing so much easier and help give rewarding results. In addition, improved autofocus specifically but technology broadly has allowed me to increase my success rates with other types of photography (mainly street photography and aircraft photography). Instead of getting frustrated over missing all the time, you start focussing more on composition and making your photography even better.

[@lukemerrill1272]

I was playing with my older Fujifilm X-E2 yesterday (now 9 years old) and was blown away (again) at how incredibly it performs! Agree completely with your sentiment. Thanks for sharing James!

[@jan-penny]

You’ve hit the nail on the head! I’ve just bought a ten year old Fuji X-E1, stuck a manual lens on it, and I’m having a great time 🙂

[@jmann316]

I shoot on a Leica SL2-s with Leica M lenses, professionally as a wedding videographer & for personal day to day stuff, it’s the best of both worlds for me, the ease of using extremely high resolution EVF but the satisfaction of using manual focus lenses.

[@markfarrand6556]

Agreed - it’s why I’ve been trying manual lenses from the film era, on a mirrorless body

[@AmorLucisPhotography]

I think you conflate two things, James: a) the use of technology to *take over* the creative process (e.g. sky replacement), with b) the use of technology to *remove obstacles* in the way of the creative process (e.g., autofocus). As "creatives" we want, amongst other things, to realize our creative vision (a hackneyed phrase, I know). Technology of kind (a) detracts from that by taking the creative control out of our hands and places it in the hands of the programmers. As such technology develops we might end up with increasingly beautiful image, but *we* will have done less and less to create it. It becomes less and less *our own creation*. But technology of kind (b) shortens the distance between our creative vision and the final product. It frees us to focus (pardon the pun) on the creative process (e.g., *where* to focus) rather than the technical process (*succeeding* in focussing where we want to focus) without reducing our creative control.

[@vincentkeith5259]

When digital came along - I held out for quite a while. Nothing could match the image quality of a 4x5 Velvia Chrome or Tri-X Negative - unless it was an 8x10 (or bigger). I wasn't at all happy with print technology. Sometime around 2004, I heard about the Epson 9600 - About a year later, I took a drum scan of a couple of images to an Epson dealer and had them printed. At that point, I decided the digital output matched the quality - if not the feeling of a darkroom print. I bought an Imacon Scanner for 4x5 and worked with scanned film until around 2007. I decided to test the waters of my photographic youth with the SLR - in this case, the DSLR, in particular, the Nikon D2Xs. It was fun to use, but the image quality was barely adequate. I could rarely print larger than 11"x14" without upscaling. Another year passed, and I had the opportunity to use a Phase One P45+ digital back on my 4x5 - focusing was more challenging and more crucial. Still, the results were outstanding, and I purchased a used one with a Contax-645 mount. I often missed that large view of a 4" x 5" ground glass, but I wasn't missing the nights mixing chemicals. I eventually picked up a Contax 645 and used the P45+ on it and the 4x5. The Contax had autofocus - Single point, and by today's standards, painfully slow. Pretty slow, even compared to the D2Xs - but the image quality was phenomenal. I am, now, in 2022 (almost 2023), giving up medium format, large format, and Nikon, my darkroom, my scanner, and most of the rest of it - for a single APS-C system that my old bones & tired back can manage. So where am I going? Fujifilm. It will either be the X-H2 or the X-T5 - probably the T5 if the ergonomics work for me. It's not the best autofocus, and I'm okay with that. It's not the highest resolution; I'm fine with that too. This will be my last change and, quite likely, my last "upgrade." It's enough. And it's light enough that I won't leave it behind.

[@johnjgilchrist]

Funny thing I have a Sony that always seems to get the shot, but I use and old Fuji xt1 all the time. I think you have nailed the reason.

[@joaodelgado3582]

Funny enough, as a web designer/developer, sometimes I feel that services like your sponsor Squarespace make it too easy and take out all the fun of designing and coding websites

[@salvatoreshiggerino6810]

As a developer myself I had lots of fun building things from scratch at the beginning of my career, but now I jump at every opportunity I get to get the product out the door with minimal effort and creative input, like a wedding photographer would jump on the latest Sony. The less I have to think at work, the more creative energy I have left for photography or other things on my own time and on my own terms.

[@headwerkn]

So true. I was a web designer back in the heady days of the late 90s and early 2000s. The tech was limited and restrictive yet the creativity was massive because it required a special person with the right mix of creative and technical skills to produce something good. Those skills were highly valued. These days web design is so generic: that’s great for usability (something we always weren’t so great with 25 years ago!) but hardly inspiring. Glad I got out ~10 years ago and did something else with my life.

[@davidmantripp]

Although Squarespace offers a lot of options it still ends up a bit cookie-cutter. I tried to use it for nearly a year to replace my custom built site, but gave up in frustration at all the design limitations. It’s also pretty expensive. I find it strange that so many photographers who obsess with developing their own style and individuality end up happy to present their work in such a conformist way…

[@salvatoreshiggerino6810]

Eh, I don't think it matters that much. The photos are the star of the show, these plain white templates they use are perfect. Of course a static site generator would be much cheaper and you don't have the vendor lock-in. But if you're not technical and don't have time to become it I see the point with Squarespace.

[@philanderson2612]

Squarespace also takes the nightmare out of engaging web design companies who charge the earth for standard Wordpress templates then hold the buyer to ransom for changes 😅. I’ll take a limited design pallette for being self sufficient any time!

[@chronicfish]

You made some great points. So, I follow numerous photography channels, here on KZbin. From experimental to landscape, however, my favourite subject is street photography. Having said that, I only follow 2-3 *(film)* street photographers, simply for the slowed down, more relaxed approach. It grinds my gear when I see many street photographers, up in someone's face, bursting 10 frames per second, hoping to catch that one "magical" photo (which is also usually HEAVILY processed). At that point, to me, it's no longer photography but more of a "scratch card" scenario.

[@ianiles6430]

I went from a Nikon FM (fully manual) and an FE (AE, but only ever used in manual mode), to a Nikon D700, which I only ever used in manual mode. I'm now using an all-singing, all-dancing Z7, which I only shoot in manual mode. The tech can get in the way, but you can always switch things off.

[@theyori6346]

As someone who is a big fan of polaroid I do get it. When it comes to those kind of pictures, it is (for me) the imperfections that makes the picture possible art. You will get results you can't really replicate and each picture often tells a story, because the paper i so expensive that the shots kinda need to be a bit "extra" to justify the pricing and enviromental damage those can produce.

[@DavyEnglish]

I've never really thought about what you've shared James, but I get it and its a fair point, Davy

[@savagefrieze4675]

At the moment my primary camera is a Nikon Z9. Absolutely fabulous camera for sports and wild life for an old guy with cataracts waiting for surgery. When I’m shooting for fun I put the camera into manual mode. When I’m shooting landscapes I’m in manual mode. Astrophotography manual it. It’s only when photographing sports and wild life that I tend to use aperture priority and auto eye focus. If I could afford the cost of an M6 and lenses, one mustn’t forget the 3-10,000.00 dollar lenses when talking Leica cost, I’d have the best of both worlds! A Creative film and a superb sports camera.

[@elimarnareads]

I had this thought several years ago when I saw a video about a camera that would let you take a photo and THEN focus where you want to. It just seemed like too much of the enjoyment and challenge, for me, would be taken out of photography with that kind of focusing system. I still feel that way about that kind of technology, too.

[@inigotaylor9401]

"18 months" was answer enough. as a m6 user of almost 20 years, my use of it comes and goes, but its always there and can always make a picture, I like to photograph trees, the sea and mountains. They don't really move like a breakdancer at an awkward camera launch. I choose an m6

[@kieranpicken3696]

Speaking as someone who is a hobbyist and who does have the patience for film, I think the main thing is understanding different processes so that when you have a project or image in mind you know how to use the best process to achieve that. My last project used both film and digital. My current one is purely digital. Most of my favourite single images from this year have been film - but they wouldn't have been if I hadn't spent a big chunk of time learning how to do it.

[@TheBigNegative-PhotoChannel]

I must say that is the first video that really nails why people like film photography. All this technology strips the fun out of shooting and just focus on the result. The fun of getting one good film photo is so much more pleasing than having 30 frames a second perfectly in focus digital images. Only because you made this photo instead of the camera doing al the work.

[@kerry5586]

Having recently got my hands on a film camera I can now understand the enthusiasm for old cameras and lenses. It has reignited my dying enthusiasm for photography.

[@solidground4157]

Hi James, following you for a while, I really apreciate you decided to start this conversation, it made me thinking about a lot more than what you said during the video. I have been shooting digital and films for many years, also professionally. Although i am with you on the ownership of an artistic work and I understand the question you're posing ("Good picture...I did it or the camera did?"), I also think that having the possibility to use such a technology might be extremely usefull for those who need to deliver "fast and furious" (ah, what a world we live in...) as in sport photography, for instance. Or in different scenario, way more meaningfull (for me) as in the case of a photoreporter, working on very hard assignment, where you have one chance to get it right. For the general users, I guess, it is a matter of wisdom and honesty : if I take pictures for the process, than I would love to enjoy that process as long as I can, try new things, be challenged at times, learn more. It is a matter of choice, at the end of the day : I can use the new Sony-Canon-Nikon but I don't have to, I can still get an old D80 for few bucks, a good lens, saving a lot of money and make art. Thanks for pocking our brains!

[@oOderTypOo]

the sentence at 7:45 got me XD i have bought a leica M1. for those of you who dont know: no lightmeter and not even a rangefinder. you basically have to guess everything and pray. i bought it because it does nothing for me. it makes me work harder. even when i use my fuji digital camera i use vintage canon glass without auto focus. i somehow found it easier to shoot like this.

[@shaungoddard8417]

Hi James, a great video & great Rant mob friend, You say it as it is & I'm think thats great. I dare to think what cameras will be doing in the years ahead, like you said they may flash up on screen messages that the composition is not ideal so choose another. Fortunately my photography is for me & I don't need to impress others so I am happy to use my Sony A6600 for several years to come. I do accept that for professional photographers (business is business) so if they have a tool that will produce an end result that is a cut above others then they will spend, spend, send & continually upgrade there equipment.

[@linjicakonikon7666]

I've been shooting since I received a Canon FTB as a high school graduation present from my folks(An incredible gift from a couple that barely could pay the bills). 50 years later, after using countless cameras and publishing many books, I enjoy, more than anything, my mechanical film cameras and old digital slrs. My newest camera is a Nikon D3 and my oldest is a Canon VT Deluxe. I only use manual focus lenses and I only use slow films and low ASA(ISO) settings and films. I'm relaxed, don't sweat the technical stuff. I know what I'm doing and am willing to miss a shot. I love photography. I love beauty. I love breathing, eating, sleeping and waking up to a cup of coffee with a table spoon of maple syrup and some cream. Life is too short to keep chasing perfection.

[@ellenw8213]

I love my A7R...3 !!! It does everything I need it to do. .. Flowers and Stills.

[@davidenpunktse]

Couldn't agree more. With a camera like the A7R5, I can sit down - do nothing and the camera will practice my hobby and passion for me. I'll just stick to my manual focus M10... It still puts a smile on my face while using.

[@TechnoBabble]

So when did the camera start choosing your lighting and composition?

[@helpstonfilms8778]

You don't have to upgrade. I was out with my Sony a900 (still a beautiful camera) yesterday and got some beautiful shots. If you do upgrade, you could always turn off some of the automatic systems should you wish. It's just a tool. Enjoy it.

[@classicaloracle]

It's why I use a Pentax - lousy video but a viewfinder that makes me focus on composition. Great, thoughtful video - many thanks.

[@dahterrasse]

Your point of view is incredibly interesting! Shooting on film myself, and only having gotten fully interested in photography when I started looking into film photography, I totally understand this sort of alienation with modern-day tech. Film fascinates me because it's an escape from this all-digital, non-tangible world. The resolving power of a mere 35mm negative blows me away, and to think that those colours are created by real, physical processes is marvellous. To me, it is essential to be in control: Aperture, shutter speed, film stock, manual focus. (I'm not the type of film shooter who loves the "unpredictability" - with experience and patience, you learn how to predict, or at least estimate, the result. I like the challenge.) The simplicity amazes me, and when I take a good picture, I can take pride in it. Perhaps the necessary patience before you can even look at what you've made adds to that. Previously, I'd taken pictures on my phone and a relative's DSLR. Neither gave me this satisfaction. Of course, I don't see those who make use of modern-day tech as lesser in any way. I despise most modern cameras' convoluted layouts, but admire those who master them. It just isn't for me.

[@4g0tten4]

There is a scene in the 1994 movie "Star Trek: Generations" where Captain Kirk finds himself in a kind of a "dream world" where all his dreams and desires have a physical manifestation. He relives an experience he had as a young boy riding a horse and jumping over a creek or some kind of obstacle. After the first time he gets a funny look on his face and he tries it again. He complains to the other character in the scene (some French guy with a British accent - if you can believe that - probably someone else's bad dream) that when he was younger he always got a thrill trying to make that jump because it was always on the edge of what the horse was capable of doing. But there in that "dream world" it was too easy. He could make it every time. There was no challenge, and not being challenging, there was no thrill or excitement. I think this is similar to what you are talking about. The problem with this in the movie is that there is one character who is obsessed with getting to that "dream world" so much that he doesn't care how many people he has to murder to get there (probably to use the "perfect camera" to take photos of his cat). So are you are saying that Sony is responsible for Marxist tyrants stealing elections, extorting huge amounts of money from corporations, murdering innocent people who could expose their corruption, destroying the supply chain so that economic catastrophe will cause everyone to be poor, and the resulting famine will kill tens of millions of people? And are you saying that Leica is the solution to all these problems? Or am I pushing this analogy a little too far? ;-)

[@Alexmaystudio]

When I was younger I made 8 bit music on a gameboy. It was a very limiting medium and it took a lot of work to create all the virtual instruments and whatnot. But the end product was unique and the process rewarding. When I upgraded to the latest desktop software and sequencing hardware I lost all enthusiasm for making music, because the ease of synthesis made my music really generic and bland. Now, that’s on me because I’m not a talented musician. However, I do see a parallel with my photography. I used to have a medium format Bronica which involved a lot of set-up and I loved the photos I took with it. Then i bought a fairly decent Sony alpha something-or-other with 3 lenses and it took the joy out of the process entirely. So I sold it. Now I’m thinking of getting a Fuji x-t20, for the ‘limitations’.

[@derrenleepoole]

Just got rid of all my Sony gear and now use a Leica M9. It’s a digital camera that’s akin to shooting film. I’m completely involved in the process and I love it. It’s a camera, not a computer :) *I may have said something similar on another video of yours*

[@DylanSpitz]

Enjoyed the rant, sir! Always fun to hear how others are sort of deep-thinking about things, whether you agree or not.

[@BarttRoman]

I can understand your point, and as you said, as a working photographer who uses a camera with slow auto focus to shoot events, I can only dream of a new Sony camera like the 7RV. Great rant by the way, shooting for fun is still the best way to use my camera, can't lie about that.

[@Matt35ist]

Bee’s knees is one of my go-to phrases, love it.

[@iscoguy]

Yep. I have a foot in both worlds. >99% of my photos are taken with the Canon R5. Amazing camera. Very much enjoy it. But....in 2022, I've bought 3 film cameras, MF to LF. I only go out occasionally with those cameras, but even sitting here typing about it, I get excited. I've learned to develop on my own, I have my own scanner. I can go from a shot to a few hours later, having it scanned in. I need the time, but when I give it to myself, I very much enjoy that process.

[@ItsTheBigHorse]

"how much do you feel part of the process?" this is something I have been trying to put into words for over a year now but Im not intelligent enough to figure it out for myself. Anyway, thats exactly the point I was trying to make when having a conversation with people. it was getting to the point where all the technology in the camera, plus all the amazing things you can do with editing software starts to dilute your creative stamp on the image you take

[@joe3eagles]

I didn't expect to find this video interesting based on the title, since I use strictly Canon bodies and compatible lenses. I was pleasantly surprised because you talked about the ever-advancing technology crutch that is reducing the challenge of trying to take technically perfect photos. I agree with your opinion. Another wonderful video!

[@kurtisa4703]

I love both. With film, i acutally find the ediiting process much easier! The colors, skin tones, dynamic range are still more pleasing to me and require very little editing. With digital, i find myself shooting way more shots, way more filtering through those shots, i spend longer time editing those shots, but the run and gun style gives me more shots to play with. With that being said, having a photo in focus is really the easy part. Making a GOOD photo is the real challenge, always will be. Regardless of megapixels or autofocusing tech.

[@josephoutdoors]

I think it’s good to have different levels of convenience in any hobby. Gear collection is a valid way to enjoy photography just as much as film photography. I think of some enthusiasts want to focus on story telling and don’t want the hassle of the technical aspects of of photography, it’s great they have the gear. As an outdoors photographer with limited time, I don’t want to worry about technical specs when I already have to plan and budget a trip,sleep on the ground, wake up before sunrise, hike in the dark, etc. But I have a Pen-1 and GF-1 and I will from time to time pull them out going somewhere I’ve been before that’s locale and enjoy the challenge and outcomes of finding a photo I shot and enjoy. I thought if I could enjoy the why not film, only to become utterly frustrated by my lack of skill and knowledge around a film camera.

[@WineLad]

Nailed it. A results based photographer will need to nail the shot every damn time. Whereas a creative or hobbyist will appreciate the process more. On a side note I just dug out a canon 1000f from a box somewhere and the only conclusion I could come to was it felt... Well... Wrong. I couldn't quite put my finger on it but it reminded me of my college day where we used pentax k1000s to learn aspects of photography. I just get the feeling that if one is to use film, one should use a fully manual, fully mechanical camera to fully enjoy the process in its entirety. Not to the extent that its a right of passage mind though. That's just my feelings on the matter though anyway have a lovely day.

[@azrela8277]

I totally get it. I have some great mirrorless gear with amazing autofocus and millions upon millions of pixels. And yet, I still like to grab my old Canon 5D Classic and a 50mm prime, and take a walk. It doesn’t have auto ISO, it only has 12 mp, the autofocus is old, but it makes me smile. It gives me more joy, often, than my newest gear. I feel more connected to my photography.

[@suew6307]

James,. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I always enjoy your perspective on the art of photography. I would agree on the points of not wanting my camera to be so advanced that there is no input from the photographer. Using the manual settings on your camera is half the fun to getting a good composition. I am still very much an amateur hobby photographer but love the adventure .... thanks!

[@jc.baptiste]

I totally agree and understand this topic, as someone who shoot most of the time manually with old primes. I neither want nor need more. Excellent vidéo, thank you !

[@NationalParksArtist]

The difference is that in golf, you don't really get to choose where the ball lies (beyond your ability to hit it there), nor where the pin is set. The ability to get the ball from where it is to the pin is the whole point, there are no strokes deducted for style. So a theoretically perfect club is doing 100% of the job. In photography, you have to choose where you're shooting from, you have to choose what direction you are shooting, and style counts for everything. The ability to get exposure/focus right is in service of the goal, it isn't the goal. Now, if a less advanced camera helps someone creatively, that's totally awesome, but it's a creative choice, not better or worse. For me, until a camera is getting up way before dawn and hiking 10 miles on it's own, or until a camera is posing someone and interacting with them so they feel comfortable, or it's choosing where to shoot or how to compose a scene, it's not too advanced. If it gets me to 100% of shots in focus in line with my creative view of what should be in focus, and 100% of shots with usable exposure, then fantastic! I actually don't find the technical aspects of photography all that interesting compared to the creative aspects.

[@danhill7889]

This topic reminded me of the Orson Welles quote, “The enemy of art is the absence of limitations.”

[@noenken]

As a photographer it is my job to point the camera in the right direction at the right time to capture the image I want. After that it is my job to edit what I shot into the picture I want to print. None of that changes, regardless of what camera I use or how much time I want to spend on it. I mean, you can be a film photographer but shoot a Nikon F6. .... Or you can shoot a Sony A7RV but with Voigtländer manual lenses. .... It just doesn't matter.

[@stuartcarden1371]

I still keep a manual film camera and a couple of rolls of film around for this very reason, plus it's good to keep your photography fundamentals sharp because of how easy modern cameras are to use.

[@patrickmckeag3215]

Great video. Thanks. I've also often thought how much photography is like golf. Now I personally hate golf and would gladly pay to not have to do it, but I completely understand why people love it. It's the fact that golf is extremely hard yet even a novice can have a great shot now and then and put the ball exactly where it needs to be. That's what makes people want to keep trying to get better. Same with photography. Most of my photos are crap, but occasionally, I take a shot which I know is special. It's the knowledge that I have the ability to take that good photo that keeps me going.

[@davidharle8794]

I found that a very thoughtful piece James. I started with film way back when, and still have a few film cameras, which I am always going to fill with film but never do. I have no state-of-the-art digital cameras, just a Pentax K1 and a Lumix G9. They seem to me just about right for my needs, and I wonder if each of us can simply decide what works for us as individuals. A better golf club certainly never made me a better golfer, and neither did a more advanced camera.

[@zacpdx]

Amen. I feel this way about post processing. “Anyone” can spend $10 grand on gear and spend more time in post to “make” their photos “good.” Especially with the hdr effect people are becoming used to today. That being said, what is even more tragic is that 90+% of photos/videos are being viewed on a phone/tablet/maybe laptop which most often times is 720p. Due to internet speed and device settings. I’ve shown prospective customers stills from a $500 camera and a $3000 camera and not one-ever-has been able to tell the difference. Respect the craft and all will fall into place

[@keithnisbet]

Your comments are spot on. The prices of these cameras and the degree of AI/automation are crazy. I guess for some it's important and necessary for clients. But, i still love my G9's and although I can now afford most of the newer FF bodies, I just cant justify the expenditure and certainly don't want the massive lens size and cost vs MFT comparables. Video/filmmaking though is a whole other issue. I think the hybrid mania has taken over and blurred the two disciplines, Filmmaking/Stills photography to such a degree that we now find ourselves paying for a multitude of features we may never use. It was a great novelty a few years back to have dual capability in one body but im ready now for a stills beast with minimal video options. No film though thanks. Been there done that for too many years. Too niche, too expensive and too time consuming nowadays to go fully analogue.

[@25myma]

Great shout-out my man!! I started using 120film cameras 1-2 years ago and now I use them more and more on my family trips vs digital; Having only 12 shots lets me enjoy a lot more the moments without snapping like a maniac, I am more aware of a scene that may work instead, the value of those few pictures is so high and I dont have to sift through 100s of pictures each time...but most of all, the moment you press the shutter, you feel that moment slipping back in time, can't look at it and that is just priceless. It's a bit like comparing Michelangelo's David with a computer build, 3D printed copy..might look the same, but is it worth the same?

[@marklevine9404]

James, you always have insights that I find interesting but this was next level observation. I grew up on film photography and loved it. I found the process challenging, and because of the need to be extremely selective (or blow whatever budget I had on film developing and printing), I was also able to better adapt my eye to a scene or image (something I still do to this day -- especially when travelling). However, when the digital age usurped film, I found I wasn't all that interested in sitting in front of a computer manipulating my own images as it took away from the joy of being out and shooting and sometimes days or weeks later learning the results. In fact, because I am not terribly interested in the computer technology and because my real joy was in-camera work, I have really lost my passion for taking photos. I mean, with the "right camera" and the "right software" anyone with half an eye can "create" great photos -- but not everyone can "take" great photos. You, sir, are blessed with both sets of skills and I admire that (and it's why I subscribe), but I would love to see a video or two of you relying solely (or as solely as possible) on composition and lighting (perhaps using manual-only settings) to create great art but without the need for extensive computer manipulation. That is my challenge to you! In the meantime, I'll keep shooting but will likely continue to do very little with the finished product because of my lack of wanting to sit in front of a computer to finish my work.

[@dahterrasse]

To anyone who has the budget and patience, I can only recommend doing film photography. Even if it's just on the side, it's so rewarding and the process is so engaging. It's gotten expensive, but that only makes you more selective and more careful, so it ain't all bad.

[@SimonWardleMillar]

James, when I saw the title of the video I wasn’t sure where you were going with this. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised and I couldn’t agree more. Like you I don’t think I could I go back to film, for the same frustrations and limits. But I certainly love my slower more analog approach with kit that cans resolve a high resolution image but more in keeping with the phrase “built for comfort and not speed”, (like the wife) 😂😂 I’m comfortable with the process and speed is just not the issue.

[@MB-or8js]

A video I did not expect from the title - it probably showed up on my KZbin stream because I was interested to hear more critical than just the mainstream views about the Leica M6 release. I found your video nevertheless very interesting since I made exactly this experience myself several years back when I added film photography to my digital workflow. Depending on the situation and mood, I either go with film or digital.

[@campbellrousselle9752]

I feel this way about motorcycling. Modern bikes have cruise control, ABS, Traction Control, Ride modes to adjust throttle response to a persons needs/skill level, electronic suspension... etc. I find I have no interest in this Tech because I spent years learning to ride well. What's the point if a computer is going to do most of the riding for me. You could argue it would allow me to ride even faster (but that really doesn't seem like a good idea). I think I'd prefer to ride slower, but be in control... be 'part of the process' as you've said.

[@gord_tomlin]

The line will be truly crossed when the camera tells you to take two steps left and crouch to avoid an overhanging branch before shooting. However, if you look at photography from a comparative viewpoint, equipment that helps you get good results with or without skill can narrow the gap between the talented and the less talented. It's similar in that way to other art forms. When the good singers and the blah singers are all using autotune, it's less easy to tell who can really sing.