What an insightful column! This probably accounts for why I have acquired a "medium" format Fuji GFX-100S camera, monochrome Leica Q2 and Leica M10-P cameras, and the Fuji GX617 panoramic film camera.
Steve, I admire you (and Bob) for your ability to juggle various camera systems. I would have trouble remembering their names, let alone how they each work!!
I am happy to juggle my cameras but other people's cameras... especially with "customized buttons" = count me out. Takes me a month messing with a new camera until I am not all thumbs.
I'm all about using different cameras for different pictures. I still have my Leica film gear I use but didn't want to get into the now esoteric world of film here. Maybe some other day.
It’s my most recent camera acquisition and I’ve just begun to use what British photographer and blogger Thomas Heaton refers to as “Big Bertha.” It’s so different in what it can do, as well as size, method of focusing, etc., that I find it bracing to use.
From the perspective of someone without the nostalgia of having been into photography very long: I love my mirrorless Sony (just updated to the r5) for the ability to shoot in a number of different moods/goals. I have found the versatility allows for more creativity than I think additional several thousands of dollars could provide. I can replace the lens and change my options entirely. If I want to slow down, put a manual focus lens on. If I want a walk around camera, put a 35 or 50mm prime on. If I want to shoot landscape and focus stack front to back, its now somewhat automated. Want more resolution? Welcome to computational photography with a much improved pixel shift algo.
I will admit I keep looking at the Q2, but haven't yet justified the extra spend for the relatively small opportunity I have to shoot while I run a business. Longing for retirement, or a slower pace in time. I can't vouch for the Leica "look", but I do respect the industrial design. Like I appreciate my mechanical watch collection. They are more form than function. My Iphone tells time better than they do - and it's the camera always with me.
The logical approach. Intellectually you are absolutely correct and I assume you are looking at it from the approach of the end result then working backwards as to the intellectually most efficient and logical approach to get to that end.
Someday you might want to try a VERY different device and see how it affects your approach to a given subject. Maybe it will, maybe it won't but I'll bet it will. I mentioned in another comment but worth repeating... shoot an active subject without AF, not for the challenge but far more from a change in approach, where you stand, and when you hit the button.
Honestly I've not had a "technical" challenge in terms of focus accuracy, exposure, etc for decades. The things that REALLY affect your images are where you stand, how you frame, and when you choose to hit the button. Oh I forgot things like motion blur and other faults you probably WOULDN'T do unless you had no choice. Theoretically you might but again... go shoot an active/semi-active subject without AF, at a large aperture, and ISO 100 in GREAT light but not necessarily bright. Make it work - bet you will make very different pictures. Theoretically you COULD do that if I showed you a picture first, the point is that it's doubtful you would.
I will bet the Q2 will change your approach using it for a couple of days and you'll end up making very different pictures assuming you don't go out with a 28mm regularly to shoot portraits, street, etc...
Yep! I can do anything with my Canon R5 and various lenses like the 100mm macro or the 50/1.2. It gets the job done. However, using my Leica M10-R is a joyful process, and I have found that because I enjoy the process, and because the act of manually focusing with a rangefinder requires a different type of attention to the subject than does blasting away with eye-detect autofocus, I more often capture more emotional and peak moment photos with the Leica. (I also sometimes miss focus, but that is part of the process too!) And for me system #3 is the Ricoh GRiii for when I need to travel light and be inconspicuous. Many times I have thought the latest iPhone would replace the Ricoh, but even my iPhone 14 pro can't compare to the manual control and post processing I can do on the Ricoh raw files.
I've taken some out of focus pictures that I LOVE and way more with motion blur that I probably would NOT have even tried if I had AF and variable ISO.
On another note the M10 (any of them) are the only Leica digital's I'd consider based on my pet peeves with the prior digital M cameras. At the rate film prices are rising this year I may actually be able to justify an M10 of some type (probably not the R) to use along side my fav of all time M4.
That re-released version 1 35 Sumilux is calling my name though.... Love the rendering, had one a long time ago as one of my first M lenses I bought used... and stupidly "upgraded it" in the '90s
Ps. I am a semi-ex guitar player as well (arthritis). I sold ALL of my amps about 10 years ago except for a 50's tweed champ and a 60's Princeton (not Princeton Reverb but the one with vibrato) as well as a tiny little Bias Grid simulation amp. Sold all my Les Pauls, Custom Shop Strats, and my tele except for a really awesome MIM road worn 60's Strat and a 1997 Gibson Studio DC that sounds like a crossbreed LP and P90 Jr.
Good luck with the new workhorse system Matthew! It's always good to try a new but very very different tool and see how it may impact your work. It's doubtful any meaningful difference in your approach will be due to another frame per second or a few more megapixels but operational characteristics, feel, viewfinder, even aspect ratio might... I find constraints breed creativity in a lot of ways and eliminate mental clutter as well as indecision of too many options.
One example is "speed". You'd think that todays super smart, super fast, eyeball tracking focus systems and ridiculous frame rates would "help" grabbing a staged action shot. Staged meaning something going on in a constrained space like a dancer or a jump or a leap. Honestly the best I've ever done in that circumstance was with manual focus, manual film winding and when the subject was instructed to "hit this mark". Less time, better shots compared to attempting to follow the subject around and grabbing a billion shots with AF. There's always "a way" and the fastest autofocus is not focusing at all (actually pre-focusing).
What an insightful column! This probably accounts for why I have acquired a "medium" format Fuji GFX-100S camera, monochrome Leica Q2 and Leica M10-P cameras, and the Fuji GX617 panoramic film camera.
Steve, I admire you (and Bob) for your ability to juggle various camera systems. I would have trouble remembering their names, let alone how they each work!!
Les,
I am happy to juggle my cameras but other people's cameras... especially with "customized buttons" = count me out. Takes me a month messing with a new camera until I am not all thumbs.
Thanks...
I'm all about using different cameras for different pictures. I still have my Leica film gear I use but didn't want to get into the now esoteric world of film here. Maybe some other day.
Ps.
Do you ever use the GX617 now???
It’s my most recent camera acquisition and I’ve just begun to use what British photographer and blogger Thomas Heaton refers to as “Big Bertha.” It’s so different in what it can do, as well as size, method of focusing, etc., that I find it bracing to use.
From the perspective of someone without the nostalgia of having been into photography very long: I love my mirrorless Sony (just updated to the r5) for the ability to shoot in a number of different moods/goals. I have found the versatility allows for more creativity than I think additional several thousands of dollars could provide. I can replace the lens and change my options entirely. If I want to slow down, put a manual focus lens on. If I want a walk around camera, put a 35 or 50mm prime on. If I want to shoot landscape and focus stack front to back, its now somewhat automated. Want more resolution? Welcome to computational photography with a much improved pixel shift algo.
I will admit I keep looking at the Q2, but haven't yet justified the extra spend for the relatively small opportunity I have to shoot while I run a business. Longing for retirement, or a slower pace in time. I can't vouch for the Leica "look", but I do respect the industrial design. Like I appreciate my mechanical watch collection. They are more form than function. My Iphone tells time better than they do - and it's the camera always with me.
The logical approach. Intellectually you are absolutely correct and I assume you are looking at it from the approach of the end result then working backwards as to the intellectually most efficient and logical approach to get to that end.
Someday you might want to try a VERY different device and see how it affects your approach to a given subject. Maybe it will, maybe it won't but I'll bet it will. I mentioned in another comment but worth repeating... shoot an active subject without AF, not for the challenge but far more from a change in approach, where you stand, and when you hit the button.
Honestly I've not had a "technical" challenge in terms of focus accuracy, exposure, etc for decades. The things that REALLY affect your images are where you stand, how you frame, and when you choose to hit the button. Oh I forgot things like motion blur and other faults you probably WOULDN'T do unless you had no choice. Theoretically you might but again... go shoot an active/semi-active subject without AF, at a large aperture, and ISO 100 in GREAT light but not necessarily bright. Make it work - bet you will make very different pictures. Theoretically you COULD do that if I showed you a picture first, the point is that it's doubtful you would.
I will bet the Q2 will change your approach using it for a couple of days and you'll end up making very different pictures assuming you don't go out with a 28mm regularly to shoot portraits, street, etc...
Yep! I can do anything with my Canon R5 and various lenses like the 100mm macro or the 50/1.2. It gets the job done. However, using my Leica M10-R is a joyful process, and I have found that because I enjoy the process, and because the act of manually focusing with a rangefinder requires a different type of attention to the subject than does blasting away with eye-detect autofocus, I more often capture more emotional and peak moment photos with the Leica. (I also sometimes miss focus, but that is part of the process too!) And for me system #3 is the Ricoh GRiii for when I need to travel light and be inconspicuous. Many times I have thought the latest iPhone would replace the Ricoh, but even my iPhone 14 pro can't compare to the manual control and post processing I can do on the Ricoh raw files.
I've taken some out of focus pictures that I LOVE and way more with motion blur that I probably would NOT have even tried if I had AF and variable ISO.
On another note the M10 (any of them) are the only Leica digital's I'd consider based on my pet peeves with the prior digital M cameras. At the rate film prices are rising this year I may actually be able to justify an M10 of some type (probably not the R) to use along side my fav of all time M4.
That re-released version 1 35 Sumilux is calling my name though.... Love the rendering, had one a long time ago as one of my first M lenses I bought used... and stupidly "upgraded it" in the '90s
See here:
https://camerafashion.substack.com/p/the-leica-35mm-summilux
RB
Ps. I am a semi-ex guitar player as well (arthritis). I sold ALL of my amps about 10 years ago except for a 50's tweed champ and a 60's Princeton (not Princeton Reverb but the one with vibrato) as well as a tiny little Bias Grid simulation amp. Sold all my Les Pauls, Custom Shop Strats, and my tele except for a really awesome MIM road worn 60's Strat and a 1997 Gibson Studio DC that sounds like a crossbreed LP and P90 Jr.
Good luck with the new workhorse system Matthew! It's always good to try a new but very very different tool and see how it may impact your work. It's doubtful any meaningful difference in your approach will be due to another frame per second or a few more megapixels but operational characteristics, feel, viewfinder, even aspect ratio might... I find constraints breed creativity in a lot of ways and eliminate mental clutter as well as indecision of too many options.
One example is "speed". You'd think that todays super smart, super fast, eyeball tracking focus systems and ridiculous frame rates would "help" grabbing a staged action shot. Staged meaning something going on in a constrained space like a dancer or a jump or a leap. Honestly the best I've ever done in that circumstance was with manual focus, manual film winding and when the subject was instructed to "hit this mark". Less time, better shots compared to attempting to follow the subject around and grabbing a billion shots with AF. There's always "a way" and the fastest autofocus is not focusing at all (actually pre-focusing).