Less a photographer

[lostinfrance]

Dose using a camera like the Nikon P7000 or Canon G 12 make you less of a photographer,looking to buy one of the two for times that my DSLR and f 2.8 glass is too heavey or impractical to take with me on days out or when with none photographers
What size of print could i get on RAW ?, I want to try street photography and think a DSLR would stand out too much,What do you think?

 

[Wuffstuff]

As an example I have just mounted and framed an A3 print taken on a panasonic LX3. It looks superb and is only marginally poorer quality at this size than my D7000 images.

And it fits in my pocket.

 

[lostinfrance]

never thought about the panny,dose not having a optical viewfinder make a lot of diffrence,been used to pearing down a little hole for the last 30 years so looking at a screen will come as a bit of a shock
PS whats the M9 like to use ,so so jelious

 

[Starastin]

won't definitely make you less of a tog.

have you considered sony nex3 ? doesn't have VF but I think it takes cracking photos especially with the 16mm f2.8 . I'll definitely buy one when I can .

 

[SpikeK6]

To me a photogrpher is all about the pictures NOT about the equipment he uses,
some good pics on here from camera phones does that not make them a photogrpher??

spike

 

[lostinfrance]

See your point,I think in this day and age there is so much to have,i started of with a Praktica MTL3 and 50 28 and 135 lens ,and ended up with a similer set up with nikon but bet most people could not tell the diffrence in IQ
I still think people use far too much post prossesing in digital,why not get it right in the camera,thats what we did with film and at a cost

 

[Starastin]

film is a different state of mind. there you think - ok - this shot will cost me 2pounds, do I really want to take it ? will it be good ? etc, etc . digital - snap, snap, snap, snap, snap etc.

 

[woof woof]

I still think people use far too much post prossesing in digital,why not get it right in the camera,thats what we did with film and at a cost

Because you can't get it right in camera, IMVHO.

Getting it right in camera means using settings that Canon (or whoever) think are right for a JPEG image and that's what you get. At least with RAW you can decide what colour, sharpening, noice reduction etc that you want and usually get something that you like better than a straight from the camera JPEG.

With film what you get is a property of the film but also of the processing (people spent / spend ages over film selection and getting the chemical mix and development just so...) so I personally see no real difference and no reason to look down on digital post capture processing as all we've done is replaced film + processing with a sensor + processing, in both the case of film and digital you have to process the image.

 

[lensflair]

Because you can't get it right in camera, IMVHO.

Getting it right in camera means using settings that Canon (or whoever) think are right for a JPEG image and that's what you get. At least with RAW you can decide what colour, sharpening, noice reduction etc that you want and usually get something that you like better than a straight from the camera JPEG.

With film what you get is a property of the film but also of the processing (people spent / spend ages over film selection and getting the chemical mix and development just so...) so I personally see no real difference and no reason to look down on digital post capture processing as all we've done is replaced film + processing with a sensor + processing, in both the case of film and digital you have to process the image.

Yeah I agree, in camera jpgs have sharpening and curves applied to increase contrast, whatever the manafacturer decides. I agree I don't like overworked images, who could be bothered spending so much time pushing an image to the point of it falling apart anyway.

But there's nothing wrong with tweaking your files a little. I used to dodge and burn in the dark room so I don't see why I shouldn't add a little fairy dust to bring an image to life in the digital world.

 

[lostinfrance]

Anyway,thank you for your coments,just seen the P7000 for £299 in St Helens so will go up on monday and bite the bullet,not geting any younger so hope the p7000 will get me out more and as people have said its not the camera but the person behinde it

 

[Iiyama]

Im using my S95 far more that I used my 450D. Its so good having a camera thats so portable

 

[Toonie]

As an example I have just mounted and framed an A3 print taken on a panasonic LX3. It looks superb and is only marginally poorer quality at this size than my D7000 images.

And it fits in my pocket.

Lx3 is the dogs danglies! I printed a boarderless A3 for a mate the other day thinking it was a from a GF1, He was impressed & wanted to see the original raw. He was even more impressed, as was i when we realised that it actually came from the little Lx3.

Toonie