Best Cameras for the New User, My Opinions

THese are my opinions and they are backed up by discussions with many
Repairmen and Repair Authors and reading good books, such as
Lippincott's, Tomosy's, and especially by the Dean of Hobby Camera
Educators, Ed Romney...


Many TLRS, Rollei, Yashica:

Most manual focus mechanical SLR 35mm from major manufacturers that
are made of metal and not thermoplastics or thermosets:

Leica 35mm RF, if price were no object:

Mamiya Universal Press, a great MF system:

Some better rollfilm cameras, some folders and the Medalist if
converted to 120:

There are others.

 

At this point, I just can't see inflicting a film camera on a new
user, unless they had specific goals requiring film use and were
*very* motivated and focused. The ability to get instant feedback in
the field is worth *so much* educationally that it pretty much swamps
everything else IMHO.

 

I don't seem to remember people using Polaroids to learn photography...

 

I used to get very fast results by developing the film myself.
Usually E6.
Maybe its old hat now, but there was a certain amoutnof pleasure tro be
gained in seeing the images appear on the film when yout ook it out of the
developing tank and opnce you had the tank etc it was cheaper than paying to
get it done.
You could shoot a roll during the day, be home at 3pm and have the photos
projecting at tea time.
When i was at college we all had to do a tape slide presentaton and most of
them left it till the last minute 9as students do).
I made a fortune doing same day E6 for them

Gordon

http://www.leica-gallery.net/gordon/index.html

 

I would suggest that repairmen are not the best source. Frankly I
believe that good sales people would be the best source. They deal with new
photographers and get their feedback. They see not only those that are
interested enough to buy a book or attend a class on the subject, but
everyone. They see which cameras they sell that people do well with and
which they don't. Hopefully they learn to judge their customers to help
them choose the camera that will suite their needs.

 

I do remember pros using Polaroid FILM to check exposure.

Stop being stupid - a Polaroid instant-camera is NOT the same as a mid-
level digital point and shoot or a entry-level dSLR.

 

It was very expensive, most available Polaroid cameras didn't have
much control, and, most important, the material didn't behave anything
like real film so it took quite a lot of training/experience to use it
as a valid preview.

 

I'd agree that doing your own darkroom work was an important part of
the learning process then. A lot of it was because of the speed of
seeing results, and also the cost (most people learning photography
aren't terribly well-financed). And because it was the only way to
get decent prints that anybody beginning could afford. In my case it
was entirely B&W; bulk-loaded TRI-X and Plus-X at about a penny a
frame. (I've developed probably hundreds of rolls of E-6 myself, but
rather later, and mostly with friends who felt it was worth the
trouble; I think that E-6 and C-41 are ideally suited for
commercial-scale automated machinery.)

 

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

You're an idiot.

 

Present market trends indicate that a *LOT* of people rather get a
disposable 35mm camera on a "as needed" basis instead of any kind of
point and shoot camera. I wonder how much this has to do with quality
from 800 speed film vs use of grain-sized sensor of a digital P&S
in similar conditions?

 

The instant feedback really IS one of the best things about my
Canon G3...let's you know if you really got the shot or not.

From an educationaly point of view, it's only really educational
if you do some of the functions manually, like setting your own
aperture or shutter speed or both, and seeing what the results are on the
screen. You don't learn much if you are always in Full-Auto mode.

But 4 megapixels is just not enough for an artist's portfolio.
The "specific goal requiring film use" would be the huge amount of
megapixels required to match the grain of 35mm, and even then, the
grain of 35mm is more acceptable than digital blocks.

I mean, even an amateur might one day wanna blow a pic up to
a huge size, and 4 megapixels won't go past 11"x14" IMNSHO.


Slick

 

I absolutely agree. And full manual control is available down to the
$200 price-point in digital cameras -- the Canon A60, I know.

Ah, "digital blocks". That's a dead giveaway. You've never seen a
print made from a digital image, have you? I've never seen one with
"blocks" on it.

Sure, they might. But their first student camera doesn't necessarily
have to support it.

I'm also not arguing that film is dead, has no place, etc. Since I
don't teach photography, I haven't had to decide (or cope with the
decisions of the hypothetical institution at which I taught) what mix
of digital and film technology I'd teach students today. I still use
film myself for some purposes, and of course there are many realms of
photography I rarely or never go into.

 

And you're not?

 

OR is it people don't want to lose an expensive camera?

Disposable aside - digital point and shoots are the bread and butter of
the camera manufacturers. Seeing as they are selling record numbers, I
would say the disposable market caters to a different kind of shooter -
one that doesn't want much control over their images and/or doesn't want
to lose their "real" camera at the amusement park or on vacation.

 

And 35mm doesn't look good past a certain point either.

Digital will increase in terms of resolution and quality. It's a matter
of time. Until then, the skills learned with a digital camera - be they
compositional, mechanical or otherwise - will apply to the next
generation, as well as back to film.

 

It has to do with the fact that millions of casual users really don't care
much about the quality of their images--or even of owning a camera. They
buy disposables for events, as they need them, and they have little interest
in progressing with the hobby. They want snapshots, that are well-enough
exposed to produce viewable images, and they make no pretense about being
able to take photos that look professional. They just want to take mundane
images that document mileposts in their lives.

Kodak made millions serving this market for decades, with their slogan "You
push the button, we do the rest." We may turn our noses up at that market,
but there is money to be made in it, and some small percentage of those
casual users do ultimately decide to pursue photography more seriously and
to buy better equipment. So it is a spawning ground for more advanced
amateurs.

We all have to start somewhere. How many of us were given Leicas when we
were seven years old . . . ?

The often overlooked aspect of this is that there are millions of families
that would not have otherwise had access to photos of their family events,
had it not been for those endless cheap cameras and consumer film formats
that have been available over the decades. I am the family genealogist, and
I have scanned many such photos of my ancestors. They were badly posed,
poorly lighted, printed in very small sizes, sometimes out of focus, but
they all are precious because they are the only pictorial representations
available of my ancestors--many of whom died before I was born.

I am sure that, at the time the photos were taken, nobody thought that they
would be handed down and cherished as important family photo heirlooms. Yet
millions of us possess such photos today, and I am grateful for all those
Brownies and Instamatics (and, now, disposables) that have produced them.

 

If you want to learn photo skills, get a manual camera and a plain old
normal lens. Doesn't even have to be 35mm. A Rolleiflex or other MF clone
would do fine.

 

That sounds like a great way to become frustrated if you're not into
taking meticulous notes.

Instant feedback does have it's place - even if it clashes with the way
you learned photography.

 

How does dcamera give teh user any extra control?

 

ht sounds good--at least in theory. But nearly everyone that learned on a
manual camera can function ok with an automatic camera. What percentage of
people that have always learned to rely upon automation can operate well
with a manual camera?

The best automatic cameras always have manual overrides. Why is that?

Why is it that virtually every photography school requires students to use a
manual camera, or one that can be manually overridden?