Do you have more than one camera, if so, why?
More than two, uh yeah! I currently have four, and some of them are in a state of flux, but it's not as bad as it sounds.
I have the Ricoh GR III, I bought it as soon as it came out even though it was financially a bit more than I could justify. I sold a GR II to help pay for it. I've had the GR III for a little over two years now, and it's going nowhere anytime soon. Having a truly tiny camera with image quality this great is super important to me. If they came out with a 35mm or 40mm lens version, I'd probably switch to that. But otherwise, it's GR III for me for a snapshot camera!
Then I have the Pentax KP, with a 35mm lens and a 17-50mm f2.8 Sigma, a nice but big lens. I previously shot with micro four thirds for years, but the bodies always left me feeling something wasn't perfect and I changed bodies somewhat often. I decided eventually to try out a DSLR with really good pedigree, and the KP has a very similar sensor to my GR III, so I figured it would have an air of familiarity.
For film, I have a Voïgtlander Bessa-T, a quirky rangefinder you have to put accessory viewfinders on to frame the image. It has a built in rangefinder, but not full size viewfinder.
And finally, I have a little fixed lens rangefinder, a Ricoh 500G with a 40mm f2.8 lens. Very fun and small.
Thank you @agentlossing, you're just the person I've been looking to talk to! After a whole lot of buying and selling (ugh; I know many of you know the drill with that!), I have landed (back) on a Ricoh GR III as well. I thought I was a Fuji guy, tried many of them, and tried to deny that the III is what I want (because of the price, and no viewfinder). But in the end, the GR III photos look the best to me, of any camera I've tried.
SO! What I'm curious about is when you say that the KP has a very similar sensor to the GR III. I have really been wondering if that, or the K70, or K3, might be a DSLR version of the GR III. I know it wouldn't be exactly the same, and I know the lens on the DSLR would make a big difference, but, would you say in your experience that a KP is pretty freakin' close to a GR III? I'm still on the learning end of photography, but I really am enjoying it (coming from a couple decades of focusing solely on music, in terms of creative stuff), and think about getting a DSLR or mirrorless thing some day. Thanks for any insights!
@dcrommett okay, it's complicated with the GR III versus KP. In some ways they do seem like kindred cameras. They're both well designed, robust, great controls that fall right to the hand. And the sensors are quite similar, probably nearly identical. But that doesn't mean your output will match that closely, at least not without some extra work.
The image processing pipeline for JPEG files in the KP is quite a bit different. There are different JPEG styles, but they're quite unlike those on the GR which are so good in that camera. For example, I shoot positive film all the time and using the RAW development in the camera, I can get a finished file to my liking 90% of the time with no computer edits required. I just don't feel as confident about the JPEG files from the KP. But, also, so much of that look and feel from the GR is the marriage of the sensor and the lens. Of course you'll be using different lenses on the KP and you'll get different files with different character.
When all's said and done, though, I feel like they harmonize exceptionally well. It just took me a while, and is still taking me a while, to learn to embrace the KP's unique traits.
I know that's sort of a non-answer, but that's the best I've got!
Thank you @agentlossing, that is really helpful! Luckily, it's hard to find a KP and I don't have any money, ha, so, it's all theoretical for now! Maybe I can just wait until there's a mirrorless version of the GR III with a viewinder and interchangeable lenses. Sounds like I will be waiting a long time.
And to anyone still reading, I wanted to make a note here about the GR II, which I thought would be "It," but wasn't: FYI, I (like our host @james-warner-b, I think?) I don't really use/care about the GR as a specifically "street photography" camera; nothing interesting happens on the street where I live (unless you like discarded scratch tickets)! Anyway, I have used the GR I, II, and III, for just life, landscapes, all that, and thought I'd mention that positive film on the II was very, very red. I couldn't seem to get rid of all that warmth without destroying the rest of the photo. Eh. So unless you're going for super contrasty, super saturated look (which is a cool look!), I would skip positive film on the GR II. Here's my local gorge, taken with GR III:
Positive film on the GR II has a strong magenta shift, it's less so on the GR III. Some people really like the GR II's looks, I like them both. But the GR III has much more flexible positive film options.
It's funny, if you look at how the GR is marketed in Japan (look at the GRist website), they consider it a "snap photography" camera foremost, not a "street" camera. As best I can tell, street photography often falls within the Japanese idea of snap, or snapshot, photography. But it's much more encompassing of life and the everyday than the west is with our strict Henri Cartier-Bresson influenced street photography. I think the GR fits that broader Japanese concept very well, and it's also where I most often like to shoot.
Quote from agentlossing on April 7, 2021, 5:06 pmIt's funny, if you look at how the GR is marketed in Japan (look at the GRist website), they consider it a "snap photography" camera foremost, not a "street" camera. As best I can tell, street photography often falls within the Japanese idea of snap, or snapshot, photography. But it's much more encompassing of life and the everyday than the west is with our strict Henri Cartier-Bresson influenced street photography. I think the GR fits that broader Japanese concept very well, and it's also where I most often like to shoot.
The Japanese domestic market seems really unique. For instance, the Fuji X-A's are much more popular there, whereas they're relatively rare outside of Japan. I feel like the way in which cameras and image taking in Japanese culture is different from elsewhere in pretty significant ways.
Sometimes Japanese companies have tried to be innovative with their products and ended up producing something which make us scratch our head a think "who is this for?" Maybe the products make sense for the domestic market.
Quote from Justin Tung on April 7, 2021, 9:00 pmSometimes Japanese companies have tried to be innovative with their products and ended up producing something which make us scratch our head a think "who is this for?" Maybe the products make sense for the domestic market.
I have often thought that. Also when people talk about how different Ricoh's marketing strategies and methods are from Canon/Nikon/Sony. I just assume that it's because I don't understand the context and culture behind those decisions.
The ricoh GR discussion is really interesting. I might need to pick your brains about some things later. I just can't get enough with that camera 🙂
Depends on how you define "camera." I have only one DSLR - a K-3II - and I have an ancient point-and-shoot, a Lumix DMC-FS3. The latter has been with me on every vacation, business trip, family event and walk-around-the-neighbourhood since I got it back in 2005, even on my most recent vacation (Arizona) where I also brought the K-3II. I still use it sometimes, even though I almost always have my smartphone with me. I also have an even more ancient Fujifilm FinePix 2600 Zoom in a drawer. I don't use it anymore. So that's three cameras but only two in actual use.
But speaking of smartphones, do they count as cameras? I think they should because the latest models can take excellent images. It's really surprising how good the images can be from such tiny lenses and tiny sensors. Nowadays they even do pretty descent night photography. For example, I got this shot handheld with an iPhone 11. I could not have done that with my K-3II.
If smartphones count, then I have three more cameras. I also have three film cameras: a Pentax K-1000, an Olympus OM-1 and a Nikon FG. But since I never intend to use them again, should I really count them?
Re deciding what to buy in the way of cameras, obviously I don't do it often. But when I do buy, I buy only for specific capabilities that I don't get with whatever I already have. I am not a collector. For example, the FS3 had optical zoom and optical image stabilization which my then-current smartphone (a Blackberry Torch) lacked. And it still fit in my pocket. I bought a DSLR (which definitely does not fit in my pocket) for all the things a DSLR can do that a P&S camera can't. And I chose the K-3II in particular because of the feature set that it provides, which includes one feature unique to Pentax: Astrotracer. I bought the iPhone because, well, I needed a new phone.
Funny thing is, I realize after reviewing all the images I have ever taken, starting from my film days back in the 70's, that the "quality" of my images has never really depended on the camera I was using. To this day, one of the best images I think I have ever taken was a quick snapshot with a 2 megapixel P&S.
Quote from Guest on April 10, 2021, 4:52 am
Funny thing is, I realize after reviewing all the images I have ever taken, starting from my film days back in the 70's, that the "quality" of my images has never really depended on the camera I was using. To this day, one of the best images I think I have ever taken was a quick snapshot with a 2 megapixel P&S.
Very nice picture, and well said. That has been my experience too. The amount of photos I'm really proud of doesn't increase with each new capable camera but is more proportional to how many pictures I am going out and taking. Who woulda thought 🙂
And smart phone cameras definitely count if you're using them. They are wonderfully capable. I had an iphone 12 recently and it's really incredible how good they are getting and how fun it is to switch focal lengths on the fly. I have tried astro stacking feature on my Google pixel with surprisingly good results. I think iphone has that now too. Might be worth trying next time you are out.
I don't use my phone much though for photography. Not so much because of lack of quality, but because of the control experience. I like my dials and hard buttons too much 🙂
Quote from Snappy on April 10, 2021, 4:58 pmAnd smart phone cameras definitely count if you're using them. They are wonderfully capable. I had an iphone 12 recently and it's really incredible how good they are getting and how fun it is to switch focal lengths on the fly. I have tried astro stacking feature on my Google pixel with surprisingly good results. I think iphone has that now too. Might be worth trying next time you are out.
I can't seem to find an app for the iPhone that can do everything the Pixel 4 will do. That is, take a series of sixteen 15-second exposures and stack the stars and the foreground separately. But the Windows program Sequator can do that kind of stacking (with, of course, additional work) and I won't be limited to just 16 exposures. Plus, I only recently learned, the iPhone can take up to a 30-second exposure if you mount it on a tripod. Otherwise, it is limited to 2 seconds. I also learned that the inline volume control on the headphones included with the phone can function as a remote shutter release. So, with the purchase of a suitable tripod bracket I can try it out. I'm not expecting to equal what my K-3II can do, especially with Astrotracer, but it seems like a worthwhile experiment nonetheless.
