Looking back.

[Ranchi]

I don’t know if I’ll ever invest in a mirror less system. I still plod along with my Nikon dslr which is getting a bit long in the tooth. I’ve had quite a few different brands of camera. My first was a Russian Zenith with a fabric shutter ( which didn’t last long & was soon consigned to the bin) through Minolta, Olympus XA (loved the style-still have it) & Pentax. Haven’t really gone much with Canon as both my son’s & my Canon developed a similar critical fault a couple of months after the warranty expired so I was a bit put off. 
The point of my post was to consider if the manufacturer of your first camera (in my case mid 70s) affected the way you take photographs. The first camera I spent a lot of time with was a Pentax and it was aperture priority and that is still my go to set up for camera. At the time the popular Canons were shutter priority and I note that quite a few folk who started on those still think shutter speed first when setting up shots.
I guess this is a post for those of a certain age as modern cameras have multiple set up options.  

[GUT2407]

I started with Canon match needle metering, but then have used almost every 35mm brand for one reason or another and then a fair few 6x6. Even now I mainly shoot manual or AE.
 

Took a long time to even go auto focus it was only failing eyes that eventually decided me. Took up digital daily early but still shot a lot of film.

[zackiedawg]

I can't say my early photography days influenced how I shoot now, settings-wise...back then, I was shooting mostly full manual, setting shutter & aperture and choosing film speed for the situation (77 Pentax ME Super).  I occasionally used Pentax's 'auto' mode when I first got it and was trying to learn (I was 9 when I got the camera at Christmas!).  I went through a few more automated SLRs into the late 80s/early 90s, including a Canon EOS-IX, which was an APS format SLR...I'd still often shoot them manual, but take advantage of autofocus.

 

As I got into digital in 1997, I considered it an entirely different beast - almost more like using a video camera in those early days (A Sony Mavica 1MP floppy disk 14x zoom)...so I really started learning to use the EVF's display to see my setting effects and start to use more of the digital features that weren't around with film cameras...it was freeing to know I could shoot all I wanted to and only keep or print what I really liked...so I started shooting a whole lot more (cruises with my film camera might mean coming back with 3 rolls of 36 shot...coming back with digital meant 300-500 shots in those early days...and as digital got higher-resolution, more capable, and much better, into the thousands per trip.

 

As I transitioned through P&S ultrazooms, to larger sensor P&S to DSLR, and into mirrorless, I still enjoy taking advantage of building my shot in the camera, using all of the camera's digital abilities and features, often switching between P mode (lazy days, A&S mode (for specific types of shooting like wildlife and long-exposure), and full Manual (long exposure, macro, experimental...or just when I'm feeling retro).

The one thing that kind of stuck with me from film days, since I never did my own developing, was the desire to get my final result, or as close to it as possible, out of the camera - so I still remain a big fan of doing all my processing/manipulation while shooting, and shooting in JPG, with no (or very little) post processing on the computer...and not as a statement or position on 'right' or 'wrong' with photography, but purely because that's where I get my pleasure from - the shooting and working the camera...I've never been a big computer geek so I don't really enjoy spending all that much time on one - the idea of hours and hours of editing and tweaking photos just doesn't interest me, so I avoid as much of it as I can.

[pierces]

I wrote this article on the subject a while ago, but it fits the topic.

 

My Long Road to Full-Frame – The Family Photographer (pierce324.com)

 

(No ads, no trackers)

 

Dave

[Host Bonjour]

I thought this YouTube video by TechRadar did a great job of demonstrating, particularly in regards to the shutter mechanism and components, what some of the key differences (and/or benefits, depending on how one comes out on the debate) between DSLR and Mirrorless.

 

For me, there's simply no argument as to why a DSLR does make sense: almost every camera is too heavy and won't fit comfortably in my hand. In terms of the mechanism/reflex of the mirror/lens in a DSLR, I don't want all that happening (or the time it takes) when going for the image. Let's get it done direct/straight on through lens/sensor.

 

That's only me. I think the larger cameras are incredible and know they work well for so many photographers for so many reasons. That Nikon won't be making them at a certain point must feel frustrating because it forces people who like working a certain way to either be stuck, or leave a brand they've been with for a long time. It's no knock on the company, everything evolves how it must.

 

And there are old cameras around and in use from a long, long time ago. So we haven't seen the end of anything by a long shot. The only thing we know is everything changes, but there are a million ways to keep making things. That's the cool part, the workarounds 😉 

[Nikon1957]

On 7/29/2022 at 5:12 PM, pierces said:

I wrote this article on the subject a while ago, but it fits the topic.

 

My Long Road to Full-Frame – The Family Photographer (pierce324.com)

 

(No ads, no trackers)

 

Dave

Funny. Our paths weren't that dis-similar. I started with a really old, fully manual camera back in 1977; "moved up" to a pretty state-of-the-art (for the time) Canon TX "automatic" SLR, and then eventually to Nikon, where I stayed a pretty loyal customer until the mid-late 2000's. My first Sony camera was an NEX-6 (I regret not keeping it). I had the "kit" lens, but eventually also a Carl Zeiss 35mm f1.8 lens. I loved the form factor and the IQ. But I drank the "koolaid" that the new A7 series full-frame cameras were the answer (I wasn't wrong - just misinformed 🙂 ). I have owned the A7ri (which had some serious issues that they "fixed" with the II), an A7, and now own the A7rII. At 46 MP and full frame with no AA filter, this is probably the most advance camera I will ever own. But what I miscalculated was exactly what had attracted me in the first place - size! While the body of the A7 was somewhat smaller than my prior Nikon DSLRs, it wasn't as much as I had hoped. And the lenses were really not small at all. So, I really ended up with the same "size and weight" concerns I had with Nikon. For a serious, dedicated shoot, I love the A7rii. IQ is unquestionable. I am happy at this point and I think Nikon and Canon lost a lot of us because of their foot dragging. They both make impressive mirrorless equipment now - but I am already invested.