I own one of the best crop sensor bodies that is available so I'm told, and probably thee best 70-200 2.8 lens you can get too. Often told that also. It's all a bit "hmmm that's cool, I think" to me.
I've often read stories of people who bought a film camera and it totally revolutionised the way they see digital. They talk of how it made them think more about the pictures they were taking and I thought, I need to try this.
I was looking all night last night and I think the Canon AE-1 Program could well be in my hands pretty soon. I wouldn't be developing my own film, and as much as I think this is part of the magic, I don't have the space for a darkroom.
When the more experienced photographers mention that it "Wasn't like this in the film days" I get really confused and upset by it. I want to know what it's all about, and when the same experienced bunch of folk make reference to older photographers who shot film, their images just speak volumes and I really sincerely believe that there's something missing in digital. There's not that same drama and magic to a shot.
I remember watching a documentary on John Free once and he'd wander about the street for hours, and kept saying "nope that's not the shot, that's not the shot" and then BOOM "There's the shot!" His excitement at getting the shot he waited 3 hours for meant so much to him lol.
I was also looking up Henri Cartier-Bresson. His stuff was so powerful.
So what do you think? Is it a good idea?
Paul
I've often read stories of people who bought a film camera and it totally revolutionised the way they see digital. They talk of how it made them think more about the pictures they were taking and I thought, I need to try this.
I was looking all night last night and I think the Canon AE-1 Program could well be in my hands pretty soon. I wouldn't be developing my own film, and as much as I think this is part of the magic, I don't have the space for a darkroom.
When the more experienced photographers mention that it "Wasn't like this in the film days" I get really confused and upset by it. I want to know what it's all about, and when the same experienced bunch of folk make reference to older photographers who shot film, their images just speak volumes and I really sincerely believe that there's something missing in digital. There's not that same drama and magic to a shot.
I remember watching a documentary on John Free once and he'd wander about the street for hours, and kept saying "nope that's not the shot, that's not the shot" and then BOOM "There's the shot!" His excitement at getting the shot he waited 3 hours for meant so much to him lol.
I was also looking up Henri Cartier-Bresson. His stuff was so powerful.
So what do you think? Is it a good idea?
Paul
Comment