Time for a poll. I had a friend, an accomplished photographer, who hated cameras. He had no end of trouble with them, and he only put up with them because of the results he got. If you'll grant me that many people choose cameras for reasons other than the results they yield—because of the system that's available for them, the selection of lenses and accessories that you might buy one day, the way they handle, their technology, their recency (they want the latest thing), their capabilities (for instance, they want a camera with a certain package of features), their prestige, their looks, their history, who else used them, how handy they are, how pocketable they are, how pleasant or easy they are to use, how much their friends admire them—what's most important to you? Just the results in the file or on the wall? Or other factors?
If you had to pick one or the other. (Which you do, in this poll at least.) I know many people consider both, so no need to scold on that account. I'm asking which overrides the other for you. (If they're in balance, I guess you just shouldn't answer the poll question at all.)
Another way to ask the question: would you put up with a camera you hated using because it was the only way to achieve the results you wanted?
Poll Results
"Results trump everything else"
46% (1,436 votes)
"Results are important, but other things are as important or more so"
54% (1,699 votes)
My own answer: I would kinda like to be the type who cares only about results and would do whatever is necessary to achieve them, but I'm not. I'm a camera aesthete, and I also count on the camera to help me get the shot. You know what they say: Oh well.
Mike
P.S. This is the first time I've used this type of poll widget. Anybody having any trouble seeing or using it? Let me know in a comment or by email. Thanks.
Original contents copyright 2012 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
A book of interest today:
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Colin Work: "Certainly since the advent (and cost!) of DSLRs my mantra has been 'and just how will this improve my images?' But I will confess that I can rather too easily make such a case!"
Softie: "I think Mike's poll hit it perfectly on the head for me, or, as Jeeves would say, rem acu tetisgisti.
"I both love and hate my 8x10. (To stay with the theme, as Catullus would say, odi et amo, Peter Gowland.) I do stupid things with it all the time to mess up photographs. But I shoot a ridiculous proportion of keepers with it, so I use it when feasible.
"Unfortunately, the 8x10 doesn't work very well on moveable objects, and film is now $9 a sheet. So I have other cameras. And despite my love of lovely mechanical dials and levers, I've learned from experience that cameras like that don't work for me, so I use electronic cameras. Ditto for rangefinders: they just don't produce the results for me (with the exception of an M3/90 Summicron that has made some worthwhile negs), so I don't use them.
"And I spend vastly more on printing than I do on taking equipment: I think I actually just spent more to print a picture from a GF3 than the camera and lens cost combined. (Odi et amo, Eric Luden.)
"It's about the results, frankly. No one cares how cool your camera looks when they're looking at a print."
Eolake Stobblehouse (partial comment): "To me, a Pentax Spotmatic is a sculpture."
Robert L.: "I don't know about anyone else, but I like the shots from the cameras I love more. A craftsperson is greater than their tools, but part of mastering a craft is finding what works best for you."
Caleb Courteau: "This is a topic that I've given much thought to ever since mirrorless cameras have reached maturity. I own an aging nikon D80. The rubber grip is peeling off the back, high ISO's aren't super clean, and Nikon has neglected their DX lens line (just ask Thom Hogan). I've held some of Olympus's new Pens and they're fine pieces of equipment, and the video function is something that I would actually use. Despite all that, the D80 fits my hand like a glove, I'm very familiar with its controls, and its image quality is good enough. With a nice ƒ/2.8 17–50 and the el cheapo 50mm ƒ/1.8 I'm good to go for the small photojournalism stories I like to work on.
"Last month I met a two-time Pulitzer Prize winning photographer who had a Tamron zoom attached to his 5D Mark II and it was working for him. In my opinion cameras and lenses of every brand are over-delivering these days. My needs are being met, and anything beyond that falls into the realm of want. What I need is the 500+ dollars that I'm saving by not gratuitously upgrading."
Bernard: "If results were the only thing that mattered, we would all be shooting 8x10 view cameras, at least for slow-moving subjects."
Mike replies: Why?!? You're about the fifth person to say something like that. I think you're conflating "the results you want" with conventional notions of image quality. 8x10 view camera results are not the results that everyone wants. They're not the results Daido Moriyama wants, for example.
Is it really true that everyone shooting digital really wants 8x10 film results, but are putting up with results they don't like as well for some reason? I very much doubt that. I think lots of digital photographers (and smaller-format film photographers, for that matter) are getting exactly the results they want.
Geoff Wittig: "Results certainly trump aesthetic and ergonomic perfection, at least for me. I'm willing to heave 40 lbs. of gear including a pair of full frame D-SLR bodies, multiple lenses and a big tripod, because I've used all of it at one time or another to capture a treasured image a half mile hike from the car. This is not to say I enjoy being a pack mule, but the results are well worth it. On the other hand, I confess an unseemly affection for the brutish weight and solidity of the Eos-1Ds Mark III. It fits my large hands, that huge bright viewfinder suits my middle-aged eyes, and the graceless lumpishness has grown on me. Those cute little mirror-less cameras seem too dainty."
Daniel S.: "Ergonomics above all. Most cameras (digital or otherwise) are more than capable of giving me acceptable results when it comes to the technical aspects; what's important to me is how well a camera fits with the way I see and work in order to make the process as enjoyable and natural as possible. Discomfort is, in my experience, the worst enemy of inspiration."
Rod Graham: "I just can't imagine using any camera for very long if I didn't like the images I was getting from it."
Bill Pearce: "I find that a camera with great ergonomocs gives me better pictures than one with poor ergonomics. Unfortunately, ergonomics is a word and study absent from digital camera designers. Oddly, my old Sony R1, my first digital camera, handled beter than my Nikons or Leica. None handled better than my Hasselblads."
Chose "result over everything else" from the poll and then it struck me how I preferred one brand over the other because it was very inconvenient to turn the front dials on one of the candidates. Nothing to do with the cameras, so I don't mention them here, just an actual physical problem with my hands. So where does that put me?
Posted by: Karel Kravik | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 03:06 AM
After viewing the poll results I now realise 49% of TOP readers are up to their ears in debt with huge loans for their cameras because cost is not a consideration and 'results are everything'. Amazing!
Posted by: Arg | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 03:42 AM
Mike, the poll doesn't show up on the iPad.
As for the question: most cameras are more than capable of doing what I need/want, so it comes down to looks and how the controls and the stuff is arranged in the menus.
The best ever for me (of the very few that I have tried) would be my Ricoh GRIII, the worst, the Fuji X10, which I have just replaced it with a Sony RX100 mainly for that reaon (images I got with it were mostly fine).
In the end iIt's about how comfortable I feel with the camera.
My MP+50 summilux is the nicest and more direct/honest camera I ever used and I feel at home with it. The Hasselblad 501CM has somewhat the same feeling, and both are the most beautiful objects I own.
Posted by: Eugenio | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 04:45 AM
"Why?!? You're about the fifth person to say something like that. I think you're conflating "the results you want" with conventional notions of image quality."
Maybe I didn't quite read the question right or maybe it's the wrong question.
What I "want" is an easy to carry camera that I can hand hold and make high quality 8 x 10 foot prints of runners in starlight, has a flash sync, a wired remote, and gives me complete control of all aspects of the image.
What I'll settle for is a few cameras that meet some subsets of that requirement.
I.E. Hugh wants the camera that is perfect in all situations but will settle for whatever is available and realizes that some limitations and hard to use aspects can enhance the creative process.
Posted by: hugh crawford | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 05:10 AM
I voted for results. Nowadays I'm more concentrating on printing. That took me to another view about cameras and I enjoy it. It improves my picturetaking and I get more picky about cameras. What I can print the best is the right camera for me at the moment.
I think Josh had the right words for it when he wrote "I think many of us start mostly with results and end up overlapping more with other factors because of sentimental reasons, experience, hopes, ideas and so on."
Christine
Posted by: Christine Bogan | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 06:07 AM
Interestingly (OT, but interestingly) the little poll graphic paralyses the scroll wheel when visible on this page in current Chrome browser. Drag the scroll bar past it and the scroll wheel's functioning again. Same in either direction. Reproduced both times I've launched this site. Win 7/64, Chrome, both patched up to current versions.
Posted by: Roy | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 06:55 AM
Hi Mike
Just discovered I could vote more than once. I have cancelled out the extra vote and only voted once overall (if that makes sense). Thought you might want to know. Thanks for another interesting post.
Posted by: Patrick Dodds | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 07:21 AM
I'm also on an iPad so I don't see your poll. Since Adobe has discontinued mobile Flash anyone with a recent tablet or smartphone (ie, not just Apple products) won't see flash widgets.
I pick my cameras based on what I'm going to use them for. As I get older and as I don't have a car to drive my equipment around, weight is always a consideration. I have an M9 with Leica and Zeiss glass for when image quality is most important but as IQ improves in lesser cameras I find myself willing to make other compromises. When I want a street snap aesthetic I don't care at all about IQ but i do care about a camera which is discrete and doesnt call attention to itself or me (rx100). I also have an all weather camera which is relatively low in weight and has decent IQ but which I'm not afraid to use in rain and snow (om d e5).
I'm growing bored with the current high IQ fetish, IMO it forces a certain anal quality into the final image which I find less and less appealing. BTW anyone coming to London before mid-January should try to get to Tate Modern where there is a great Daido Moriyama/William Klein show.
Posted by: Eric Perlberg | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 07:36 AM
A camera is a tool.
The principles of ergonomy apply.
A digital camera is either a dedicated computer with a lens or lens mount; or, increasingly, a portable general purpose computer with a lens attached.
The principles of user interface design apply, in addition to the general principles of ergonomy. (Note to Nikon, Sony & Co.: yes, they do!)
If you don’t like your tool, you can’t master it.
If you don’t trust your instrument, you can’t play well on it.
I don’t see how one can achieve worthwhile results unless one agrees with, and has complete confidence in, the tools one uses. Any other approach would not work.
___
Yet another Flash failure.
Mike, you care a lot about your readers.
Please: no more Flash.
http://xkcd.com/676/
http://xkcd.com/619/
Posted by: Chris Lucianu | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 08:45 AM
I think I hate the Nikon I have, it's got too many gew-gaws and too many ways to set the same function, I know it bugs me every time I use it. In addition, some of the newer "G" series lenses that Nikon is introducing have worse sharpness than the older "shaft drive" auto-focus models (which was a ridiculous and half-assed design anyway, compared to the wonderful Canon lenses that have been fab since they changed the lens mount).
Anyway, I keep it only for the fact that it shoots tiff, and that's it. The ease to which I can go into a situation with the camera pre-set, and then light up the subject and fire away in tiff, so that I just have to transfer the images direct to the client and call it a day, is the closest thing to shooting transparencies in the olden days, and well worth the annoyance with the way the thing operates.
If I didn't have to shoot pictures for a living, or keep abreast of digital technology to be hire-able by clients; it'd be a Mamiya 6 and Tri-X for me, and that's it....
Posted by: Tom Kwas | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 09:15 AM
Only two selections?
Either this or that?
Well I clicked one. It was easy to select the tribe I was mostly with. But still.....I could see the appeal of the other side.
I'll bet a lot of folks are "mugwumps" on this question. There they sit, on the fence, with their mug on one side and their wumps on the other.
Posted by: John Robison | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 09:23 AM
Mike:
"If the results were all that mattered, you would carry with you whatever camera you needed to, no matter how heavy or inconvenient."
You expressed what I was thinking when I was voting. I had clicked "results" and was about to click "submit" when I realized that if that were the case, I'd always take a larger camera and rarely favor a smaller one. I'd haul all my lenses with me, no matter what. These days, unless I'm on a paying gig, I leave the house with usually one, and at most two, lenses. And I choose the smallest camera that I believe will deliver acceptable results.
Posted by: Eric | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 09:25 AM
I voted for the second option. It's critical that results meet some (in my case, vague) threshold for image quality, but any recent APS-C cameras (dating back a couple years), and the latest Olympus (& possibly Panasonic) micro 4/3 cameras all meet those loose standards. So choosing a camera based on image quality, to me, is like picking a car based on top speed. I finally get to choose based on other features and that's a nice luxury.
My standards for a point & shoot are lower and after trying the RX100 and XF1 recently, I'm eager to see some test results from the XF1 because even though I know the RX100 will prove "better", if the XF1 is "good enough", I'd seriously consider it as I like it better.
Posted by: Dennis | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 12:23 PM
Mike,
I think that you are associating large format cameras with the common large format aesthetic (tripod shots of either national parks or urban decay).
I've not had the pleasure of seeing a Moriyama print, but I've seen plenty of 19th century prints that had a Tri-X look down cold.
If camera choice was purely based on technical results, then there would be very little need for lightweight, portable, fast or inconspicuous cameras. Other considerations almost always prevail over technical perfection, and that's why I voted for option 2.
Posted by: Bernard | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 12:37 PM
Have been a Pentax user since my Spotmatic F days. I liked the results when using my K200 and now the K-30. The ability to use all my M 42, M and A lenses is an added plus.
Regards
Posted by: Milton Conrad | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 02:11 PM
For years I shot all my serious work with an 8"x10", 5"x7" or 4"x5". Then I slowly eased my toes into the digital stream. To make a long story short, I now shoot with a Canon 5DII and I am satisfied, although not thrilled with the comparison. Further, a lot of worry is devoted to being sure I have the "important" stuff backed up. On the other hand, all my negatives are snuggled in their little archival sleeves in an archival storage box.
Posted by: Jim | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 08:34 PM
Results ultimately is the ONLY thing that matters. How we each get there certainly differs a lot. Today in the digital world, the camera is but one small part, perhaps it's always been that way.
There is so much that matters, other gear like great tripods for me, Pano heads, lenses, and practice and skill in simply shooting.
And now perhaps even more than before, post. Digital image production is a skill only refined over many years, much like the darkroom printing masters of the past. I think it probably even more complex than before as there are so many more options now.
But results and the end game is all that matters, great work is never easy, just meant to look that way :)
Posted by: robert harshman | Sunday, 28 October 2012 at 10:43 PM
I just buy cameras to see what they are like. I don't really give much thought to the results as I delete most of what I shoot.
If I was told I could only keep one camera it would be the Olympus E1. I love the sound of the shutter and it feels good to hold.
Posted by: jocky scot | Monday, 29 October 2012 at 04:07 AM
+1 for the category of "compatible with my current lenses/gear" being a major factor. And yet, a camera belonging to this category does help deliver the results I want; results such as being able to shoot pictures.
Posted by: Christian | Monday, 29 October 2012 at 10:38 AM
Hi Mike, late to the vote! The voting plugin didnt work on Google for Android ICS.
It is very hard to be completely one or the other of your options in the poll. Yes, one part may be dominant, but there will always be some other things going on to make your 'decision' final.
Posted by: Julian Lynch | Monday, 29 October 2012 at 06:21 PM
Camera love never goes astray...
Posted by: Len Metcalf | Monday, 29 October 2012 at 07:01 PM
Whether I like it or not, what I'm feeling, totally shows up in the image, to more or less noticeable degrees. (Please be aware, I'm a professional. I can deliver professional results on any day.) But those days when I'm feeling love for my camera, the love for my subject, and I have a happy heart, it shows through in a happy and warm picture. Image quality counts, but so does the love.
Posted by: Josh Hawkins | Saturday, 03 November 2012 at 04:41 PM