Why Cartier-Bresson’s photographs suck.

Bold statement or stupid statement?

Dead simple really;

‘No IBIS? It’s a deal breaker.’

‘Only 25,600? It’s a deal breaker.’

‘EVF? It’s a deal breaker.’

‘Only 4.5 frames per second? It’s a deal breaker.’

‘It’s too (insert one the following…big, small, light, heavy, ugly, slow) It’s a deal breaker.’

‘It doesn’t look (insert one of the following…pretty, macho, professional, discrete, understated, around my neck) It’s a deal breaker.’

‘It’s not good enough to swank around a trade show with it around my neck. It’s a deal breaker.’

HCB didn’t have any of theses features on his cameras so it follows that his photographs must suck.

And what about Lartigue, Brandt, McCullin, Bailey, Avedon, Penn, Weston, Egglestone and Adams to name but just a few? More sucking.

How on earth could they be expected to be classed as proper photographers?

We’ve been conned…or have we?

Statue of Liberty

I’ve been suggesting that DSLR’s with flippy-flappy mirrors could be slowly on their way out. How slowly I couldn’t possibly know but there’s a lot of new mirrorless cameras hitting the market now and (allegedly) in the near future (Sony full frame?).

For the moment I’ve still got my D3 and pro glass but I recently added a Sony Nex 7, with the standard zoom, to my collection.

I also bought a cheap Canon FD adaptor to attach my old Canon 200mm f4 FD lens to the Nex and a couple of spare batteries. An old battered Domke F803 completed the outfit for my first ever trip to NYC, the Nikon gear stayed at home…and I never once missed it!

I didn’t use the 200mm much (300mm with the crop factor) but when I did the focus peaking made it easy…can I have focus peaking on my Nikon DSLR and in the viewfinder too please…no? Anyway, enough of this, here’s a shot I took with the Nex/Canon combination of the Statue of Liberty…and I loved NYC!

Statue of Liberty                                                                                                                              ©Les Wilcockson 2013 All Rights Reserved

Get rid of your old flappy-mirrored cameras while you can!

I think digital cameras with mirrors are doomed.

Why? Because all you need is a good lens to place an image on the sensor, job done. You don’t need a big clanky flappy mirror bouncing up and down in-between, what’s the point of it?

Mirrorless and SLT cameras let you see the image that’s actually on the sensor, adjust the exposure on the fly, adjust white balance, check critical focus, see exactly what you’re going to get BEFORE you press the button.

NO CHIMPING after and thinking, ‘I need some exposure compensation so I’ll add some then take another shot then CHIMP again…ooops too much, better crank it down a bit then I can have another CHIMP’, now I’ve taken 3 shots instead of one…what’s the point of all that nonsense??? STOP MONKEYING ABOUT!

It’s at this point that the self-appointed experts will say something like ‘it’s not a problem if you knew what you were doing in the first place’…the point is that I know when exposure compensation is required, or not, and to be able to apply it and see the exact effect before I press the click button sounds like a good/obvious idea. (I said ‘click button’ to annoy the same people).

Shoot movie on a DSLR but you can’t do it through the viewfinder…what the f—-!!! It’s a stupid way to work.  You paid for the viewfinder but you can only use it some of the time???!!!!!

It’s ridiculous..

…can you imagine if the DSLR manufacturers told you ‘Hey, you can only use our viewfinders’ for still images, they don’t work for movies because our viewfinders are still employing old technology’

I reckon I’m right, do you?