All the Pieces Finally Falling into Place - Digitally

[mwfanelli]

I still think that all aspiring beginning photographers should start by using manual film bodies (just my opinion ) in order to appreciate the decisions one makes before pressing the shutter. But after that, the instant feedback of digital sure makes the learning curve awfully steep!

I wonder how many people would buy a retro-digital SLR if available? Like the good old K1000 but with a 10+MP imaging sensor. Of course the film advance lever and film rewind knob would have to be replaced with something

The retro camera would have some sales, just for it's retro nature. But it sounds like a camera that would be all about form rather than function. .

Learning on manual film bodies really makes no sense. Anything you can learn on that type of camera can be learned better and faster with a digital camera. The basics are the basics regardless of the camera use. You don't learn to drive on a Model T for the "basics"! The instant feedback of digital makes learning super fast, it makes the learning curve much LESS steep rather than greater.

[STinGa]

I have also left the film age behind. I realized a while back that I was using my daughters' P&S digital much more than my tried and true Elan, for the most part due to cost and instant gratification. As a parent with three youngsters, film and processing can be expensive. I realized that I missed the old format's flexability only about 5% of the time since I was usually able to position myself in places to make the shots work. Last December I made the jump for myself and bought a 20D. I have been happy beyond belief. I have also started teaching my two older daughters (6 and 7 years old) the ins and outs of the DSLR. They are proving to be quick learners and are doing quite well. Again, the cost issues, or lack of, are letting me feel free to let them explore their photography boundaries and the instant gratification is teaching them how and where their mistakes are coming from and they can usually fix the problem on the spot. Granted the 20D is not an inexpensive camera, but compared to film and developing, I will more than break even in the blink of an eye.

STinGa

[Loupey]

Learning on manual film bodies really makes no sense. Anything you can learn on that type of camera can be learned better and faster with a digital camera. The basics are the basics regardless of the camera use. You don't learn to drive on a Model T for the "basics"! The instant feedback of digital makes learning super fast, it makes the learning curve much LESS steep rather than greater.

I know, I know. The film camera reference is just my point of view as it was invaluable in my early understanding of the basics. Human nature is such that if automated features are built in, it is going to be used by those who perhaps should not be using them. Not possible if it is not there to be used I wonder what percentage of professed "newbies" who jump into DSLRs are disciplined enough to start (and stay with) full manual controls? Why should I care if someone picks up a camera, shoots in automated mode, and gets a decent image? Because many people here seem to want to improve and want to understand the basics. Cameras and function change, the basics do not. Shouldn't everyone have a firm and solid understanding and practical experience with it? As for your driving analogy, there are a lot of terrible drivers out there driving automatic tranmission cars. I think there would be a lot less accidents if they drove manual transmission cars and paid attention more.

As for the curve, if knowledge (Y-axis) is a function of time (X-axis), one would hope their curve goes vertical.

[mwfanelli]

Human nature is such that if automated features are built in, it is going to be used by those who perhaps should not be using them. Not possible if it is not there to be used I wonder what percentage of professed "newbies" who jump into DSLRs are disciplined enough to start (and stay with) full manual controls?

Very true. Most DSLR newbies don't know the first thing about exposure, focus, etc. But the primary purpose of a camera is to take photographs. Just because it was harder in the old days doen't mean that the new stuff is somehow bad. If someone gets photos he/she likes using the "green square", more power to them!

Why should I care if someone picks up a camera, shoots in automated mode, and gets a decent image? Because many people here seem to want to improve and want to understand the basics. Cameras and function change, the basics do not.

Those who want to learn more have the ability to do so. Those who don't still have a camera they can use rather than have it collect dust in the back of a closet!

Shouldn't everyone have a firm and solid understanding and practical experience with it?

No. They should be taking photographs with it.

As for your driving analogy, there are a lot of terrible drivers out there driving automatic tranmission cars. I think there would be a lot less accidents if they drove manual transmission cars and paid attention more.

I have always driven a manual transmission car and motorcycle. It does takes more concentration, even if just a little with experience. That is concentration not available for the road! Is is really safer to be shifting in traffic? My first car had a manual choke. I knew more about the workings of cars back then but was it really better than an automatic choke? I don't think so.