Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dcstep
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahero4eternity
I shot with a 5d mk2 for years. Had all the L glass I wanted (well, never got that 85L mk2). The results were technically fine. Probably too technical. Too clinical.
Like I said, for me it's more about the process than the results. Don't get me wrong, results matter. Just not as much as the process to me.
DSLRs...I'm indecisive. And that's a fault of my own - not DSLRs. I can never figure which lens to bring, so I always end up bringing 2-3, which I never use. TLRs (with the exception of Mamiya) simply things for me. Leica....the glass is so small and light that I can afford to bring a second lens comfortably in my pocket.
|
Lots of guys shoot with one lens, like a 35mm, 40mm or 50mm, or a zoom, and make the lens on the camera work. If you want to try again at working digital into your process, then you might try that.
Too clinical? Well, I assume you're shooting Raw; therefore, you're in control of the final product. Maybe you're pushing sliders too far to the right and getting overly sharp and overly saturated results. I keep Saturation below 5 except on the grayest days. Generally extra sharpening is not needed.
Dave |
I typically don't process my photos. Used Photoshop and Lightroom for years. Gave them both up a long time ago. Sitting behind a computer to edit pictures isn't really my thing.
I can't stress enough. It's about the process/journey for me.
Some people prefer to use their phones to tell time. I prefer a mechanical watch. Some people prefer to shoot digital. I prefer to shoot analog.
I don't think one is ultimately better than the other. Just different.