5.24.2012

What I learned when I dragged a Hasselblad on vacation. The myth of perfection.

Rome.

It was 1991 and most of my assignments were being done on medium format film with one or another camera from Sweden.  There's a myth that floats around the web like a party guest who's drunk and won't leave, that all the pros back in the film days used 35mm cameras.  Well, I know the four or five hundred sports shooters did but the other 200,000 professionals mostly used medium format...except for the ones that used 4x5 inch film.  With the exception of documentary photographers and event photographers very few pros used much 35mm for real work until the late 1990's and, even then, would quickly scurry back to medium format, given a choice.

Anyway, the dollar was strong and Belinda and I decided to take a real vacation, not just a quick jaunt to the coast or a long weekend in San Francisco or New York.  A real vacation.  Two weeks or so and out of the country.  We headed to Italy.  I packed light.  I brought a Hasselblad 500 C/M with two lenses:  a 50mm f4.5 and a 100mm Planar f3.5.  I also brought along about 100 rolls of Kodak Tri-X (magic film).  The camera was rudimentary.  Just a waist level finder and a couple of 120mm film backs. No meter. No autofocus. No motors.  Just my eyes, my brain and as much cool industrial art as Hasselblad could cram into a body.  My back-up plan?  Buy another camera on site if this one failed.  But I was using Hasselblads in the studio, shooting 20 or 30 rolls a day for years and I hadn't had one fail on me yet...

So, what did I learn hauling that around?  Well, to start with I like medium focal length lenses and I could have just left the 50mm at home.  The 100 was about the equivilant of a 60-65 mm lens on a full frame, 35mm style camera and it always seemed just right.  I learned to judge exposure by using the little slip of paper that came packed from Kodak with each roll of film.  They had printed pictograms of the most common exposure situations and the accuracy was better that anything we get using a meter.

I learned, with 12 exposures on a roll to be discerning about what I shot.  I also learned to be patient.  If I shot too much too quickly I'd be out of film just about the time something really cool was happening.  I learned that old, waist level cameras were invisible and anonymous.  And I learned for the 10,000th time that the square beats the crap out of all other photographic formats.

When I got back home I learned that a big negative trumps all the technology in the world for image quality.  I learned that 120 mm film made contact sheets where each individual image was big enough to judge with the naked eye.


Belinda in Siena.


Belinda in Verona

And I've learned over the years that the pursuit of perfection in photography is great if you are trying to exactly replicate a box of laundry detergent or a stereo receiver for an advertising project but that perfection tends to suck the life out of images that are meant to be savored and enjoyed.  

I'm happy if something is in focus.  I'm happy if the image reminds me of an experience and I'm happiest when I can see the grain.  When I can see the grain I know it's art.

Finally, if you are shooting art for yourself you really only need one lens.  Not an all purpose lens but a lens you can believe in.  A lens that, when you look through it, makes everything look more exciting and more real.  A lens that matches the vision in your heart.  All the other lenses are bullshit.  They make them so professional photographers can do stuff the way clients want it.  Really.  If you don't get paid to do this stuff just narrow down and narrow down until you find a lens that makes your vision sing and then sell the rest.  You'll argue and you won't believe me but if you do it you'll be so much happier with your work five years from now.  Honestly.  It's the one thing I've learned chasing business and clients.  You compromise your vision.  One lens is all you need.  In fact more lenses just cloud everything up.

The best fashion shooter I ever met just had one lens.  It was a Hasselblad 150.  The front element looked as though someone had put a cigarette out on it.  She didn't own any other lens so she never had to think about which lens she would use or how she would work.  She just did her work and it was stellar.  No choices, just the right choice.  No confusion just vision.  Amazing.  But now we're all so fearful we feel like we need to have "all of our bases covered" even when we're just doing this for fun.  That's why it's not as much fun.  

Zooms are for sissies.  I have a collection. I'm just a sissy.  Show me the guy with one 50mm lens and no bag and I'll show you an artist.  Or at least a guy without a back problem.....

You won't listen anyway.  Go ahead and buy whatever you like.

81 comments:

Dave Jenkins said...

A twin-lens reflex would have been perfect for what you were doing. I love the TLR above all other camera designs, but don't want the expense and hassle of film, so I bought an Olympus Pen EP series camera because I read in one of your blogs that I could set it to shoot in square format and that I could tip up the VF-2 viewfinder and look down into it.

I have all the bases covered for commercial work too, but only carry that load when I have to.

What in the world is that Canon machine in Belinda's hand?

stefano60 said...

Signor Kirk!

it is always good to see some great pictures of my old country ... i left it over 20 years ago, and now i am realizing that i like it more every time i go back and visit, even if just for a few days...

i am with you on the 'one camera - one lens' philosophy'! when i had the EP2 i took a whole trip worth of beautiful images in Guatemala using one lens only; on my last trip to India i had the M8 with -gasp!- THREE lenses in my bag, and ended up using only the excellent 40/1.4. I could have done just as well with the little Leica X1 - sadly, it had ONE major flaw, the lack of viewfinder, which caused its early departure.

now that all the hype is over, i have finally ordered a Fuji X100, and i think it has the potential to become my 'go to' camera for walking excursions and trips.

HOWEVER, your insistence in waxing lyrical over medium formats keeps pushing me dangerously closer to the point of getting one again, after having finally convinced myself that i was happy enough with digital!!!

i need to find a good place to hide it from the wife :-)

p.s.: it is a MINOR correction but, regardless of what Nissan thinks, Siena only has one 'n' :-)

Richard M said...

Nice one, Kirk. I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels that "choice" in photography is merely an idea so that camera companies can sell more lenses! Choice is a distraction from photographic vision. That's why I'd kill for a cheaper "monochrom" camera so that I don't have the choice of endlessly fiddling with sliders and emulsion "simulation". The only reason I take my camera bag with me is to protect my reading material!

wjl (Wolfgang Lonien) said...

Sooo nice! And this is real good advice, too - for free even! Invaluable. Thanks Kirk.

cidereye said...

I will listen.

You know, when I owned a Rolleicord Va I barely ever used it as nice a camera as it was. In fact I only ever used it for landscape and can only clearly recall one single occasion that I used it on the streets. You have now made me regret that Kirk.

Why did I not consider it appropriate for street photography? Size I guess. My Leica's were then and still are now my "go-to" cameras for discreet photography. But hey - I missed a *BIG* trick here and should have tried the Rollei with it's VF. I could have had lovely 6x6 negs with tonality to die for in my negative catalogue to boot. I hold my hands up and admit I made a mistake, I feel I really should correct it now but as usual it's going to cost me. Ah well.

Daniel Zaleski said...

Inspiring post, thanks for that Kirk!
Too many choices dillute my vision and distract from the creative work.
Not to mention too much "empty" shots, the result of the huge capacity of the memory cards and the no cost effect (actually it is quite a big cost = apart from the shutter counter, it is the time necessary to spend watching computer screen and selecting the right shots).
But these are just my weaknesses, it is not fault of the equipment.

Andrea said...

Nice article. I dig the "just one lens" too, lately almost all the time I shoot with my old Pentacon 28mm on my G3 - it makes you concentrate more easily once you start to learn what will be the framing in relation to what you see with the naked eye.

Claire said...

Kirk, as usual stunning photos, I'm a total fan of your style. It may not work for everybody but it certainly makes my skirt fly ! You are inspiring me to dare use 1:1 format (I've been stuck on 3:2 forever, even use it by default on m4/3). Maybe I also shoot RAW + jpeg in Monochrome (I'd always have the Raw file for color back up if needed).
I'm rather comfortable shooting with just one lens, my PL25/1.4 hardly ever leaves my GX-1 anyway. Despite its greatness I find the Oly 45 a little "sterile" (as in clinical) in its rendering, and much prefer the output of the PanaLeica...
Kirk, on another note, have you ever considered opening a section on your blog where your fans could share some pics ?

PP said...

A couple things...one I am again struck by your images, really, really satisfying.

When I was a teen all I wanted to be was a photographer...I got my dream camera in 1976 an OM-1 with a 50mm. Well I never became a photographer, but rather a designer, but still have kept in interest in it. I went digital about 6 years ago and have been struggling with it, despite all the images I have made, I don't really like many of them. I don't really feel comfortable with the camera and the controls, too many menu options and it does not feel fluid.

Recently I have been going thru old slides I shot and have been struck with the quality of the shots I made with the OM-1 and the 50mm, many when I was as young as 16,17. "Wow, I say I made THAT shot?" Good composition, lighting, exposure, all around great images. What the heck happened?

I have the new OMD on order and have made a vow to try and re capture what I once had... but not sure how to do it, there is so much to learn it terms of software, both in the camera and out. I miss the old ways...

Marco Venturini-Autieri said...

1. It's "Siena", not "Sienna".
2. As an Italian who lives now in dark England, I would like to say that the pictograms for exposures that you are referring to may work in normal countries (Italy, US, France...) but not here in England. In fact, in the rest of the world you may recognize situations such as: sunny, cloudy, shade, etc. Here you can't, it is all only different "shades of grey" and different amounts of cloudiness. Cloudy may be so thick you barely see anything. Sunny does not exist or, when it does, it is always hazy. Those rules do not apply here.

Wally Brooks said...

I still shoot a 4X5 and carry one wide angle in my bag, almost never use it, and at most carry 10 film cassettes each with 2 sheets of film. Almost all landscapes. 20 sheets of film forces discipline. I usually end up only shooting one image of a given scene in a given light. One shot is all it takes when you know what you are doing. Often I end up waiting for that one shot! Oh yea it took me 6 years of continuous shooting to get to this point.

Daniel S. said...

Gorgeous images, all of them.

Can't say anything definitive on your advice though, as I'm still internalizing; is a two-prime setup only a slight compromise, the beginning of a slippery slope, or already a large compromise because it still forces you to think which one is the most adequate? I imagine you'd go for the last one, but I'd like to think about my own feelings on the matter, which has proven somewhat difficult. It's true when I started out and economics relegated me to only the 50mm kit lens I felt much more comfortable than with any zoom, but it's also true I often dreamed of a 135mm when out shooting and I do think it would've made a positive difference, even in hindsight.

But perhaps the whole issue is that I can't accept the 135mm might be the "one and only" lens for me, rather than the 50mm. Something else to ponder about. Still, thank you for making me think; it's the main reason I read your blog, even if the great photos don't hurt ;)

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Move.

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Daniel, I don't give out actual prescriptions. My writing is meant to stimulate your own internal discussion, just as it does mine.

Marco Venturini-Autieri said...

I am trying! Unemployed now. Applied to about 350 jobs in the last 14 months. I have an interview in the South of Italy next month.

Craig Yuill said...

Your vacation story reminds me a bit of the summer of 1988, when I deliberately chose to use only a 4x5 view camera I designed and built myself. My lens was a new 150mm Schneider Symmar-S. A too-flimsy tripod, a few sheet-film holders, T-Max B&W sheet film, a light meter, a cape for looking at the ground glass, a blowing bulb, and a changing bag - that was my kit for three months. A 4x5 camera on a tripod, however, tends to attract attention. Definitely not something to use for anonymous shooting.

I do agree with you that using only a single single-focal length lens is a good way to shoot. Lately I've become enamoured of my 50mm f/1.8 lens on an APS-C DSLR. It's a short tele that works well for me right now. Last night I decided to put a 24mm lens on the camera and walk around a bit and take some photos. I quickly realized the 50 would have been a far better choice.

I love stories and words of advice like these. Please keep them coming.

Craig Yuill said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
AdamR said...

I've got a Nikon 50/1.8 AI, it came with the black FE I bought for my wife. I probably take 80% of my shots, whether they're on film or digital, with that lens. I tried using a neglected zoom lens last weekend but ended up switching back to the 50 after a few shots.

I normally go out with a 2 lens kit (24 and 50) but that unassuming 50mm just feels more natural. The odd thing is that the change in FOV between the formats doesn't throw me that much. I just end up standing a step or two closer with the film camera than I would with the digital :)

Adam

Bill Bresler said...

2. Back in the summer of 2004 I was doing some street photography in London with my old Rolleiflex E2 and Tri-X. It was 4pm and I was eyeballing the exposures, but it seemed a tad dim. I pulled out the LunaPro and checked. 1/30 at f5.6! The meter in my brain was off by about 2 stops. England is dark, no doubt.

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Craig, I saw that your post had been doubled this morning and when I went to remove one of the duplicates the system ate both. I am sorry. I was not trying to edit or censor your response. If you have it intact would you please re-post it?

Signed, the ham fisted Admin....

Jan Klier said...

Nice post. It needs to be said more often.

Pictureandrew said...

I couldn't agree more. My biggest problem I'm having these days is trying to decide between my Mamiya C330s or should i buy the Hasselblad 500 CM that I am currently borrowing from a friend? I love them both! Kirk, I'm sure you'll steer me to the Hasselblad but I'm just not sure..... They both have 80mm 2.8 lenses and give similar results. But anyways back on point....12 shots, One lens and tri X, there is nothing better. If anyone thinks there is, they haven't tried it.

Bob said...

Very timely post for me. I've been thinking over the last month or so that I like the pictures from my Nikkor 105 better (way better) than anything else. I have a few bodies. It's the lens, not the body.

It's all I've been shooting lately. I decided that it really doesn't make sense to shoot anything else, all though I thought I must be a little crazy shooting an interchangeable lens camera with one lens welded to the front.

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Crazy like a photographer...

Caleb Courteau said...

I've been reading your blog for a long time. Some articles I enjoy and others I can't relate to but I can still see their value and appreciate your well articulated points. I have to say though, this is the first time reading VSL that I've wanted to jump out of my chair, and shout, "F@#k yeah, that's what I'm talking about!" This is the passage that filled me with such enthusiasm:

"if you are shooting art for yourself you really only need one lens. Not an all purpose lens but a lens you can believe in. A lens that, when you look through it, makes everything look more exciting and more real. A lens that matches the vision in your heart. All the other lenses are bullshit."

I can relate to that on such an intuitive level. I own only one lens. Mounted on my D80 is a 50mm 1.8. It works out to about 75mm-e. Does it dash my chances of fitting everyone into certain group shots. Sure. Can I swallow a room's interior with its field of view. Nope. Does it "make everything look more exciting and real?" Absolutely. I get excited every time I look through my viewfinder. I once owned Nikon's 35mm 1.8, common wisdom being it was the lens to own for APS-C if you were only going to own one prime. Its perspective felt dead to me. It didn't narrow down my world and crop out the extraneous like the 50 does. It got put up on ebay quick like.

Bill White said...

You posts always make me think. Oddly my favorite lens is the Canon 28-135 on a crop sensor. It's reputed to be a poor quality lens but it works well on the crop sensor. Guess I'm just a sissy since it's a zoom.

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Join the club, Bill. I have a drawer full...

cidereye said...

England is indeed dark most of the time. The Sunny 16 rule does not apply here Bill, it's more like an "Overcast 4" we have to work with. :-)

Tesch said...

Great post! I've been trying to follow this same advice I heard from another pro and not buy a new lens for a year. Well I broke down and bought a refurb for a great price, Huge mistake! The lens attached great to my A77 but then wouldn't release. I had to send it to the manufacture who removed the lens and told me the mount was no good. Strange that I can mount everyone of my other lenses. Anyway, I need to listen when the universe is talking to me and send the lens back. :)

Rick said...

Does it count when that "one lens" is a 35-100mm f/2.0 zoom? It's a monster, but I love it, and can't get past the gorgeous images it enables me to make.

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Yes. If you are willing to carry it, it definitely counts!

Frank Grygier said...

I am still on my quest to find the lens that makes my heart sing. I believed for a long time that zooms were the way to go but I have been smitten with the trio of primes I use with my OMD. I also have the 75mm on the way. On my solitary walks I pick either the 12mm, 25mm or the 45mm. I find the 12mm & the 25mm to be the most fun for the street. The 45mm and the 75mm will be my tools for portraiture. Can't wait to hear the song in my heart.

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Frank, I think one day you'll reach for the camera and you'll just know. You'll know because of all the lenses it's the only one you can't bear to be without...

Unknown said...

Great post, Kirk, with some wonderful square photos too. My friend recently said that you can leave the middle prime of a classic 3 prime setup home. And when I look at my Lightroom library I see that he's right. These days my setup du jour is the Pentax K-01 with the DA21mm F3.2. If I'm weak I'll throw the DA70mm F2.4 in the bag but 80% of the time I just stick with the 21 and step closer if I have to.

Anders said...

Beautiful shoots.

Stephen said...

Kirk,
Wow! You nailed it with this blog entry. I fly fish and the gear trap is similar. People spend their lives chasing "the best gear". Find one combo you love (rod and line type) and get in as much water time as possible learning the fish. The simpler the better. Covering your bases complicates and weakens your efforts.

In photography a body of work develops when you find your voice. Covering your bases diffuses and diminishes voice and distances us from passionate connections. Staying with one fabulous lens long enough is like writing a clear chapter in a book. Too much gear is like a story with no focus or clear purpose.

Thanks for saying this so well!

Steve

Bold Photography said...

Hehe... says the guy who does 'walkaround' travel photography with just the 135L ... no other lens speaks to me like that one does...

Craig Yuill said...

Kirk, no problems. The remaining post is exactly as I intended it. I actually meant for it to be a main reply to your posting. I think, however, it fits well under Wally's post too. Cheers.

Libby said...

"Zooms are for sissies."

Best thing I've read today ;-)

atmtx said...

I need to go back to Italy. It's been too long.

ballardboy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ballardboy said...

nice story, I still have a 500cm, bought new in '82, but prefer my Mamiya 6 now days.

Scott said...

I have two TLRs, a Rolleiflex, and (my secret favorite) a Minolta Autocord, that I use on the street from time to time.

They are not unobtrusive. Every time I take them out, 3 or 4 people stop and ask me about my cool "antique" cameras.

Stefan said...

Claire there is a VSL-group on flickr: http://www.flickr.com/groups/visualsciencelab/

But the policy there is to share only portraits and I'm still too shy to ask someone for taking a portrait :-{

Shawn said...

Nicely said, Kirk with a real world experience to back it up.

My "go to" camera at pretty much all times is a Hasselblad 501cm w/ the 80mm lens. I've thought about getting a wider or longer lens but then remember that I have these things called feet. I use them instead and save the money.

Unknown said...

Though like you I have a drawer full of various lenses, the shots that end up singing most to me (and likewise get the strongest reaction from others) tend to be shot with my treasured Zeiss Planar 50mm f1.4 manual prime lens (on my 5D MkII, just upgraded to MkIII). I love the sharpness, and that I can never be tempted to flip on the AF. Plus it weighs a heck of a lot less than the Canon 24-70L Zoom.

Thanks for reminding me that I don't need to take all the options along just in case, Kirk.

Russ Mead said...

Years ago (pre digital) when I traveled 50% of the time I had a one lens set up to entertain myself while on the road. It was a 135mm on a nikormat. I found it much better than a "normal" lens for all kinds of shots. What I found was you see life differently and find those shots that work well for the focal length stuck on your camera. I would not take a photo of the old church, but the old church door. And for people, I could get a great head shot, and step back for something wider. Yes, you can use a 135mm (full frame 35mm) as your primary lens and get some great photos.

wili said...

Excellent post, thanks for that Kirk. I will come back every now and then to read this and remind myself what is important in photography. It is not the number of pixels and the hardware, but the photos.

AlbertoBotturi@me.com said...

All your words ere so touching! Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Wow! I love this article! No one said it better than Kirk. I started to feel the same way a few years ago. The late fashion photographer Helmut Newton says that he only used "ordinary" lenses for his fashion work. by "ordinary" he means normal lenses, like an 80mm for example. When was the last time you guys saw this man's work? While he shot with 35mm sometimes (not even a Leica, huh) and a Rollieflex tlr with a normal lens ( you see, just a simple normal lens), he used a Hasselblad with a normal lens I'm not sure if it was an 80mm or a 100mm, but I have a documentary tape showing Helmut Newton at work. For one of his photo sessions while photographing Candice Bergen he was using a 100mm planar on his Hasselblad. He also used, at one time, the old 135mm macro Planar. Helmut Newton kept it so simple, and the other amazing thing about him is that he only used a 500 watt floodlight to shoot his sexually charged and often weird and mysterious fashion pictures. The thing I hate about fashion photography today is that all these fashion pictures are just too "over lit". You know,-- the Profoto 7b this or br8 or whatever the hell they are called these days, blah, blah, blah, not to mention the Breisi line of lights. (Also, Helmut Newton only used the 400 version of tri-x for all his work, processed in Rodinal,). By the way, even Robert Mapplethorpe kept it simple (I like his work more for the quality than the content): he only used the 80mm planar and 150mm Sonnar lenses on his Hasselblad. Simple equipment and a good imagination are all one needs for fascinating photography. Even I suffer from having more equipment than I need. I have 5 prime lenses for my Hasselbad system--all cfi's, and 98% percent of the time I use the 60mm along with 80mm or with 100mm. When I had the amazing 180mm CFI (purchased brand new), I rarely used it. I am a prolific shooter, but that lens would sit in my Pelican case for years and only use it maybe 2 or 3 times a year throughout those years, but I would use the the aforementioned lenses 98% of the time. So what did I do? I sold the 180.--I wasn't using it. But boy!—that 180 was sharp as hell!!

Anonymous said...

Your post is old, but I'll just mention that Francesca Woodman used a Mamiya 6x6 for her amazing photographs, and boy!--what a body of work. Stunning photography. Its not the camera, it's the SOUL.

Seppo N said...

On a vacation to NY city several of my lenses were lost in the baggage systems. I was left with a 28mm on a 5DMKII. I learned to used that camera/lens in all times places with joy. A great lesson !

DRU said...

Hi Kirk
Thanks for article. I completely agree with you. I remember my holidays with Kodak SLR\c and one 35mm lens - that was completely enough for everything. Another trip - i was with Fuji gw690 film camera with fixed lens - same. Nowdays i use Hassy 500c with planar 80 almost all the time. Its really natural to think more on subject then on selection of gear :) Also great advantage in weight.
Good luck,
Dmitry

Unknown said...

Great pictures and Great post!. I went to Italy this for 3 months and i brought way too many lenses with me. My neck and shoulders paid the price. I'll be traveling much lighter on my next trip!

Penguin's Waddle said...

Absolutely correct about the 50mm lens. I favour mine above all the others.

I don't have a Hasselblad though. I so WISH!

jz said...

G'day Kirk, I am looking at buying a 500c/m. Nice post. Can you provide any more info on the little piece of paper provided with the film>? Which paper is this?cheersJeremy

Unknown said...

I believe the slip of paper no longer exists inside the box of film, but similar info is printed on the inside of the box itself. Open carefully!
Interesting article. I took my 503cw to NZ and Fiji for 6 weeks. I took 3 lenses but really only used the 50mm. Occasionally the 80, and only 2 or 3 times the 100. Sadly, the lens I love the most for my large format work does not have a shutter or I would use it all the time. Getting it fitted with one costs several times what I paid for the lens itself.

Dave Green said...

Good post, sound advice. I'm finally learning this (after many years) and now have a Leica M6 with one lens; a 50mm Summicron and I rarely want to shoot with anything else. That said, I do fancy a Hasselblad for MF work...I have 645 but love the square :))

Flynn said...

Truly enjoyed this post.

Unknown said...

Nice article. I once did a 3-month trip with only one lens, a 25mm for my film Nikon; at the end of the trip, it had become my "normal" lens. I do have to disagree about your comment that most professional photographers did not use 35mm cameras until the 1990s. I knew quite a few professionals in the 1970s who were using 35mm in most situations, and they were not strictly speaking photojournalists.

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Hmmm. I lived through the 70's and I've got to tell you that you might be wrong. Everyone used 35mm cameras as personal cameras but most clients demanded bigger cameras for the real work.

Anonymous said...

I enjoyed this article, and the lovely photos (the twilight of the pay phone era!). I bet this set looks great in print.

It's true that many great photographers have or had very little equipment. HCB - one camera and lens for most of the time. Ansel Adams - I think I'm right in saying the same there too.

I have many camera and lens combos and I'm as lousy as the next guy in comparison! ;-)

- Linden

Anonymous said...

I am late finding this, but could not agree more. After owning and using a shitload of gear, digital, 35mm, 8x10, 11x14( yes, really), 6x6, 6x9, 645 and 5x7, I realized that upwards of 80 percent of my best work was done with a Hasselblad and a standard 80mm lens. I found that, in every format, the lens I worked best with was a normal lens-more or less- for that format. It works for me. And yes, the square is indeed king.

Anonymous said...

You need to be a part of a contest for one of the best blogs on the web.
I most certainly will highly recommend this web site!


Look into my page pure virility reviews

Anonymous said...

Yeap !!!!!

Anonymous said...

A Pentax ESII and a Takumar 50/1.4, and I'd ready to explore the world...

Stephen said...

A Pentax ESII and a Takumar 50/1.4 and I'm ready to explore the world....

FraSiec said...

Nice post. You may be an even better writer than photographer. I come back, and reread often. Your story reminds me of a trip long back. I packed a 2 mp Nikon and for fun a spotmatic I picked up at a garage sale. Fast forward, the spotmatics images are still my favs. I only had the 55mm super takumar. The 2 mp , nuff said.

King Wen said...

I just found this site because I was thinking about getting a used Hasselblad film camera, since I had picked up a used Leica this way and saved a lot of money. I think it's a great perspective from a pro viewpoint. But two things about lenses, and digital vs. film. I only shoot for my own art, but a cinematographer I work with says I am pretty good with the images. I do carry a few lenses because I shoot outdoors - mountains and seacoast, and railroads sometimes, and public events - carnivals, fairs and so on. I almost exclusively use a tele-zoom any more - it's incredibly versatile - if I had to use one lens, that would be it. Second, I love film, and understand about seeing the grain. I used to shoot Tri-X 40 years ago, and developed it with Kodak Microdol diluted 1:3 which softened the edges of the grain. My photag prof was surprised I could get an 11 x 14 blow-up without the grain showing very much. I really miss the darkroom days. I bought a lot of Ektachrome Tungsten film while I could still get it, and other slide film. But digital allows me to do one thing that is valuable, and that is I can shoot many images of a rapidly changing scene, for "free", and simply delete all the mediocre ones, and keep the good ones. Like 20 shots of waves crashing on rocks, and then keep the amazing one, and crop it a little bit, and I have a great image. And yes, making a contact print from a 2-1/4 square negative is a big plus - I remember those days. One last thing, the Leica point-and-shoot has a lens that reproduces colors in the mountains like nothing I have ever seen - the difference is amazing.

Anonymous said...

I read this from top to bottom, and agree 100%. I get so much crap from people for using my 50mm 1.8 only on my F100. It works for me, and even my clients can't tell I stick to one lens. Frankly as long as they are happy it doesn't matter. I recently invested in a 500cm as a work horse camera, so I'm very excited to see how I like working with 6x6 again. Been using 645 for years, but never really liked it.

Kyle

http://thebromleycollective.co

Lance Saunders said...

Just read your blog and found it very inspiring. My father just gave me his old Hasselblad 500c with 80mm lens and I am very excited to get out and discover photography in a new way versus shooting with my digital Nikon and all of my zoom lens which I love to do but this is purer and perhaps more thoughtful.
Cheers,
lance

Unknown said...

Old Codger (84) says don't get hung up on any one else's hang-ups.

I have a raft of cameras: Two Hassels and lenses, Linhof Teknica, Graflex 4x5 and 5x7, Rolleiflex 2.8E, Pentax LX (best viewfinder ever made), Canons, Nikons, and so on, ad infinitum. I've used them in science NCAR Boulder), technology (IBM), free lancing and huge stacks of abstracts - industrial, nature, childbirth books (4 million copies). Space (NORAD), and am happier than ever with 25 megabears in my new Nikon.

Go with what you love and enjoy the things you do and the people you meet. Life's too short to fuss.

Each element of photography can be exciting, rewarding and demanding. Enjoy.

Rodger Ewy

Unknown said...

Forgot to mention - Kodak Royal X Pan. Fastest, delightfully grainy film I ever knew (120 size). I used it with line film onr the enlarger easel to hold onto the grain. Line film was extremely high contrast film used by printers.

Hugs to all,

Rodger Ewy

sejko said...

Very inspiring article to read. and timely for me. I have not found my sweet tool yet, but I am now gravitating towards it. It is a very interesting and personal process. Thank you.

Unknown said...

Spoken like a true old school

soonerpa said...

Thank you for such an insightful article. Nice read and love what you captured.

Saulo Cisneros said...

Six years after the original post, it is still valid and I think it will be for as long as film exists. I have TOO MANY cameras systems in 35mm, Medium format and digital to (foolishly) keep my bases covered. I've come to find out that it does cloud my decision on what to choose whenever I go out. I've been trying to narrow down for weeks and I want to use the money to travel. My favorite kits are Leica M3 with a 50mm, Nikon FM2 with a 35mm 1.4, Rolleiflex 2.8E and Bronica ETRSi with 50mm. Thanks for sharing Kirk, by the way. After six years what do you take out when you travel? Do you still feel the same way? Let us know. Thanks!

eric erickson said...

Kirk, You hit the nail on the head. I am like you, I love to buy and own cameras, but at the end of the day, my go-to camera, and the one I use most is the Fuji x100f. It is easy to carry, and takes great pictures. Love this post. My problem, I have several lenses that I love and use including the sissy, 18-135 Fuji, and the 35 f2 fuji. But for an upcoming trip to Arizona this week, the only thing that will go in my bag will be the x100f.

Roland Tanglao said...

it's 2023, you are still right :-) i love these photos of course too!

jlsalvignol said...

Is it possible to reread all these comments without feeling a kind of nostalgia?

MikeR said...

I came in around mid-2012. Looking at commenters' names, I think I recognize just two who are still participating.

Useful post. Thanks

Post a Comment

We Moderate Comments, Yours might not appear right after you hit return. Be patient; I'm usually pretty quick on getting comments up there. Try not to hit return again and again.... If you disagree with something I've written please do so civilly. Be nice or see your comments fly into the void. Anonymous posters are not given special privileges or dispensation. If technology alone requires you to be anonymous your comments will likely pass through moderation if you "sign" them. A new note: Don't tell me how to write or how to blog! I can't make you comment but I don't want to wade through spam!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.