What Camera to Use
Over the many months we have been publishing GP OnLine one question that keeps popping into our mailbag is, "What camera do you recommend?" We have discussed lighting, metering, colour temperature, film, models, studios. Almost everything to do with taking glamour pictures except the camera you use.
So let's start at the beginning. There are many types of camera's that are available to you when you enter into a camera store, but the only ones we can take seriously for what we intend are, 35mm, medium format, and large format and digital.
Large format cameras are used mainly in studio as they are too big to lug around locations. Prove me wrong here, but I don't know any glamour photographers that use a large format camera for glamour work. So I don't think it is really worth getting into a discussion about them.
OK next we have medium format and 35mm. A lot of people think that 35mm is OK to learn on, but once you have experience then it is time to move up to medium. My view on that is simple. I learnt to drive a car, but do I want then to go on and drive a bus? My Brother in law who is now the proud owner of a Hasselbad doesn't see it that way at all. He feels that moving on from 35mm to medium is like going from driving a family saloon to driving a smooth running luxury Rolls Royce.
You see the problem is we all have different ideas and tastes and although we have the same needs and requirements, how meet those is in our own way. I started out with 35mm and in the 1980'a moved on to medium format by way of a Mamyia and then a Bronica. I was almost solely based in a studio at this time. Once I moved out into the great outdoors again I found my 35mm was getting more and more use. Finally I sold on the big boys and brought a brand new Nikon and haven't been tempted again.
You see it is a case of horses for courses. The advantages of medium format is the large negative, the almost square, OK these days squarer format. Certainly better quality Trannies and obviously dupes as well. (Trannies=Chrome/Transparency film) (Dupes=Copies of these Trannies) So Photographic Agencies prefer medium format because they can offer their client higher quality reproduction, or dupes. The other advantage of this format is the opportunity to put a Polaroid back on the camera and take test shots to check your lighting in the studio. Something you cannot do with any 35mm. The disadvantages for the photographer are, the cameras are large, heavy, awkward when shooting off outdoors without a tripod for those more flexible shoots.
Read in reverse for 35mm as the two formats are almost exact opposites.
The improvement in film over the last 15 years has been astounding. Just talking about Trannies for a minute. 15 years ago there was only one film a pro could seriously think about using and this had an asa (DIN now) of 64. So low light conditions, or poorly lit subjects would cause low shutter speeds and wide open irises. Now of course that has changed and film technology seemed to suddenly take off. Before we knew it there was film running at 200asa that was producing results far superior to that earlier 64asa. If you don't know why then you should read up on film, so you understand about how grain works an what silver halide crystals used to do. Also about T technology and 4 layers.
OK so anyway, suddenly it became possible to produce work on 35mm film that had the quality and colour saturation of it's bigger brother. So where do we go from here? Simply to say it is now a matter of choice.
I haven't finished yet, but I want to say something about digital as they are very, very much part of the equation these days.
Digital cameras where good fun to start with, but couldn't be taken seriously. I remember in 1996 saying at Photo Focus in B/ham that digital would never be able to reproduce the quality of film. How could it? You could never match the amount of crystals on a single negative with digital pixels. Yes well call me a dinosaur!!!
Here we are now in 2002 with 4.8megapixels. Fantastically superb cameras producing results of exceptional purity. Each image is around 14meg in size so quite acceptable for most printing and publishing these days. Oh yes of course not acceptable though for the double page, or cover, glossy paper magazines. No these still demand only the best quality 35mm or medium format. Now that's interesting isn't it. It doesn't seem that long ago to me that publishers would accept only medium format. Then once a brave publisher printed a wonderful picture on their cover which was taken from a 35mm. Then it was OK to print 35mm it had come of age. Will digital come of age?
I believe gentleman it has. I understand that "Sports Illustrated" wanted a particular picture for a double page in their magazine, but were disappointed to learn it had been taken with a Nikon Digital so there was no tranny. The brave picture editor decided the picture was that good that he passed it over to the printer to see what it could look like. Of course this was a 14meg file and it looked wonderful. I cannot confirm this story, but it is what I have had reported to me and I believe it!
So yes it looks like digital has come of age. If you are a digital user please remember that this isn't just about megapixels though. I believe there are only three manufacturers who's cameras are capable of producing work to this standard at the moment.
So what camera do I recommend? I recommend a camera you get on with, a camera you understand and feel happy with. Most importantly a camera that takes great pictures when you are holding it. So let's not hear anymore crap about "Oh he only uses digital", or "Blimy 35mm I thought he was a photographer.", or "Christ what do you hope to achieve with that carthorse round you neck?"
This is probably the only branch of photography where we have such a wide and varied choice and perhaps we should be grateful for that.
What do I use. I use Nikon, because I always have and the lenses will all still fit each other after all these years. Yes I use AF, once I got used to it. So find what's best for you and stick with it.
©Glamour Photo 2002