The camera you use matters less than you might think

It seems to me like an almost impossible puzzle. From the photo you can sometimes see or suspect who the photographer is, but taken with which camera... Besides the regular camera, I have a Sigma, which I can usually pick out in my own photos. But yes, that is also a very different sensor with a character all of its own.

Oh Nando, that is a completely impossible task for me !!
It really doesn't matter a damn to me what camera someone takes a photo with ..
The enjoyment someone gets from taking a photo is what matters to me !!
That's why I can also enjoy a beautiful photo taken with a smartphone.
My camera is on your list so I'm really curious which photo you took with it ..
I know the village in photo 9 very well .. we often come there, it's basically just around the corner from us

Great article, regards Ad Hartjes

In my opinion, you simply cannot see that. I too am fed up to the back teeth with always having to hear the same drivel about how much better ‘their’ camera supposedly is than the many others. There are photographers who still swear by the mirror (which then makes me think of the queen of Snow White standing in front of the mirror), others by the system or the bridge, while with their mobile phone or compact they take an equally good (or bad) photo … to post on FaceBook.

As has been said countless times, it is mainly the ‘content’ of the photo, ‘the subject’ that matters and with what ‘feeling, interpretation, message’ it has been captured. But no, the number of pixels, the sharpness, the noise, … still take precedence for many. That often results in the technically perfect photo that says absolutely NOTHING.

I've done little tests more often; photos with a (Nikon) full-frame DSLR and a smartphone. Under normal circumstances, it's already impossible to tell which is which. Let alone between these cameras.
But what I do very often find with photos that catch my eye, that I like, especially B&W, is that 9 times out of 10 they turn out to have come from a Leica afterwards. That, at least.

Of course you're right! So I don't even have to guess! For that very reason, I even included photos by my students in my textbook 'A Wink at the Light', made not only with DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, but also with simple compact cameras. The photographer determines the quality of the photo more than the camera does!

Donald Willemsen wrote on Tuesday 29 December 2020 at 14:39  | reply

Hello Nando, it is impossible to link all photos to a particular camera. All the more so because the photos have been post-processed. An unprocessed RAW file is easier to link to a particular camera, and even then.... The lens used also plays a role, as does, not to be forgotten, the type of sensor. If you are going into the mountains or going on a trek, a compact system camera seems more convenient to me than a DSLR. So I am not going to venture into linking cameras to photos.
You are right that a brand does not necessarily matter. Okay, for example, people say that Canon's dynamic range is somewhat on the meagre side compared with, say, Sony. But do you really notice much of that? Yes, perhaps if you often have to deal with extreme contrasts.
The choice of brand and type of camera also has to do with the contents of your wallet. Of course, that applies somewhat less to professionals than to hobby photographers. In principle, you can take a good, beautiful photo with any camera. For the vast majority, it depends on the photographer's knowledge, skill and creativity. In addition, knowledge and skill in the digital darkroom also play a major role.
In the analogue era, I mainly worked with Ricoh cameras. Now in the digital era, I have chosen Canon. Started with an entry-level model, but after just a few years switched to the mid-range model. That switch was mainly determined by the need for somewhat more extensive adjustment options of the mid-range model. For the future, I will stick with Canon so I can continue using my lenses. That way, I only have to buy a new body if one of my cameras gives up the ghost.
So the choice has nothing to do with which brand is or is not better now. So I agree with you.

Dear Nando, I have certainly enjoyed every one of your photos, but I don't want to start guessing which "Kodak" they were made with, it's impossible. I completely agree with you, it's not the little box that does it, but the person holding it. I myself am pretty much an all-round photographer, except for sports and action because I am a slow one. I have a thing for Nikon because it can be operated "by feel", at least that's what I think. And for years I have (almost) always carried a Fujifilm X100 with me because it is light to carry on walks, quiet for photographing in churches and museums and ... when I bought it, it was still the only compact with an optical viewfinder, so I didn't have to perform acrobatics to compose with the sun behind me. But ... not a bad word about other brands.

jos schiffelers wrote on Tuesday 29 December 2020 at 15:04  | reply

You won't be able to tell from the photos which camera they were taken with. And true, everyone has their own preference. Ease of use does matter to me.

Hi Nando, I really can't make that distinction. I really don't know enough about this and also don't have that much to spend on a camera and lens to be able to compare this for myself. I like taking action photos along the sports field. I need a new camera, I currently have an eos50D. Which one would you recommend to me? Not too expensive but nice and fast, lens is sigma 18-300 F3.5-6.3

Haha, that Nando, you really lured us out of our tents like that between Christmas and New Year's.
In my view, the photographer is the biggest factor in whether a photo succeeds.
I became fully aware of that when I was walking through Medemblik with a photography course and we had to photograph shop windows. We were all fumbling around a bit and we didn't really know what we were doing.
Then that teacher grabs a camera from one of the participants and says: 'It's not that difficult, you just do this and this".
It was a beautiful photo, there was still a long way to go, so to speak....

It is of course an impossible task to solve this puzzle. The camera I bought on the recommendation of a well-known photo shop in the middle of the country, but have since moved away from, is the Canon M50. I like photographing wildlife in the forest, so in low light and from long distances, and there the focusing fell seriously short due to a lack of contrast. The camera also turned out to be too small for my (clumsy?) hands because I accidentally touched buttons too often. So I switched to the Sony DSC10m4, which isn't even on this list. The controls suit me much better and the focusing is also better. The smaller sensor is large enough for my photos. The Sony simply works much more pleasantly for me than the Canon. Only for night shots where manual focusing is needed do I find the Canon more pleasant to work with.
So my advice: buy the camera whose controls suit you best. Because taking photos enjoyably produces better images than doing so in an irritated mood.

Nice piece Nando and I completely agree. I’m not going to try to figure out which photo belongs to which camera either. I have no camera preference. Irrelevant to me. I decide for myself what I need. I do research into that. In doing so I take the following variables into account: budget, purpose, box of electronics (camera), glass, post-processing program, knowledge, future, and common sense. With this mix, something came out of it that I have now. I’m going to get to work with this. And of course the subject in front of the lens is important. Photography is conveying emotion. In the first instance for myself. If others like something of mine, that’s a bonus. If the emotion is missing, then I have to go back to the drawing board. And no camera brand is going to help me with that. By the way, I had a great time on Fstoppers with the reactions .....

Piet van Kroonenburg wrote on Tuesday 29 December 2020 at 18:02  | reply

Nicely provoked, Nando. Striking is that the commenters say they cannot answer the question and thereby sense the crux of your story. You also encounter a similar brand (nonsense) discussion among motorcyclists! What is important is that everyone who photographs with ‘his’ brand (hopefully) gets a lot of enjoyment out of it. A serious cause for brand loyalty may be the lenses one already owns. Thousands of euros worth of lenses from your brand ensure that you are not so quick to switch to another brand.

I have been photographing with a Pentax k10D for years. Purchased over 12 years ago as a digital successor to my Pentax P50, which I had used for about 25 years. At the time I chose the P50 because the lenses I used on my Petri also fit the Pentax. Pentax still uses the same lens mount, so I can still use my old manual lenses on my K10D. I even took the focusing screen with focusing prism from an old camera, adjusted its size, and mounted it in my k10D so that I can focus manually with a prism... SUPER!!! Of course, the technology of the k10D is outdated, but it is still a fantastic camera. Especially the ISO setting (max. 1600) cannot be compared with current cameras, but I manage with it.

4BYE wrote on Wednesday 30 December 2020 at 10:03  | reply

@Paul Apparently you don't quite understand what I mean or what I wrote. Yes, Canon was seriously behind in mirrorless. That's simply a fact. Personally, mirrorless has many advantages for me.

Have you ever made a photo stack handheld in nature? Or have you tried capturing salmon jumping out of the water? Or the shot where the arrow shoots a balloon at exactly that moment? I can now achieve that more easily with an Olympus camera. They have some very interesting options. That's the reason I switched to mirrorless. The tracking system of my second-hand Sony A9 is such that I now have more keepers than ever, for example in Birds in Flight photography. (Animal) EyeAF is also a great option. And there are still quite a few more examples to think of. Very useful for my "branch of sport".

Although I agree with Nando for the vast majority, a good tool with the right options also partly determines whether a photo succeeds (more quickly). The fact that not everyone needs that because they are interested in other forms of photography is another matter. That's why I think it's a shame that there are now only similar photos that could have been taken with almost any camera. It would have been more interesting if there had also been a stack of, for example, a fly with a lot of DOF. Or a bird of prey in flight. Or, go crazy, a drone photo. That's why I wrote that my motto is "different tools for different jobs".

4BYE is right when he says ""different tools for different jobs". The possibilities with a more advanced system camera (I own an Olympus E-M1, E-M1X and TG-6) are much greater than with many others. So the chances of success in taking 'that' photo you want can seriously increase when you use 'the' suitable camera for your particular photographic choice. When it comes to 'quality' (and that is much more than just the technical aspect), however, the camera plays the least important role of all the parameters.

From now on I am buying not the brand, but the service of the brand. Recently I bought a Nikon Z6, which broke down after a few months due to rain damage. On Nikon's official website it is advertised that this camera is very rain- and dust-resistant. But I don't get any warranty, so in the bin !!! (interest in my lens 50 mm f1,8)

For the more skilled photographer, equipment can indeed be the limiting factor. That photographer can achieve much better ‘optical’ results with better equipment. But here too, the camera remains secondary, and the quality of lenses, filters, tripods, screens, post-processing programs … and above all the photographer’s knowledge and skill are more decisive for the end result than the camera. Nando demonstrates the latter very well with this series of photos.

4BYE wrote on Thursday 31 December 2020 at 11:40  | reply

@François Stiphout
Yes, in some cases it is necessary. But it strongly depends on what you want to photograph (and how easily).

If you have a depth of field of millimeters, EyeAF is very pleasant for portraits. If you want to follow a fast (bird of) prey, LockAF is very welcome. If you want to get a living insect (or similar) in the wild sharp from front to back, in-camera focus stacking is very pleasant. If you want to capture something that cannot be timed exactly, ProCapture (Olympus) is a great option. If you want to focus on that bear in the bushes, it is wonderful that you have relief view to distinguish the part that is in focus in the viewfinder. But small things like back-button AF, quick menus in the viewfinder, etc. also make photographing easier. For many types of photography where you have all the time or can redo things, that is less exciting. But for subjects where you do not get a second chance or that are short-lived, it can make the difference. Of course I am still the one making it, but all help is welcome. The art is to never let yourself go crazy over things you do not need at all. My first SLR was an East German Praktica MTL 3 (1970s) and it is great to see where we are now.

Dear Nando, best wishes for 2021.
And best wishes and good health to everyone in 2021. Also may it be a good photography year. I have now read all the responses to the subject that Nando started the discussion about. A final conclusion can be that:
1. the camera brand does not matter, including all the technical gadgets that are present on it, but it does make taking photographs easier.
2. The quality of the lenses used is important.
3. That the insights or acquired knowledge or experience of the photographer is important. But also having an eye for the subject that someone wants to capture.
4. The distinction between the pro and hobby photographer also remains important. It is the difference in the money to be spent from someone's wallet or the company. The difference will always remain between the pro and amateur.
5. If a comparison were to be made, it could only be with unedited originals. With edited photos, the photographer's taste also comes into play and the possible differences can no longer be determined.
6. The most important thing remains the man or woman behind the camera who makes the choice of the composition and in post-processing
makes the photo better or worse. There is no arguing about taste, everyone has their own preferences.
But the pleasure of creating remains the most important thing and the relaxation that comes from it.