One day a couple of weeks ago, I heard a bunch of banging noises. At first, I wasn’t sure what the noise was, but then I realized: window washing day! Thankfully, I had the D7000 and an autofocus lens, and some minutes that I could afford to pause and shoot a bit. Continue reading “he does do windows”
In case you missed it, here are all the pictures from this last week’s digital/film, point-and-shoot/slr, compare/contrast fest.
If you see something I missed in the last posts, please let me know. I don’t have much more to say about any of it, and it’s Saturday anyway, so get off the computer, go outside, and shoot!
This is, admittedly, sort of a random, grab-bag of leftovers.
Let’s look at them in order of sensor size.
Once again, digital wins in terms of contrast, color and saturation; film wins in terms of soul.
And, again, they’re all pictures, and all have some sort of purpose. It’s probably more preference than anything.
I honestly can’t say which I like best… I like the picture from the C-5050; I like the glossiness from the D7000, largely because it was my first ‘proper’ camera; I like the character in the film.
All in all, I’m glad I did this. The results are much as I expected.
It’ll be interesting to go out with one lens, two bodies, and a body cap, set the D7000 at the same ISO as whatever film is in the FG, and then shoot the same pictures, more or less, from more or less the same angle… Maybe a day with the Zomb-E… or maybe 6 shots with 6 lenses, or 12 shots with 3 lenses… something like that.
But that’ll have to wait awhile. Work and life is rather busy just now, Alhamdulillah.
Bokeh really is all about the size of the recording medium.
Again, it’s contrast, saturation, sharpness vs raw physicality. But this time, the difference between the 1.5 crop and the ‘full frame’ is obvious… InshaAllah one day I’ll get my hands on a medium format or 4×5 (or 8×10…) and see what real bokeh looks like.
So these pictures are more or less different: one is in a greenhouse on a bright, sunny day; the other is at a roadside picnic spot on a cloudy day.
But there’s something similar, maybe, compositionally anyway.
Again, the differences come down to saturation, contrast, sharpness. But there’s also grain & bokeh.
The grain off the Lomography Color 400 film, and the bokeh off that (relatively) big slab of film just whollop the 1.5 crop CMOS in the D7000. The film photograph is physicial, it has a tactility in and of itself that is quite simply missing from the digital picture.
But the digital wins in terms of color, saturation, sharpness, and contrast, if that’s what you’re into.
And from time to time, that’s precisely something to be into; and so is the physicality in the film.
Again, no winners or losers, just pictures.
Continuing on with the compare/contrast event, here are some examples of looking through things, looking past things, with two small, point-and-shoot-type cameras and two slr-type cameras: the Lomo LC-A, Olympus C-5050, Nikon D7000 and Nikon FG.
This isn’t quite as straightforward a comparison as yesterday’s, and it’s more about lens characteristics than anything else.
But one thing is clear: at this level, the differences due to recording medium (2x 24x36mm film; one 1/1.8″ CCD sensor; one 16x24mm CMOS sensor) are less readily apparent than I imagined they might be, but still fairly clear, methinks.
Color, contrast, saturation are similar: the LC-A falls a bit short, but that’s probably due to film choice or lens characteristics.
Blur is probably best in the FG, but the others are no slouch. Granted, its a bit busy in the digital shots, but that’s due to framing and composition more than anything else.
Once again, it appears as if it’s about pictures, rather than about cameras.
Shocker, I know.