It’s true: photography has always been furthered by technology.
What I mean is that, as technology has advanced (first during the film era, and now digital), photographers have increasingly been provided with the tools to more easily record/convey their vision.
However, I’m not so sure that the last 5 years have given us anything along the same vein.
5 thoughts on “Photography has always been furthered by technology, but…”
Homo sapiens advances with technology, as well as myths and stories that Yuval describes.
When 99% of human don’t bother to the difference between the bokeh of iPhone Xs and a summilux, the margin of technology narrows and Stories comes to play. What’s Stories then? It sometimes implies creativity and the importance of your works to you, people around you or this era.
Nicely said, Peter.
I sense cameras are not simply designed and functional any more, they’ve become commodities used as a conduit to drive and secure better corporate margins that’s underscored by a particular income generating behaviour mindset and policy – which has nothing to do with the actual practice of photography using a camera …
I suppose it depends on what the specialization is. Some would say that the A9 is the first camera in a long time that has actually given sports photographers something to rejoice.
Have the photos gotten better? Maybe not. But they have gotten easier to take. Actually, ordinary PDAF sometimes causes more problems than manual focusing did. But face detection AF actually does make things easier, as long as there is a face to detect.
On the domestic front, the iPhone XS’s camera is significantly better than the X’s, and that is only a year old. You can now seriously consider the XS as a professional tool. It’s not as compromised as you would think. That allows professionals access to images that they would not otherwise be able to take – at least in theory. It took 11 years to give us a good phone camera, but we have one. But oh boy is it expensive!
I can tell you that a lot of people don’t like it when the old revolution (DSLR) gets overtaken and eliminated by a new one (mirrorless). They won’t like the next one, either, when photo and video become the same thing. “Who needs a camera that can shoot 50fps non-stop?” Well, there’s a thing called 35mm…
What fascinates me is that the most recent Mirrorless bodies are growing to nearly the size of a compact/entry level SLR, and in some cases may actually be bigger. SLR’s are falling out of favor, but for questionable benefit. I am thrilled by all of the innovation, but truth be told, I have the tools that work for me (M system, primarily). I certainly would be tempted to try an M lens on a L mount body, but from prior experience ,I always prefer M lenses on my M body….and the L mount lenses (SL lenses for the moment) are HUGE….not to my liking, as the size proposition is entirely defeated. Still, it’s good to see Leica innovating and collaborating…
I think the benefit is obvious – size aside, mirrorless bodies are much more flexible than SLR bodies in terms of lens selection. Then there is the silent shutter which is becoming more popular – rightly so. And then there is eye and face detect AF.
As for the SL lenses, I think they’re large because they’re designed to cover a larger sensor. Just a hunch. And while the camera is CDAF only, the accuracy is greater than on DSLRs.