I went to The Photography Show at the NEC, near Birmingham, yesterday.
I was advised to attend either on Monday or Tuesday, as those two days were set aside for seminars and demos etc, for the benefit of trade visitors. Nevertheless, it was heaving with all manner of people – whose common interest was photography. So regardless of whether they were, or were not trade visitors, their participation demonstrated the immense following which photography generates amongst the general public.
I attended specifically because I wanted to see the new generation of lightweight full-frame cameras coming onto the market for the professional as well as the dedicated consumer. If you’re not a pro tog you have to be a dedicated consumer nowadays, as a body alone will set you back in the region of £2500. Then there are the lenses …….
Years ago, in the days of the Nikon F5 pro film camera, and its Canon contemporary, it was the norm for the price tag, to the newspaper groups, depending upon how many units they were purchasing at any one time, to be £4-5000 each. And dedicated consumers, in that respect, were a species of the future. How the price was justified is open to speculation. And one answer of course is that the content of the body was, in electronic wizardry terms, pretty well cutting edge stuff.
Now, when you buy a camera body, what you are in fact purchasing, is a light receptive and processing computer, with the facility, at the front, upon which to attach a lens.
And this becomes obvious when you pick up a camera on a stand, take a shot and view the image on the rear screen. There is no requirement upon you to have any expertise whatsoever other than the simple motor skills ability to point the lens in the right direction and press the shutter button to produce an image that Ansell Adams would have sold his soul for.
But what is blindingly apparent is the weight of the body unit. I did like the Samsung offerings. They appeared to be well made. They were certainly light. They produced pin sharp shots, with great clarity and definition.
The trouble is that I’m set up for Nikon. In terms of both bodies and numerous lenses.
The Samsung is unquestionably featherlight. In fact, so light that with anything other than a 50mm f1.8 prime lens on, the most likely shot that you would take, would be of your feet.
So I had a look at the Df ~ the computerized retro-body-styled offering from Nikon. It was reliably, and satisfyingly, immediately identifiable as a Nikon. I felt at home with it.
Only the aperture ring was slightly different. Oh, and the ISO and shutter speeds settings which have reverted to top of the camera position, as knobs. And no top screen.
But otherwise ………
The downside was that, in my opinion, when viewing the rear screen, the shot taken was nothing like as good as the ones which I took of my feet.
Oh well. Back to the drawing board. Perhaps I’ll just stick to my F5, FE, D300 & D3.
[for which I have all the lenses I could ever possibly need]
And, my bank account will maintain a sense of perfect equilibrium.