# What kind of photographer are you?



## monkeyboy (Aug 2, 2011)

I've come up with several different categories that photographers fall into. Which one are you? 

1) The non-photographer (AKA normal person). This person will go to a shop and buy a cheap compact camera without previous internet research. They will use it on birthdays weddings and holidays etc. and be happy with it. They will keep it for a long time or until it breaks.

2) The gear hound. Usually male. This person will will only consider buying a camera if it contains phrases such as "1Ds" or "D3". As for lenses, the bigger the better and the more the merrier. This sad individual will spend hours upon end trawling the internet for rumors of newer and better equipment. Phrases such as "mark II" or "Aspherical element" cause particular excitement. Spends more time looking at cameras on the internet than actually taking pictures. Favourite hobbies include lens cleaning.

3) The girly girl. Usually female (but not always). Buys a camera based on how cute and pink it looks. Matching nail polish and lipstick is a bonus. Takes pictures of all her hot friends out clubbing and posts them on Facebook to make everyone else jealous.

4) The artist. This person would not be caught dead with a something as crude and vulgar as a DSLR as this would destroy "the moment". Likes retro styled cameras, prime lenses and probably still uses film. Shoots a lot of B&W and IR. Pictures usually have some sort of rebellious or controversial theme.

5) The purist. Usually male. Owns only one lens, usually a 50mm f1.8 (or equiv) but must be a prime. Must be manual focus. Again, probably still uses film. Spends more time doing yoga or tai chi than actually taking pictures. Owns a light meter for no apparent reason.

6) The Leica owner. Keeps camera locked in a glass case away from direct sunlight. The glass cabinet must be UV filtering to avoid fading and perishing of rubber parts. Keeps silica gel desiccant in cabinet and regularly dries it out in the oven. Probably has no friends.



EDIT: No need to perfectly fit a description to vote, just whichever fits your personality type the closest. e.g. you may be an artist and have a DSLR or a purist but own 2 lenses.


----------



## Obijuan Kenobe (Aug 2, 2011)

(Hey, where did your thread go?)

I don't find myself in your list. My favorite camera of the last 10 years was a point and shoot Canon. It had time lapse video. Nothing captures a landscape scene like time lapse. Could never replace it.

I now have a point and shoot S95 from Canon. I think as I am composing a photo and rarely take pictures of posing folks. Often, I am disappointed I don't have my old SLR for the fine control or depth of field. However, for the most part, I love that I can take a pretty high quality photo of anything I see, without having to lug around a separate bag. 

I love to make photographs. I love the fact that I can see a shot right after making it (although the intense anticipation and joy of opening unseen prints has been lost). I love that I can carry a decent camera in my shirt pocket. I take at least a picture a day. I think phone cameras in general are rubbish, and are far from a substitute for even a decent point and shoot in your pocket.

I don't upgrade unless there is a reason. I guess I might like more optical zoom, but I don't miss it that often. 

I am starting to think that more megapixels is a scam. I made great photos with my last camera that was only 3mP. 

obi


----------



## monkeyboy (Aug 2, 2011)

Hello obijuan, from your post, I'd probably put you down as "the artist" even though it doesn't really fit my description. Time lapse video is definitely something an artist would do as it's sort of out of the ordinary. Also that you appreciate of DoF and high quality.


----------



## will (Aug 2, 2011)

You really need more choices -

I have been taking pictures for a lot of years, I still do, on very rare ocasions, process and print B&W film. Yes, I still have a B&W enlarger and all the trays. I still have about 20 rolls of 35mm film in my freezer, plus a few 120 rolls. I still have and use, rarely, an old TLR camera. some of my best shots were taken with this camera. Everything is manual on it. 

I have a modest collect of OLD Kodak Autographic cameras, Plus a bunch of 35mm rangefinder cameras.

Most of what I use now is digital. I have a DSLR with a few lenses. And a P&S waterproof camera. great for the beach and I use it in the water. 

Added to all that - a couple of tripods, and a few camera bags to store everything.

I take a lot of pictures, digital is great for that. Just download them to a PC, do some basic editing and you are good to go. 

I just did a wedding. I take lots of pictures of kids, scenes, flowers 

I also have been scanning all my negatives and prints to my PC. That is a big, time consuming job. I sit with the scanner and I do this while I watch TV.. I made copies of all the pictures for my kids on DVDs


----------



## nfetterly (Aug 2, 2011)

Closest I am is gear hound - but do a fair amount of traveling for work so use cameras then. Not as deep into it as in the past, but I can see myself edging back in again - less as a gear hound and more as a user.


----------



## shao.fu.tzer (Aug 2, 2011)

I suck! I have a good artistic eye but no patience and a Canon Elph SD1000 that you need hands as steady as a rock to get anything decent. I need to invest in a better camera!


----------



## will (Aug 2, 2011)

shao.fu.tzer said:


> ...
> 
> I need to invest in a better camera!



There are so many good choices for cameras now. All the newer ones take a lot of guess work out of taking the picture.


----------



## Echo63 (Aug 2, 2011)

The category I fit in best is gear hound.
It's not quite true though (looks in gear room to see 4x 1d bodies)
I'm a working photojournalist, and motorsport photographer.
Work supplies me with 2x 1d bodies, and an assortment of lenses (16-35, 24-70, 70-200 and shared "big guns")
I also have my own cameras for when I'm not at work.

I bought my Mk2n and recently a Mk4 as they suit what I do, have excellent AF, weather sealing (very important for motorsport events during winter) and produce amazing files, providing I do my bit right)
I bought my Mk2n before I started at the paper, but was happy to see they used Canon too, which means I can easily switch between cameras and all the buttons etc are in the same spot, and I can use them instinctively rather than hunt for the right button.

If I had too I'm sure I could do my job with a 350d, or the nikon equivalent, but the gear I use makes my job easier.

I did recently buy a Fuji X100 too and I am using it to have "fun" with my photography, the big SLR is just to big and heavy to carry around all the time, then little Fuji is almost pocket size, has a big sensor, manual controls and a nice sharp fixed lens (equivalent to 35mm f2 - it's a 23mm f2 on an APS - C sensor)
Some of my favorite photos recently have come out of it, and some of those photos only exist because I actually had a camera with me, and didn't need to go and get the 1D


----------



## monkeyboy (Aug 3, 2011)

@will I guess I should have had an "other" category. Kind of hard to categorize you but I'd say that the B&W processing and optical enlargements puts you in the artist/purist category even though you don't really do it anymore. Probably leaning more towards artist.

@shao, the gear hound in you wants to buy a top of the range tripod!

@Echo63, professional press/sports photographers are notorious gear hounds! Although they do actually make use of their equipment. In this case, the top-of-the-range gear is justified as it could make the difference between getting the picture and not. The extra cost would tend to pay for itself.

I put myself down as gear hound although I've recently sold off all my high end Nikon stuff and I'm currently cameraless (other than a few old film bodies and my phone). I'm thinking of getting one of these new fangled EVIL/mirrorless camera's. There's supposed to be a lot of new stuff coming out soon with Nikon and Sony making some big announcements on 24-25th Aug. These are my thoughts so far.

-Olympus E-P3 with panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4
-(rumoured) Sony NEX 7 with Zeiss 24mm f1.8
-Fuji X100
-Whatever replaces the Leica X1 (supposed to be a new Leica EVIL system coming late 2012 - early 2013 but I can't wait that long) 
-Upcoming Nikon EVIL


----------



## will (Aug 3, 2011)

monkeyboy said:


> I'm thinking of getting one of these new fangled EVIL/mirrorless camera's.


 
I have an older Kodak digital camera DX7590. This looks like a DSLR, but, no interchangrable lenses. It has the screen on the back and an electronic viewfinder. Nothing beats an optical viewfinder for seeing what you are about to take a picture of. The electronic viewfinder on the Kodak is good, but nearly as bright as an optical unit.


----------



## Echo63 (Aug 3, 2011)

monkeyboy said:


> @Echo63, professional press/sports photographers are notorious gear hounds! Although they do actually make use of their equipment. In this case, the top-of-the-range gear is justified as it could make the difference between getting the picture and not. The extra cost would tend to pay for itself.
> 
> I put myself down as gear hound although I've recently sold off all my high end Nikon stuff and I'm currently cameraless (other than a few old film bodies and my phone). I'm thinking of getting one of these new fangled EVIL/mirrorless camera's. There's supposed to be a lot of new stuff coming out soon with Nikon and Sony making some big announcements on 24-25th Aug. These are my thoughts so far.
> 
> ...


 
thinking about it now, I do fall into the gear hound category
My list of photo gear to buy this year is a bit long (new laptop, 2x einstein640 lights and vagabond mini battery packs, pocket wizard MC2 recievers for the einsteins, 16-35 for the wife)
And I would like a Leica M9 as a "fun Camera" but can't justify the cost, especially for something that only goes to 2500 Iso - I love the full frame sensor, sharp fast glass, small size and focusing system that works when it is very dark, but I don't like the price, or the top iso.

Monkey boy, if you have used an SLR with a real viewfinder you will hate the new EVIL cameras.
I cannot stand a camera I have to hold at arms length (ep2 etc unless you shell out the extra for the viewfinder)
There is a Ricoh with interchangeable lenses and a very very good viewfinder available as an accessory, kind of an odd camera though, the lens/sensor module detches from the screen/battery/memory module (and there will be other modules available too, like a projector, printer, and extension cables to allow you to hold the sensor/lens module separate from the body.

The X100 is a interesting camera, it's a bit funny with a few things, the focus-by-wire is a pain (lots of dial turning for a bit of movement across the focus range) but the AF is pretty good compared to some point and shoots.
The hybrid viewfinder is cool, the frame lines move in the optical viewfinder (correcting for parallax) the digital viewfinder isn't great during the day, but is brighter in the dark, and doesn't suffer parallax, especially for macro stuff (it also shows you what's in focus, something that isn't always obvious in the optical VF)

Hopefully Fuji consider the X100 a win, and build something even better, Preferably keeping the sensor, fitting a proper rangefinder (but keeping the hybrid viewfinder for the shooting info and moving frame lines) and putting an M mount on the front of it.
Price it reasonably and it should sell really well 
Fuji do have experience building good solid film rangefinders, remember the Hasselblad XPan ? - it was made by Fuji


----------



## will (Aug 3, 2011)

Echo63 said:


> Monkey boy, if you have used an SLR with a real viewfinder you will hate the new EVIL cameras.
> I cannot stand a camera I have to hold at arms length



Well said +1


----------



## monkeyboy (Aug 4, 2011)

I found that as my budget increased as I got older, so did the size and weight of my camera. My last camera was a Nikon D3 and I found that I wasn't getting much use out of it simply because it's just too big and heavy to carry around all the time.

I don't want my next camera to be another DSLR. (unless the specs of the upcoming Nikon D800/D4 are too good to resist).


----------



## Echo63 (Aug 4, 2011)

monkeyboy said:


> I found that as my budget increased as I got older, so did the size and weight of my camera. My last camera was a Nikon D3 and I found that I wasn't getting much use out of it simply because it's just too big and heavy to carry around all the time.
> 
> I don't want my next camera to be another DSLR. (unless the specs of the upcoming Nikon D800/D4 are too good to resist).


 
They will be hard to resist - and even if they aren't, your a gearhead like the rest of us 

I do understand what you mean though, I feel the same way, and is the reason I bought the X100.
But honestly, if I was stuck with just the digital viewfinder on it, I wouldnt have bought it.
I am fairly certain you will want the instant view and clarity that can only come from an optical viewfinder


----------



## csshih (Aug 4, 2011)

gearhead? what. nope, not at all..







Craig


----------



## nbp (Aug 5, 2011)

That's almost exactly how I have always pictured you Craig.


----------



## Cogitria (Aug 5, 2011)

I belong to #1, I just like record what I am interested


----------



## Echo63 (Aug 6, 2011)

csshih said:


> gearhead? what. nope, not at all..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ok that proves I'm a gear head.
I can tell it's a 70-200 f4 with 2x TC on what appears to be a XXD body


----------



## Max_Power (Aug 6, 2011)

csshih said:


> gearhead? what. nope, not at all..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Uh oh, looks like you are well on your way to another expensive and addictive hobby!


----------



## monkeyboy (Aug 6, 2011)

Echo63 said:


> Ok that proves I'm a gear head.
> I can tell it's a 70-200 f4 with...


 
AHA! But can you tell if it's the newer IS version or not?


----------



## Burgess (Aug 7, 2011)

That is NOT the IS version !


Just the *wonderful* (plain) non-IS version.


Have one of these beauties myself, and I absolutely LOVE this lens !


:thumbsup:


----------



## Echo63 (Aug 9, 2011)

monkeyboy said:


> AHA! But can you tell if it's the newer IS version or not?


 
Actually I can't, there isn't enough resolution to count the switches.
I'm guessing it's the Non IS version though (going by what I can see)


----------



## csshih (Aug 9, 2011)

you guys are great  (non IS, yep)
...except it's a 7D body.

I win!

Craig


----------



## Echo63 (Aug 9, 2011)

csshih said:


> you guys are great  (non IS, yep)
> ...except it's a 7D body.
> 
> I win!
> ...


I knew it wasn't a 1d or xxxd body 
The 5d and 7d look close enough to the XXD range to be very hard to pick (the strap is normally the giveaway)


----------



## EV_007 (Sep 5, 2011)

I'm between number one and two. Not quite a photographer, but not rich enough to have top shelf gear. I'd like to be both someday. LOL


----------



## Terai (Sep 24, 2011)

Although it may sound wierd, I'm probably a mix between a 2 and a 5. I enjoy looking at other expensive gear but only has a Nikon F2AS with the only Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 AI. Yes, I still shoot film ><


----------



## Nyx (Nov 20, 2011)

Just joined the forum as I’m starting to do night photography and need to learn all about lighting. Lance Keimig’s approach in his book ‘Night Photography’ is the closest to what I want to do. Coastal and rural scenes, and anything different. I just love the idea of playing with darkness and light.

I think I’m a ‘gear hound’ meets ‘artist’. I’ve been an ‘artist’ (whatever that means) for years, but now love DSLR, though I only buy what’s best for my needs, and haven’t been able to stop doing/learning about/ reading about/ talking about and dreaming about photography since I started a couple of years ago. I used to have other interests and other loves. Now it’s just me and my gear out there in the most people-free places I can find. 

I’m female, retired early, and finally free to please only myself and spend every waking hour doing something photography-related. I have no goal except to share what I do with friends or give it away. Making money for anything other than food, bills and rent has always complicated life too much, so I’ve never bothered. Prefer a simple life. True amateur. Do things purely for love 

It’s been good to see such wonderful night photography on the forum. I need to learn those skills very badly. This morning’s first attempts at taking static star photos was less than successful. How can I focus on the dratted things if I can’t see them? . Still, that’s not for this forum. Just needed to vent


----------



## JacobJones (Nov 20, 2011)

Not all leica owners are like that, my photography teacher was loaded, he owned several vintage leicas and let students borrow them.

Think I'm number one, my cheap canon powershot takes good enough images for me so I'll stick with it. To be honest I'm quite impressed with it, I was bought up on extremely cheap film cameras that were barely a step up from disposables, anythings an improvement over that.


----------



## tel0004 (Nov 20, 2011)

The only camera I own is my 5 mp camera on my cell phone. The pictures are good enough, so I have no reason to use anything else. Why carry a camera when I have a cell phone on me.


----------



## EV_007 (Nov 21, 2011)

Night photography is challenging. Lots of fun though. For the stars, try to set your camera on manual focus if it has it and set to infinity. Or pre-focus on a far away streetlamp then recompose to the sky and shoot if possible.


----------



## will (Nov 21, 2011)

EV_007 said:


> Night photography is challenging. Lots of fun though. For the stars, try to set your camera on manual focus if it has it and set to infinity. Or pre-focus on a far away streetlamp then recompose to the sky and shoot if possible.



If you are using a digital camera, check to see if there is a setting for 'Long Exposure'. This will reduce that amount of noise in the resulting picture.


----------



## Nyx (Nov 22, 2011)

EV_007 said:


> Night photography is challenging. Lots of fun though. For the stars, try to set your camera on manual focus if it has it and set to infinity. Or pre-focus on a far away streetlamp then recompose to the sky and shoot if possible.



I like a challenge and am learning fast, and you're right about it being fun, but unless there's a good moon it's inky-black around here so I need a stronger light source to get me to locations safely. But nothing like being out there the first time, seeing a great potential shot, and looking down that viewfinder.....at nothing at all 

Auto focus and me never agree on things, to I don't use it. I work manually for everything but WB as I shoot RAW, and am finally getting comfortable with all the buttons, but focusing at night really is the hardest thing for me right now.

We're a bit short on streetlamps, though I can sometimes see distant lights from a neighbouring country. However, I will use your technique the next time I'm out and use lighthouse or buoy lights for the same purpose. I'll let you know how it goes in a new thread 

Thank you for your advice. Very much appreciated. Really enjoyed looking a your 'Beamshots' thread too


----------



## Nyx (Nov 22, 2011)

will said:


> If you are using a digital camera, check to see if there is a setting for 'Long Exposure'. This will reduce that amount of noise in the resulting picture.



I've got a 5D2 (bank loan will be paid off in 2017, seriously ). A friend recently advised me to turn on the 'noise reduction for long exposure' setting and it's making a big difference. I get a bit impatient waiting for the 'busy' sign to go and let me take another shot, but that's the only drawback. 

Thanks for the good advice. I think it's a setting that most beginners, like myself, don't even think about enabling, and I had the camera a year before it was pointed out to me by someone who saw lots of noise on one of my ND filter daytime shots.


----------



## PaulSR (Nov 23, 2011)

EV_007 said:


> Night photography is challenging. Lots of fun though. For the stars, try to set your camera on manual focus if it has it and set to infinity. Or pre-focus on a far away streetlamp then recompose to the sky and shoot if possible.



You can use the moon to focus on as well, usually works well. Setting the camera to infinity is not always the best thing to do as it is NOT perfect.


----------



## PaulSR (Nov 23, 2011)

Nyx said:


> I've got a 5D2 (bank loan will be paid off in 2017, seriously ). A friend recently advised me to turn on the 'noise reduction for long exposure' setting and it's making a big difference. I get a bit impatient waiting for the 'busy' sign to go and let me take another shot, but that's the only drawback.
> 
> Thanks for the good advice. I think it's a setting that most beginners, like myself, don't even think about enabling, and I had the camera a year before it was pointed out to me by someone who saw lots of noise on one of my ND filter daytime shots.



When you have that setting turned on, the camera takes a DARK frame that is just as long as the long exposure shot. So if you took a shot that was 2 minutes, the busy light will be on for 2 minutes exposing the dark frame. Then the camera removes anything that the dark frame has on it.


----------



## Nyx (Nov 23, 2011)

PaulSR said:


> You can use the moon to focus on as well, usually works well. Setting the camera to infinity is not always the best thing to do as it is NOT perfect.



Thanks for the tip. I've just started shooting the moon as well, and don't have a lot of trouble focusing on that, so I'll try it out next time the moon, the stars, and me are all out together


----------



## Nyx (Nov 23, 2011)

PaulSR said:


> When you have that setting turned on, the camera takes a DARK frame that is just as long as the long exposure shot. So if you took a shot that was 2 minutes, the busy light will be on for 2 minutes exposing the dark frame. Then the camera removes anything that the dark frame has on it.



I know exactly what it's doing, and I'm very grateful to it - wouldn't want it to rush a good job . I just get fed up standing around in the dark waiting for it to finish, especially if I've just finished a thirty minute exposure. I'm not the meditative type so I'm working on trying to find something to do to keep me occupied and help the time pass...

I've heard that once I get more skilled I won't have to rely on in-camera noise reduction for long exposures. But that's all in the future.


----------



## PaulSR (Nov 23, 2011)

Nyx said:


> I know exactly what it's doing, and I'm very grateful to it - wouldn't want it to rush a good job . I just get fed up standing around in the dark waiting for it to finish, especially if I've just finished a thirty minute exposure. I'm not the meditative type so I'm working on trying to find something to do to keep me occupied and help the time pass...
> 
> I've heard that once I get more skilled I won't have to rely on in-camera noise reduction for long exposures. But that's all in the future.



I have the same camera that you have and I find that I don't need the noise reduction. The main thing you "may" have to deal with is hot pixels, but, they are easy to get rid of with photoshop. H have several night panoramas that turned out really great, taken from Glacier Point in Yosemite. Took them at night and it was cold, which helps with the hot pixels.

You can shoot a dark frame at a later date (taken in the same conditions) and use that in photoshop to remove the hot pixels as well. 

You should look into "painting with light" as well, it's really fun and will go well with flashlights.


----------



## fonaryk (Nov 23, 2011)

I have a Canon 7D,G9 and a Pentax Spotmatic. Not a gear head because one cannot keep up these days. Camera's are "old news" shortly after being launched.

I carry a beat up, 18 year old SLIK U 212,heavy as an anvil,tripod, some old but good glass and my camera bag has more duct tape than nylon showing.

Maybe a mix of purist and artist? Oh yeah, an Iphone 4 with the Hipstamatic App.. Lottsa fun.


----------



## Erich1B (Nov 23, 2011)

Nyx said:


> I've heard that once I get more skilled I won't have to rely on in-camera noise reduction for long exposures.



That's not an accurate assumption. With long exposures, your dealing with "Dark Current Noise"

Dark current noise - http://www.photonics.com/Article.aspx?AID=44298

Heat Generated by the Sensor
The photons collected by the photosites on the sensor are converted to electrons.
The sensor generates heat.
The heat produces anomalous electrons.
The camera converts them into image data along with the electrons created by photons.
This noise is called dark noise or dark current noise.

Long Exposures - the heat produced by a sensor creates dark noise. The longer the exposure, the more heat is produced, creating more dark noise.


----------



## precisionworks (Nov 24, 2011)

In the pre digital 1970's I shot lots of 1:1 macro shots, usually on Kodachrome 64. Now the lens is a Canon 100mm macro on a Canon Rebel XSi, normally shooting at ISO200. The majority of my shots run around 1 second at F/11 so noise isn't a problem. Even longer exposures like 76 seconds for trit vials come out with no noticeable noise. Really long exposures are where the issues crop up. 

Thank goodness for PhotoShop


----------



## will (Nov 25, 2011)

Erich1B said:


> Long Exposures - the heat produced by a sensor creates dark noise. The longer the exposure, the more heat is produced, creating more dark noise.



I took a bunch of pictures of a lightning storm a few years back. I wanted to capture the lightning bolt with my digital camera. ( this was before I realized the was a long exposure setting on the camera ) The setup was simple, keep the shutter open for around 2 - 3 minutes. If there was a lightning bolt, start a new frame. There was a certain amount of ambient light and the sky, instead of being completely black had a gray speckled look to it.


----------



## monkeyboy (Nov 25, 2011)

Can we please try to keep the thread on topic? 

The thread is about photographer stereotypes and not photography technique.


----------



## siginu (Nov 25, 2011)

Wanna-be gear hound (that's how I voted anyway) on a P&S budget, by body is a little older and I have lens envy...


----------



## bayboy (Dec 5, 2011)

I guess I would have to say artist but I do have DSLRs. I have a DSLR that I modified to only take IR photos. I shoot some 120 film. My big thing is macro photography (I like bugs).


----------



## yurbo (Dec 7, 2011)

me and my camera are not in the list no dslr, nor retro also i have enough knowledge. i love my canon S90. It is compact you can carry in your pocket, also you can adjust parameters as you want.


----------



## RBR (Dec 14, 2011)

.....


----------



## subwoofer (Dec 14, 2011)

I suppose I might be a combination of Artist and Purist, though none of the stereotypes actually have a photographer who really focuses on photography rather than the equipment.

Considering I chose my last camera based on its fully manual capability (the Lumix LX5) so I could take photographs of torches and their beams could introduce another category of 'Flashaholic Photographer'.


----------



## Greta (Dec 28, 2011)

Ok... I read through the choices and I honestly can't say I fit any of the descriptions. Yes, my camera is pink... and yes, that is why I bought it. *BUT!!!*... it's a pink Sony NEX-C3... and I wouldn't be caught DEAD posting pics of "hot friends" on Facebook unless they are my derby girls... and the only "clubbing" they are doing is to each other....  My nail polish is usually black and I wear lip-gloss not lip-stick. I *LOVE* B&W photography... but leave the IR to my husband (he particularly enjoys taking pictures of my hair so he can show me how white it is under the color I get put on it every 4 weeks :ironic: ). My FB albums have such titles as "Amateur B&W", "Flora", "Fawna", "Sunrises, Sunsets, Skies, Water", "Kayaking", "Road Trips", and "The Babies". I'm a purist in that I do not believe in "shopping" my photos with the exception of cropping, straightening, and adjusting shadows or highlights just a tad. My theory is that you either get the shot or your don't. Most photos that I post in my Facebook albums are straight off the camera with no editing. I had only one lens up until a few days ago... my wonderful husband bought me a 55-210mm, f4.5-6.3 for Christmas and it is the best gift EVER! :santa: 

So... what am I? :shrug:


----------



## jgbedford (Dec 29, 2011)

Hard core Canon user here.

7D body, 70-200, 28-70 and hopefully the new Canon 100 IS macro. 580 exII flash and a whack of filters.

On the lookout for a carbon tripod and best rechargeable batteries for my flash.

Cheers!


JB


----------



## monkeyboy (Jan 1, 2012)

Greta said:


> Ok... I read through the choices and I honestly can't say I fit any of the descriptions. Yes, my camera is pink... and yes, that is why I bought it. *BUT!!!*... it's a pink Sony NEX-C3... and I wouldn't be caught DEAD posting pics of "hot friends" on Facebook unless they are my derby girls... and the only "clubbing" they are doing is to each other....  My nail polish is usually black and I wear lip-gloss not lip-stick. I *LOVE* B&W photography... but leave the IR to my husband (he particularly enjoys taking pictures of my hair so he can show me how white it is under the color I get put on it every 4 weeks :ironic: ). My FB albums have such titles as "Amateur B&W", "Flora", "Fawna", "Sunrises, Sunsets, Skies, Water", "Kayaking", "Road Trips", and "The Babies". I'm a purist in that I do not believe in "shopping" my photos with the exception of cropping, straightening, and adjusting shadows or highlights just a tad. My theory is that you either get the shot or your don't. Most photos that I post in my Facebook albums are straight off the camera with no editing. I had only one lens up until a few days ago... my wonderful husband bought me a 55-210mm, f4.5-6.3 for Christmas and it is the best gift EVER! :santa:
> 
> So... what am I? :shrug:




Hmm.. difficult to place you
The NEX-C3 is actually has quite a good image sensor, comparable to a decent APS-C DSLR (despite being pink) so I think this rules out "girly girl". Also, girly girls (and girly boys) would not understand the concept of interchangeable lenses. I think B&W and Skies (I'm guessing cloud formations) would place you in the artist category. Shooting IR with a digital camera requires the removal of the IR cut filter so you would need a separate camera for shooting IR.

The NEX system has 2 high quality primes coming out soon which would be ideal for the artist/purist type; the 50mm f1.8 OSS and the Zeiss 24mm f1.8.


----------



## monkeyboy (Jan 1, 2012)

jgbedford said:


> On the lookout for a carbon tripod and best rechargeable batteries for my flash.
> JB



Eneloops are definitely the way to go. They are ideal for flash guns as they will hold their charge for long periods of time ensuring that your flash is always ready to go. Make sure to use a decent charger and don't let them run down too low. 
For ultimate capacity, go for the powerex 2700's. 

I use energizer lithiums (non-rechargeable) as I don't use the flash that much. The battery life is surprisingly good.


----------



## precisionworks (Jan 1, 2012)

> hopefully the new Canon 100 IS macro


The 100 Canon macro is a killer sharp lens. Mine is non-IS but never gets used without a tripod (and a lens plate) and the body is always set for mirror lock up.

Like Greta, I didn't fall into any of the available categories. Most images are shot around 90% of desired size so there's room for just a little cropping, and apertures from f/16-f/22 see the most use. Haven't used a flash for years & haven't much missed it.

Many of my images show small details like the 1.5x5mm trit in the photo below:


----------



## SemiMan (Jan 1, 2012)

_*[Crabby and discourteous post removed - DM51]
*_


----------



## monkeyboy (Jan 2, 2012)

Who invited him?


----------



## csshih (Jan 2, 2012)

wasn't me!


----------



## DM51 (Jan 2, 2012)

I just uninvited him.


----------



## mvyrmnd (Jan 2, 2012)

You forgot an option: Smartphone photographer. You use your iPhone or Android to take photos, 99% of which get uploaded to some sort of social media (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter). You use the myriad of photography apps to muck about with your shots; some of which turn out great, most of which are rubbish.

That'd be me


----------



## Halfpint (May 22, 2012)

Hmmmmmm... I dunno... I guess I'd be a `Gear Hound'?

I got my start back in the late '50s when my father passed on an old KODAK 35mm viewfinder. Then in the '60s I stumbled across the PENTAX Spotmatic w/42mm threaded lenses. After many years of dealing with threaded lenses I decided that maybe it was time to get a bit more `modern' and picked up a K1000 with the bayonet mount lenses. After getting used those it was onward and upward to an MX `system' eventually culminating with an LX `system'. I continued using both my MXs & LXs whilst dabbling with assorted Sony `Digitals', and after my father's `passing', a MINOX IIIs `system' (Pretty much complete with even the enlarger and tanks.).

Recently I have acquired a PENTAX Kr and a pair of K5s along with a small selection of the new `auto' lenses. One of the reasons, besides the disappearance of good old KODACHROME, I went and bought the new PENTAXes was that, with only a very few exceptions, I can still use pretty much all of my lenses I'd acquired for my film cameras. (For those who may wonder about my getting the Kr and then the K5s... I managed to score the Kr as a 2 lens `package' for almost half the cost of the body alone from a local shop that was basically wanting to get it out of their inventory. I'd already pretty much settled upon the K5s but figured that the Kr would be a good `first real camera' for my teenaged son to learn with. [No! I *didn't* let him `play' with my MXs & LXs! And, yes, I am probably a `mean old codger' for doing so! Even today *those* are still `my babies'.])

I dabble in landscapes, the occasional `portraits', of course `family' pictures, and assorted `macro' photographs. The most recent things I've been doing have been cataloging my wife's and I's antique glass and assorted coin collections. Of the two the glass photography has been the most interesting to do in that my wife collects Royale Ruby and Cobalt glass and I generally collect clear glass, mainly `salts'. I am still contemplating doing both pictures and beamshots of my flashlight collection but, haven't managed to "Get A Round Tuit".


----------



## Bevis (Jul 18, 2012)

I am like a girly girl photographer. I love to capture pics but i dont have a good professional camera.


----------



## Vinniec5 (Jul 30, 2012)

I'm a gear hound/artist if I had to choose. I like good equipment and do like tech, so I don't mind being a gear hound. My first real camera was a Maxxum 7000 and had a few lenses dropped out of the camera gear race till the Sony A100 came out and all my Minolta lenses fit so I stayed with Sony(always like sony electronics and their cameras/video equipment are top notch). Sold my older Minolta gear and Sony A100 and picked up a Sony A580/18-250 Sony lens and 56AM flash and haven't looked back the A580 takes HD video so i picked up the Sony Stereo Mic and about a month ago found a nearly new Sony Reflex 500mm F8 lens that I've always wanted since Minolta started making them in the late 80's. It's basically a 500mm mirror telescope compact camera lens that is actually 750mm on DSLR's. now with just 2 lenses I'm better covered that with 5-6 lenses and a film camera not to mention being able to take thousands of pictures with just a couple of memory cards to carry


----------



## TweakMDS (Jul 31, 2012)

Personally, I'm floating somewhere between artist and gear hound. If there were a category "strobist", I'd pick that, even though only a limited area of my photography is done with flashes, I love making intricate flash setups. I think it also sparked my flashaholism


----------



## tomswift123 (Aug 8, 2012)

I am Artistic photographer................


----------



## Landshark99 (Sep 14, 2012)

I did not see a Professional option


----------



## jaycyu (Oct 29, 2012)

Closest I am is _gear hound_.
I have a 5D II, and like Nyx I slaved for many month to repay the debt.
I shoot IR, but spend more time "looking at cameras on the internet than taking pictures."
I stuck with the purist doctrine as long as I could. Now I have 3 lenses.
And lastly, I have no friends.

You should start your own fortune cookie factory.


----------



## Smeghead (Nov 11, 2012)

From that list, I suppose the closest fit for me would be artist. I actually did use a film camera on a recent holiday to New York. I liked the whole experience of it. If I were using a digital camera, I know I would've been completely obsessed with getting perfect shots, retaking and just holding people up. With the film camera, I took one or two shots, and moved on. If it didn't come out right, then tough s---, it's my own fault. Film also looks fantastic, and digital still has a long way to go in my opinion to equal that special feel film has.

It's far too expensive though. £40 for about 9 rolls of film, and then it cost me another £40 to have them developed and scanned.


----------



## killy (Jan 26, 2013)

I have ticked Gear hound - that is the closest to gadget man and there is no box for Bird/nature photographer which is a pity


Regards

Mike

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## aspirina750 (Jan 26, 2013)

I might go for 2 and 4. And food photography is my thing. 

How about adding one for gear photographers? 

Cheers


----------



## TedTheLed (Jan 26, 2013)

Lol. What weird sort of animal does "Leica owner" imply that none of the other choices do??

..and what sort of owner of Wetzlar glass wouldn't specify his/her model? 

What if you're a Leica AND a Nikon owner? 

M3.....F2

Do light meters count?


----------



## blub (May 21, 2013)

None of the above, started as gear hound, now I have everything I need, pretty much know how to use it and try to use it a lot.


----------



## sniper (May 21, 2013)

Dunno perzactly what kind of photog I are.

I consider myself an enthusiastic hobbiest, with 50 years' experience. I did film and manual metering for years, because that's all there was. I LOVE digital, as confusing as it is. My cameras are both older-generation 6 & 12 MP Digital SLRS, and I have a collection of AF lenses, some of which have been with me for 15-20 years, and work fine on my cameras, some newer ones, too, a couple of tripods, and a flash. Lots of cords, bags, remote releases, lens hoods, batteries and chargers, and one lonely flash bracket. 
I think we make photography harder than it needs to be. Photographers PHOTOGRAPH...they don't spend endless hours drinking tea, discussing things like the whichness of what, diffraction and bokeh (Sounds like a cat hacking up a hairball, doesn't it?) and other interesting but ultimately non-relevant "issues" in the real world.

Maybe Curmudgeon Photographer should have been a category?

I was a photographer in the Air Force, a reporter/photog for a large daily newspaper, taught a photo fundamentals class for a year while doing graduate work. I have won awards for my photography, and enjoy the Merrie Aitch out of it. 

It is a magical pastime! 'Nuff said!


----------



## 1nterceptor (Jul 13, 2013)

I have three cameras and I consider myself a recreational photographer.
I have a Nikon COOLPIX P100 bridge camera, a compact point and shoot
FUJIFILM XP50 and a ContourGPS sports camera. I'm using the FUJI most
of the time on my trips/vacations because of it's convenient size. I also
use the Contour and FUJI for cycling events/trips I go to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLz8uakmkWc


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AopSW5T843s


----------



## CampingLED (Aug 9, 2013)

Where does taking 2500+ photos in one day fit in?


----------



## ElectronGuru (Aug 10, 2013)

That's usually called 'spray and pray'


----------



## CampingLED (Aug 11, 2013)

Haha, I was at a gymnastics event and photographed the few hundred kids on various apparatus. We were 4 photographers who took photos that were displayed and sold as prints. My shutter count for two days were 3700+.


----------



## Echo63 (Aug 11, 2013)

CampingLED said:


> Haha, I was at a gymnastics event and photographed the few hundred kids on various apparatus. We were 4 photographers who took photos that were displayed and sold as prints. My shutter count for two days were 3700+.


It's not hard to do shooting events.
i spent 10 hours at a music festival and came out with 1600 photos - maybe half of the crowd, and the other half or the bands - around a photo every twenty seconds is easy to do without motoring off long "spray and pray" type bursts
a day at the racetrack is good for around 2000 pics, and that's being gentle on the shutter button too.

Spraying and praying as a photographic technique sucks, it causes unneccasary wear on your camera, causes you to spend more time behind the computer, and fills up your storage media quicker.
it can also cause you to miss deadlines (which is never a good thing)


----------



## CampingLED (Aug 11, 2013)

Agree with you Echo63. At the gymnastics I even limited my continuous shutter speed to 6 fps on the camera settings and not full speed. At full speed I often get two pics if I wanted to take only one. On Wednesday I am going to shoot vultures at a hide and will probably shoot at 12 fps when they come in to land. It was also nice to take 120 photos in a few seconds when they imploded a building in our city a few weeks ago.


----------



## camit34 (Feb 7, 2014)

I voted gear hound but not for the items mentioned in the description. I'm a very mechanical thinker and thus really enjoy things that are solidly built and have that quality fit and finish, partly the reason I fell for the Fuji X-E1 and partly the reason I feel I take "ehh" photos even though I thoroughly understand the photo taking process - aperture, ISO, focal length, shutter speed and so on and how one effects the other but I just don't seem to have that "artsy" eye to catch the photo the way I truly want to.


----------



## wedlpine (Feb 10, 2014)

Definetly a gear hound. Have more then 100 lenses for my 2 dozen plus slr's and dslr's. Most of my lenses are Minolta Rokkor. Have every focal length Minolta made from the 7.5mm circular fisheye to the 400mm. Also have numerous P&S cameras. My last strictly photography trip was in November of 2005 when I went to Cape Churchill in Manitoba to photograph the polar bears. Great trip, I highly recommend it.


----------



## Steve K (Feb 10, 2014)

what kind of photographer am I? A somewhat jealous one. 

I mostly take pics of family, a lot of shots of aircraft, and other assorted photos. Perhaps I just need to take some classes, especially for Photoshop, because I'm really impressed by some stuff I see on Flickr! These guys do it professionally, and as such, have opportunities to be in places that allow them to get a great shot. But still, they do a great job of processing the shot and I'd love to know what they've done to achieve the final results.


----------



## StarHalo (Jan 14, 2015)

Fast/Light Strike Photographer: I use whatever point-and-shoot that has capabilities/produces pictures closest to a DSLR, currently a Sony RX100 III in a camera protector body worn as a sling. No lenses, no bag, just 20 megapixels under my arm. My iPhone 6 does light editing and publishing duty (the camera sends pics via wi-fi), and there's a MacBook Pro back at base for heavier editing.


----------



## Echo63 (Jan 15, 2015)

I am going to have to update my "photographer type" to "Leica Owner" 
around a year ago i bought a M240 and 50 Summarit - its not kept in a special display case though, it goes everywhere with me (16000 pics in 11 months)
I love it, its my favourite camera to use, although the work issued 1DX bodies get more use


----------



## n3eg (Jan 30, 2015)

Small kit photographer. I shoot micro four thirds, with a Kodak S-1 and an Olympus E-PL5.

I also use small flashlights and small two-way radios, and I repair small electronics with small chip components.


----------



## bestellen (Mar 28, 2015)

I'm relatively new with photography so I'm sort of still in the "finding my style" stage, but I'm veering towards documentary photography. More specifically street photography. Most of the photographers I look up to are street shooters and I have a lot of fun doing it too. I enjoy it because I like it haha. <br>
<br>
I'm also the type who hates hipster photographers who use Instagram and think they're really good even though they know nothing about photography. Then again, who doesn't hate those guys?


----------



## SemiMan (Mar 28, 2015)

I am not ashamed to admit some of the best pictures I have taken in the last year were with a cell phone. The HDR software and antishake enables relatively sharp images with good dynamic range and shadow detail. As well the panoramic works surprisingly well.

Last but not least the best camera is the one you have on hand.


----------



## Berneck1 (Mar 28, 2015)

SemiMan said:


> I am not ashamed to admit some of the best pictures I have taken in the last year were with a cell phone. The HDR software and antishake enables relatively sharp images with good dynamic range and shadow detail. As well the panoramic works surprisingly well.
> 
> Last but not least the best camera is the one you have on hand.



Yeah, for about 15 years I had a lot of Canon gear. I sold it all about three/four years ago, and went with micro four-thirds. My latest camera is the Olympus E-M1. However, I almost hate to say it, but I find myself leaving it at home most of the time. Or, more to the point, I don't think about taking it with me. With post processing and other "in camera" tricks, my iPhone 6 does just about all I need. Only on special occasions do I think about it, because there are still times where the phone camera just can't get the shot. 




Sent from my iPad using Candlepowerforums


----------



## bestellen (Dec 8, 2015)

The girly girl. Usually female (but not always). Buys a camera based on how cute and pink it looks. Matching nail polish and lipstick is a bonus. Takes pictures of all her hot friends out clubbing and posts them on Facebook to make everyone else jealous.


----------



## bykfixer (Dec 20, 2015)

Photo-journalist/nature photographer.

Each photo either tells a story or highlights natures bounty...or both. 

I have lots of gear but the simpler the better is my favorite method. 

At least $10k in gear, but prefer the unpredictable nature of my crappy cel-cam.


----------



## sidecross (Dec 20, 2015)

I did photojournalism from the mid 60's until the late 80's my work was similar in kind to Robert Frank or Henri Cartier-Bresson. I did all my photo processing and framed and mounted all gallery work I did. My worked appeared in Jury Showings here in the U.S. and Europe.

While my work was good by pay or compensation was not; I later worked as a Union Journeyman Mechanic and I am now retired with a Union Pension.


----------



## joanne (Dec 30, 2015)

I don’t consider myself a photographer as much as a story teller who uses pictures and words to share my adventures with people online. I use whatever camera I need to capture the pictures that I want to share. I spend a lot of time underground exploring abandoned mines and my cameras take a lot of abuse. I found that buying used cameras and knowing that they have a limited lifespan reduced my anxiety about the dirty, dusty, and rough conditions that I encounter. I’m not looking for the “artsy” pictures, rather images that capture the essence of being there.

So I’m considering delving in to the YouTube world. I know, there’s already too many people generating a ton of video. In looking at “outdoor adventure” segment, there seems to be a lot of “home movie” type videos but nothing that really tells stories about interesting places or activities. I would like to do videos similar to what you see on the outdoor TV channels, but in a more personal style. Consider Les Stroud in Survivorman without the “drama”. I’ve started accumulating some gear and practicing capturing video and audio. Will probably need an action camera (GoPro) to capture video when dangling off a rope and don’t have any hands to spare to hold a camera. Video editing, voice over, and audio editing is another huge learning curve. I’ve watched so many poor quality videos that I don’t want to simply be one more feed in the endless stream of junk. I’m not sure if I can produce the minimum level of quality I feel is necessary to make it worthwhile.

*Joanne*


----------



## bykfixer (Jan 1, 2016)

I like taking pictures like this.
Kinda tells a story, yet lets you use your imagination what that story is.

Or workers on a hot summer day slamming a bottle of water or wiping their brow...

Or....




Oh my! That's big.


----------



## slackercruster (Sep 7, 2016)

I'm a people photog. But I fall into some of the other poll options too. I got way too much gear sitting that needs to be ebay'd


----------



## kkchome (Oct 8, 2016)

Of the choices given, I guess I would be a gear head because I have a lot of camera gear. However, I really only consider the camera gear as a tool that allows me to capture an image.



Tropidolaemus wagleri [Wagler's Pit Viper] - Male by Kevin, on Flickr


----------



## chaosdsm (Oct 8, 2016)

None of the Above: I'm a "wish I could afford photography" photographer.... i.e. cheap P&S lack features (full manual control / lens options / lens quality) to allow me to capture the images I want to capture at times. Until I can afford Photoshop, I'll just stick with the camera on my phone & suffer in silence.


----------



## StarHalo (Oct 8, 2016)

chaosdsm said:


> None of the Above: I'm a "wish I could afford photography" photographer.... i.e. cheap P&S lack features (full manual control / lens options / lens quality) to allow me to capture the images I want to capture at times. Until I can afford Photoshop, I'll just stick with the camera on my phone & suffer in silence.



Check out Pentax's APS-C lineup; lens selection isn't great, but a full kit with top shelf image quality and features is ~$600. The Photoshop/Lightroom suite is now $10/mo.


----------



## Dr. Mario (Feb 7, 2017)

I am more like an opportunistic photographer - I use what I could borrow or have, meaning any cameras I could use and it also give me a bit of hands-on experience which is actually useful ($600 - 900 Nikon D3400 two lenses DSLR camera kit suits me just fine for now as I use Linux version of Photoshop, Darktable to clean up RAW image files a bit, now that I am also into astrophotography and that camera's not too bad for that low light photography). Also, I have a rare Canon 35mm A-1 SLR camera, gifted to me - I will need to find a few compatible parts to repair the film speed selector, fairly chewed up.  However, ancient Nikon and Canon SLR cameras were built like tanks.

However, IMO, you don't have to be so rich to be a photographer, although it kind of help. Camera don't have to be greatest and latest, if you know of a few tricks, both analog (films) and digital (semiconductor) cameras can be your best friend in photography.


EDITED: Forgot to add the astrophotography picture, I know I got off on a wrong footing, however I learn quickly. I may get best result when I get to the campground (ie. away from light pollution), so I don't get overzealous with the shutter timing. Oh yeah, and better tripod is also important. I intend to figure that out.







YET ANOTHER EDIT: And here's some newer bonus.


----------

