James Shackleton's Blog

A careful title here. I own quite a lot of equipment, but regularly use a lot less.

In order of popularity, it would run:

Edit – October 2011: Sony NEX-5N

Take all the good bits from the NEX-5 and then put in a MUCH better sensor and you have the NEX-5N. At last, a sensor that is OK at 3200. And then there is the focus peaking – where it shows you what will be in focus on the screen – all rather clever. Again, it isn’t perfect for everything, but I think I could do 90% with just this (which is rather frightening given how much I have spent on other cameras).

Edit – March 2011: Sony NEX-5

I’ve only been using an NEX-5 for a few weeks, but think I’m ready to share a couple of thoughts about it.

1. While it doesn’t fit in a pocket, it will fit in my man-bag and still leave room for all my nerd stuff.

2. It gives very good results. Even in low light. No, I think results from the 50D (see below) are better – but this is MUCH smaller and lighter. Hanging from a strap, you really don’t notice it.

The interface, is to say the least “quirky” and unlike the TX-1 below, it doesn’t have a touch screen. In the end, I think I probably just keep it in Program Mode and treat it like a rather pudgy point and shoot.

Sony Cybershot TX1

For quite a while I carted around the G9 (see below) in my “man bag”, but I found it increasingly frustrating, because it was actually quite bulky and while for a compact the pictures were pretty good, you never forget that they were from a compact – the 50D for example does a much better job of things even at base EI.

So I started hunting around for a pocketable camera. Initially I got a Canon ElPH which I used for a while – but after I had taken pictures I found that it tended to blow the highlights, the pictures weren’t as detailed as I wanted and that it was rather awkward to hold (when taking pictures). It was that bit too small. So I sold it. And after a little thought bought a Sony TX1.

I like that it is truely pocketable. I like that it focuses quickly and “gets the photo”. The prints look good to quite a large size (A4 is fine) . I hate the Sony menu system. A touch screen is nice, but I would prefer a camera that didn’t need one.

But it does the job.

Canon 50D

This feels like a digital equivalent to my old EOS 100. It has about right bulk for me and everything seemed to fall readily to hand (which is my “buy it” test), so I chose it over a D90 – which I also rather liked. I have no Nikon/Canon preference. I tend to think about cameras as a way of using that manufacturer’s lenses. In retrospect, I could just as easily have ended up with a Pentax K20, ‘cos Pentax are making some nice prime lenses these days.

And then you have all film cameras (there are a lot):

Nikormatt FTN

A really tough, simple to use camera. Probably the cheapest way into “Nikonia”. The focusing is probably the worst thing about it. The best is probably its 1/125th sync speed (Nikon F 1/60th ) and some really nice early non-ai lenses, which weren’t (and aren’t) all that expensive. Try the 85mm f1.8, 55mm f3.5 or the 35mm f2. They really are rather special – just be sure to use a lens hood and keep an eye on flare (which they do rather easily).

Rolleiflex

I always keep coming back to the Rolleiflex. I wish mine had TTL metering. I wish it was a bit faster to work with at times. But, it has the best lens I own (probably) and people in the street like it. With a Nikon, people run to get out of the frame, with a Rolleiflex, you can’t keep them out. It is middle-aged man bait; on holiday in Hong Kong everywhere it went, men cooed about how beautiful it was.

And did I say the lens was really good?

Canon 7

Fujica GW690

I don’t use this camera enough. It is simple to use. It has a good lens. That should be enough. Why aren’t my walls covered with beautiful pictures from this picture-taking-machine? The short answer is – I don’t know. I think it is because it is rather bulky – you never forget you’re carrying it. Note to self – “use the Fujica more”.