GAS GAS: A Denialist Is Speaking!

[mike3996]

I deny that I have any GAS!

At least not the "bad kind". I claim I have the good sort of GAS, that I have my addiction in control.

(For the sake of the scope of the following discussion, I limit this to camera bodies only.)

~

Let's take a journey, start from the beginning.

I'm pretty new to the whole scene. In January I will celebrate my 6th anniversary. In the beginning, one doesn't know what kind of a camera works for him. So I sample a variety to gain an understanding. That's not GAS, surely?

My first attempt at taking direction took me to mirrorless Fujifilm cameras. The first one I had was the X100T. Then a year later I tried an X-T1. I kept preferring the X100T and then realized that the rangefinder style body is something I prefer. I bought and sold the X-T1 and I knew better now what I wanted.

I took even bigger a leap of faith then by trying a real rangefinder. A huge step into an unsure direction. But at the same time I also was confident enough that I had the right idea what manual-focus rangefinder photography would entail.

My gamble was certainly worth it. I bonded with the Leica M instantly, and it has been my longest companion to date. Most everything about it works for me, and yes, there are technical deficiencies and other things that prompt me to think about newer models a great bit. Financial realities and Leica pricing keep my feet on the ground.

At this point I had learned that not only do I prefer rangefinder style cameras, I prefer actual rangefinders with optical viewfinders and stuff.

Based on that insight on OVFs, I decided to check out the SLR landscape. If this endeavor proved successful, it'd mean saved money and easy living. I got my first taste of Nikon Df 18 months ago. At this point I think SLRs are not the style that gets me. Or is it the other way around?

Today my desires regarding camera bodies revolve around finding the best way to adapt and focus manually lenses. It's not about megapixels or best ISO values but about the little things that can make or break a shooting experience.

~

Epilogue:

This was more apparent in the film days I should think? There were no image quality differences between cameras, nor even autofocus ones if we go back to the good times pre-80s. There was an absolute plethora of cameras available and they all competed with each other, not with image quality or pet bug eye autofocus accuracy, but with usability mainly. Digital photography sadly has entangled these previously separate things together so that we often have to be compromising between image and handling concerns.

 

[tilman]

haha, I think I sometimes DO have a problem that isn't 100% under control... but there are good sides to GAS that can't be denied...

Without it, I would have never tried cameras or lenses that I truly enjoy... (like the Sigma DP3m, or the Olympus Stylus 1, the old Olympus E-1 or lenses like the Oly 50mm f2 macro...)

I guess the challenge is to not let it become a means to its own end... and to realize when to stop and "settle"(or reflect) for a bit - and enjoying what you have - and learning to get the most out of it...
Always many sides to it...
I guess we're OK as long as it stays enjoyable (rather than too much of an obsession)... (or maybe as long as it stays an "enjoyable obsession" )

 

[Bart J D]

Epilogue:

This was more apparent in the film days I should think? There were no image quality differences between cameras, nor even autofocus ones if we go back to the good times pre-80s. There was an absolute plethora of cameras available and they all competed with each other, not with image quality or pet bug eye autofocus accuracy, but with usability mainly. Digital photography sadly has entangled these previously separate things together so that we often have to be compromising between image and handling concerns.

I think this is a bit over simplifying things from the analogue area.
There was a change of m42 to K mount in Pentax, a change of mount all together in Canon and in Nikon, there was the pre-Ai and Ai system.
There was an evolution from stop-down metering to wide open metering, spot metering to center-weighed metering.
There were the lines of amateur - enthusiast -professional bodies.
There was the evolution from big to compact.
The difference between rangefinder and SLR system. My godfather always found me a bit "silly" for buying an SLR.
I am most likely missing some.

I bought a Pentax SP500 around 1975 and I was blissfully unaware of all the above over the coming decades - except for the rangefinder - SLR thing obviously.
I had the - amazing - pentax kit lens, Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4, a generic 28mm and a Vivitar zoom lens. The 28mm and the zoom lens got little use.
Of course, photography was just a hobby / passion for me. Not my profession in any way.
I think the big difference between "then" and "now" is simply the internet, the abundantly available information about ones area of interest.

On a personal note, since I started "researching" the digital camera system online, I have bought a Pentax K10D, a Panasonic FX500, a Nikon D700 ("full" frame - yay), a Nikon Df and finally a rangefinder. I had to know what all the fuss was about, right.
And a Sony a7 II, a platform for yet another slew of readily available cheap lenses. m42 for me.
Is it "GAS"? I think it's curiosity
Some years ago, I decided that enough was enough and haven't bought anything since. If something breaks, I will replace it.
Does that mean I'm "cured" from whatever this was? I also think everyone knows there is no cure for something like this. I still get really curious from time to time
All one needs to do is to say <No>, every time again.
That is, if one want to end it, of course.

 

[Brownie]

I have no GAS whatsoever.

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

C&#x27;s A, and 21 by telecast, on Flickr

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Brownies and a few Kodaks by telecast, on Flickr

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Argoflexes and A&#x27;s by telecast, on Flickr

 

[Les Klein]

No escaping addiction. Bear with me, this is a story that stretches decades. Prior to abandoning SLRs in 2002 I spent too much time obsessing about additional lenses for my camera (there was always a better lens than the ones I owned). Reading magazines with comparison charts, fabulous news about new lenses and never ending opinions, was a major pastime. In 2002 I bought my first digital fixed-lens camera (it would have been called a superzoom) and my GAS was ‘cured.’

Not so! After struggling with dust on an inaccessible sensor in my most recent camera (Lumix LX100) I decided to return to the world of interchangeable lenses and bought a Lumix GX9, which I thoroughly enjoy. Within a short time, though, Lens Envy raised its ugly head. LE is a subtype of the larger GAS category of obsessions. Now my obsession is fed not by print media but Youtube with its vast agglomeration of personalities each one an expert. Every lens and camera is compared every which way, accompanied by declarations of independence and impartiality (“This lens is not mine, it was given/sent/loaned to me for my unbiased opinion . . .” ). Some of them are informative, some entertaining, and some so painful in their narcissism that I wince.

I now promise to myself that I will strengthen my resolve to reduce my consumption of this stuff.

 

[DeeJayK]

I have no GAS whatsoever.

View attachment 278894C&#x27;s A, and 21 by telecast, on Flickr

View attachment 278895Brownies and a few Kodaks by telecast, on Flickr

View attachment 278896Argoflexes and A&#x27;s by telecast, on Flickr

Now I understand the cure: just acquire one of everything.

- K

 

[Les Klein]

Now I understand the cure: just acquire one of everything.

- K

Now I understand the cure: just acquire one of everything.

- K

Yes, but your quest is as impossible as finding the perfect camera and the perfect lens.

 

[agentlossing]

After struggling with dust on an inaccessible sensor in my most recent camera (Lumix LX100) I decided to return to the world of interchangeable lenses and bought a Lumix GX9, which I thoroughly enjoy.

A small M4/3 body plus a pancake prime or small zoom is quite a close approximation of a fixed-lens camera, really. And if you look at the cleanable sensor as a specific perk, so much the better.

 

[Les Klein]

A small M4/3 body plus a pancake prime or small zoom is quite a close approximation of a fixed-lens camera, really. And if you look at the cleanable sensor as a specific perk, so much the better.

Yes, indeed. Even with the kit lens (12-60mm, f3.5-5.6) it is a reasonable carry. Having access to the sensor for cleaning is the main reason for my decision to return to an interchangeable lens system.

 

[Brownie]

Yes, indeed. Even with the kit lens (12-60mm, f3.5-5.6) it is a reasonable carry. Having access to the sensor for cleaning is the main reason for my decision to return to an interchangeable lens system.

Don't ever blow on the sensor.

Don't ask how I know.

 

[Brownie]

Now I understand the cure: just acquire one of everything.

- K

It's a quest. A bit different than searching for the Holy Grail, more like finding enough grails to outfit a restaurant.

 

[Les Klein]

Don't ever blow on the sensor.

Don't ask how I know.

Sorry, I have to ask. At some point the sensor in my camera will have to be cleaned. Knowing how in advance will be helpful.

 

[Brownie]

First off, some people go many years without cleaning a sensor. Being careful where you change lenses, using the in-camera cleaning system, and engaging in good practices make a huge difference. As an example, before changing lenses I have the new lens ready to go with a loosened rear cap so I only need one hand to remove it. The camera stays in the other hand, sensor facing down to reduce dust settling on it. That's really important outside.

A couple of choices for cleaning:
Take it to a pro.
Buy a sensor cleaning kit and DIY. There are plenty of tutorials on the web. It's easy, although a bit scary at first.

And since you asked, here's why. This is my sensor after blowing on it with what I thought was a very dry mouth. There is a lot more spit in that photo than there s dust.

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Les Klein]

First off, some people go many years without cleaning a sensor. Being careful where you change lenses, using the in-camera cleaning system, and engaging in good practices make a huge difference. As an example, before changing lenses I have the new lens ready to go with a loosened rear cap so I only need one hand to remove it. The camera stays in the other hand, sensor facing down to reduce dust settling on it. That's really important outside.

A couple of choices for cleaning:
Take it to a pro.
Buy a sensor cleaning kit and DIY. There are plenty of tutorials on the web. It's easy, although a bit scary at first.

And since you asked, here's why. This is my sensor after blowing on it with what I thought was a very dry mouth. There is a lot more spit in that photo than there s dust.

View attachment 294396

AHH. Got it! How did you clean the sensor after this?

 

[Brownie]

I used a cleaning kit. This is in a G9, I cleaned a GX9 the same day. The dried watermarks from blowing on it came off easy, the other marks took a few passes. To this day, no idea what they were but those larger marks are what caused me to clean the sensor to begin with. I think the cleaning kit came with 9 swabs and I used all but 2 on the cameras, so I can clean one more.

 

[Les Klein]

I used a cleaning kit. This is in a G9, I cleaned a GX9 the same day. The dried watermarks from blowing on it came off easy, the other marks took a few passes. To this day, no idea what they were but those larger marks are what caused me to clean the sensor to begin with. I think the cleaning kit came with 9 swabs and I used all but 2 on the cameras, so I can clean one more.

I’m going to buy a cleaning kit. Thanks