This winter I had found that I much preferred using the grd 3 over the gxr m, but it didn't quite make sense to me. The gxr certainly has much better image quality. It is a bit larger, but the way I hold it, less camera shows itself to my subject so it probably is not much more imposing than the grd when photographing people. I was always a Leica shooter, so I have an array of lenses to choose from. So theoretically, the gxr should have been my camera of choice, but that was not the case .
When deciding what to pack for a quick foray to the West Indies, I figured I would bring just the gxr and an assortment of lenses to force myself to get really adept with it because I thought perhaps that was why I kept going back to the grd. Just as I was about to go out the door, I had a wave of anxiety and slipped my grd into my camera bag, just in case.
As it worked out, I shot mostly with the grd and I wasn't sure why. I started to form a theory towards the end of my stay (2 weeks) and have been thinking about it quite a bit since I have been home.
I am 56 now, and have been in and out of photography since I was 13 years old. In the "old" days , when there was the argument about whether photography was "art" or not, a person with a camera around their neck and a bag over their shoulder was clearly a pretty serious photographer. What he or she was doing was accorded at least a little bit of respect. It was, in fact, sort of rare to see someone with a "real" camera. Snapshooters had things like Instamatics and perhaps some other toylike camera in their pocket. If a "serious" photographer pointed their camera at a person, they seemed to be more flattered than encroached upon. Now, of course, things have changed.
In the West Indies, I found that by having my camera in my pocket, I could make contact much more easily with people than when I had the gxr either out, or in the bag which was clearly holding camera equipment. Without a camera showing, the exchanges I had with people were, in fact, more genuine and less guarded, on their part. One of the main reasons I travel is to make real connections with people who are very different from myself. It’s not only for the photos which is perhaps, why, when I referred to myself as a tourist, the locals would correct me, calling me a visitor. (I have, in fact, been to that same island several times and often have stayed longer.) I think that when you engage with people, give them some of who you are, and appreciate who they are, they are much happier to let you shoot your shots.
One day a cruise ship came to this little island I was visiting and I happened to go "into town," where there were all these tourists with all giant Nikons and Canons around their necks. Even some Leicas. You could see the locals steering clear of these folks and you could see these tourists pointing their cameras at the most cliché subject matter available. Postcard stuff.
I did take some landscape-type pictures that I am fairly pleased with using the gxr, and a few people pictures as well, but I think I shot 3 or 4 times as many frames with the grd. I wear my pants baggy so even though I use the gv-2, the grd just slipped into my pocket. Now that I am home, I keep telling myself I am going to conquer the gxr, but I always seem to leave the house with the grd. I think if I were going to shoot something planned -- like a portrait or some landscapes -- I would take the gxr, but otherwise I am having better results with the grd . Do not get me wrong. If it is image quality I am after, the gxr wins without any competition. And although I would love to master the gxr so that I could make the same kind of people pictures that I do with the grd, I am not sure I can get there given the way that cameras are currently perceived by the public.
When deciding what to pack for a quick foray to the West Indies, I figured I would bring just the gxr and an assortment of lenses to force myself to get really adept with it because I thought perhaps that was why I kept going back to the grd. Just as I was about to go out the door, I had a wave of anxiety and slipped my grd into my camera bag, just in case.
As it worked out, I shot mostly with the grd and I wasn't sure why. I started to form a theory towards the end of my stay (2 weeks) and have been thinking about it quite a bit since I have been home.
I am 56 now, and have been in and out of photography since I was 13 years old. In the "old" days , when there was the argument about whether photography was "art" or not, a person with a camera around their neck and a bag over their shoulder was clearly a pretty serious photographer. What he or she was doing was accorded at least a little bit of respect. It was, in fact, sort of rare to see someone with a "real" camera. Snapshooters had things like Instamatics and perhaps some other toylike camera in their pocket. If a "serious" photographer pointed their camera at a person, they seemed to be more flattered than encroached upon. Now, of course, things have changed.
In the West Indies, I found that by having my camera in my pocket, I could make contact much more easily with people than when I had the gxr either out, or in the bag which was clearly holding camera equipment. Without a camera showing, the exchanges I had with people were, in fact, more genuine and less guarded, on their part. One of the main reasons I travel is to make real connections with people who are very different from myself. It’s not only for the photos which is perhaps, why, when I referred to myself as a tourist, the locals would correct me, calling me a visitor. (I have, in fact, been to that same island several times and often have stayed longer.) I think that when you engage with people, give them some of who you are, and appreciate who they are, they are much happier to let you shoot your shots.
One day a cruise ship came to this little island I was visiting and I happened to go "into town," where there were all these tourists with all giant Nikons and Canons around their necks. Even some Leicas. You could see the locals steering clear of these folks and you could see these tourists pointing their cameras at the most cliché subject matter available. Postcard stuff.
I did take some landscape-type pictures that I am fairly pleased with using the gxr, and a few people pictures as well, but I think I shot 3 or 4 times as many frames with the grd. I wear my pants baggy so even though I use the gv-2, the grd just slipped into my pocket. Now that I am home, I keep telling myself I am going to conquer the gxr, but I always seem to leave the house with the grd. I think if I were going to shoot something planned -- like a portrait or some landscapes -- I would take the gxr, but otherwise I am having better results with the grd . Do not get me wrong. If it is image quality I am after, the gxr wins without any competition. And although I would love to master the gxr so that I could make the same kind of people pictures that I do with the grd, I am not sure I can get there given the way that cameras are currently perceived by the public.