In both worlds

For the first time in months, I used my Canon 350D. Complete with a Sigma 105mm macro lens, available light and no tripod.

Ok, so the “ISO” was cranked up. Tripods are cumbersome, too cumbersome for my liking, so the ISO setting was at 1600. No sweat with the 350D. One reason why I bought the camera was its digital noise in high ISO photos.

Or lack of.

It didn’t disappoint me either. Yes it’s there, but nowhere near as noticeable as it could’ve been. Thank $DEITY for the DIGIC II processor.

… and low MP count.

See, more pixels crammed into a finite space, the risk of digital noise increases. You can thank generated heat mainly for that.

I digress.

So I was taking photos of… anything really. Macro photos. Genuine macro photos. 1 to 1 reproduction, not the pseudo-”closer focus” that the industry likes to try and sell as “macro”. The items…? Mundane items took on a life of their own. Landscapes were open for exploration.

Item 1. Click, whirr. Item 2. Click whirr. Nope, not quite right. Click, whirr. Damn handshake. Click, whirr. Ok, Item 3. Click, whirr. Nah, that wasn’t as interesting as I originally thought. Item 4. Click, whirr. Yep, that’ll be ok. Click, whirr. Click, whirr. Same as before. Time passed, but there’s no major differences. Item 5. Click, whirr. Hmm… well, I’ve got 3 that’ll work.

3 of the same item. 3 of the same viewpoint. 3 of the same… same.

Digital’s fine for convenience. But… and this is a big one, for myself at least, the character’s gone. Provided a lens focusses correctly, I could stick another Sigma 105mm macro lens on the 350D and it’d be as though there’s nothing different. True, this is really how photography should be. After all, a line of lenses, all the same type/make/size, there should be nothing different between them. But lenses at one time had a character. One lens would deliver different results to another. You had to consider what style of photo you wanted, before bolting the lens into place.

The convenience of digital is… bland…?