Originally posted by tomshen
erwinx: I am trying to say DSLR offers convenience for learning, but others might think it makes photographers lazy. Sometimes if u run out of film, carry/load wrong speed film, and dun have certain filters, u won't be able to achieve the shots. We all know photography is a matter of shooting the right light at the right time. So dun tell me one can come back and shoot again.
Your arguments above - running out of film, wrong speed film, wrong filters as an argument for choosing digital over film - suggest that we have different approaches to photography.
You can 'learn' photography even if you don't have any film loaded in the camera. Pressing the shutter release is simply the last part of a process of visualisation.
Even if you decide not to press the shutter release (something more often done with film cameras), you learn something from the photo not taken.
You seem to equate the 'learning' with an increased hit-rate of good shots - made possible by the conveniences of digital - eg: changing iso, changing white balance.
I would say that this would be true only if all your good shots were something that you actually pre-visualised before taking the photo rather than something that turned out well and you're not very sure while and maybe I'll just memorise the aperture and shutter settings for this successful shot sort of thing....
To me, the skill in photography is in the previsualisation of the shot rather than the capturing of the actual shot (rather much easier with all the technological advances...)
yes, you're definitely improving, but as Ian pointed out, one may hit a barrier or plateau very soon... shots all technically ok (comments from other clubsnappers 'Wow! so sharp!) ... but you'll realise theres something missing....