Would a modern-day Cartier-Bresson use a smartphone?
The concept of heroes has never featured in my life. However.... I guess the nearest thing I have to a Photography Hero is Henri Cartier-Bresson (1908-2004). I keep going back to books such as this: LINK
C-B's weapon of choice was a Leica rangefinder usually fitted with something like a Summicron 50mm f/2. Looking at his photos however, and their (by and large) unextraordinary technical quality - notwithstanding the Leica gear - got me wondering.
Would a modern day street photographer in the Cartier-Bresson mould do just as well with a multi-lens high-end smartphone like, e.g. Samsung S21 Ultra, iPhone13 Pro, Sony Pro-1 or whatever? Does anyone on here do this type of photography with a phone rather than a conventional camera and if so what are the limitations?
C-B's weapon of choice was a Leica rangefinder usually fitted with something like a Summicron 50mm f/2. Looking at his photos however, and their (by and large) unextraordinary technical quality - notwithstanding the Leica gear - got me wondering.
Would a modern day street photographer in the Cartier-Bresson mould do just as well with a multi-lens high-end smartphone like, e.g. Samsung S21 Ultra, iPhone13 Pro, Sony Pro-1 or whatever? Does anyone on here do this type of photography with a phone rather than a conventional camera and if so what are the limitations?
Quote:the best camera is the one you have with you...
That's true but C-B's equipment was presumably a conscious choice, not something he just happened, for other reasons , to have upon his person at the time. Although one suspects he did carry his camera around a lot, just in case!
Would one make a conscious choice to use a camera phone, rather than a camera, for this type of work even if one owns both?
I think that what it boils down to.
I’m not sure about Cartier Bresson, but at the end of last year ai acquired an iPhone 13 pro…… and instantly began to use it on a gimbal with a wrist cord for easy/safe holding, instead of my usual LUMIX GX9 with a Panasonic -Leica lens fitted….
You can see results in two Coventry shoots ….the results are smaxing, so intend to continue on a shoot this coming Thursday if all goes to plan.
One observation, is that no one seems to turn a hair at a phone on a gimbal…. But might wince if a camera was pointed their way….
Take a look to see what I mean…
Hobbo
You can see results in two Coventry shoots ….the results are smaxing, so intend to continue on a shoot this coming Thursday if all goes to plan.
One observation, is that no one seems to turn a hair at a phone on a gimbal…. But might wince if a camera was pointed their way….
Take a look to see what I mean…
Hobbo
For what I have personally used until now, which excludes iphone and latest of samsung and sony the very honest answer is a definite NO. The phones I had and own suffer from shutter lag. Want to catch "Decisive moment?" Good luck. Wait for a couple of years.
Quote:The phones I had and own suffer from shutter lag.
Hmm, I can see that could ruin the Decisive Moment!
However I've not noticed that on the S21 Ultra. You can see a pic on my folio of birds taking flight.
So far the captures seem to have been near instantaneous. But I'll keep an eye out for that.
The other thing Cartier-Bresson might have liked is 8k video. The ability to pull 33-megapixel images from a video clip might have been right up his street. Only works well in decent light though. To be honest I've only done some test shots.
Yes, but not all the time, far to frustrating for the best part, your often presented with a split second or micro second to react.
Can`t see it working at all for the likes of Mark Cohen or Garry Winogrand.
Can`t see it working at all for the likes of Mark Cohen or Garry Winogrand.
Forgot to add this
Cartier-Bresson had hands large enough to hide a Leica - and even film era Leica did not have a completely instant shutter.
His photographic strength had a lot to do with being able to photograph usually unobserved in the background - where with hands large enough to hide a Leica or a good smart phone can have advantages.
His photographic strength had a lot to do with being able to photograph usually unobserved in the background - where with hands large enough to hide a Leica or a good smart phone can have advantages.
Would a guy in an old raincoat get away with this, these days? 😱😀
This is where a phone scores for candid photography - it is multifunctional whereas a camera has only one function .
The problem is that phones are designed to be used in portrait format. They feel clumsy when being used in landscape. It's possibly this rather than the niceties of shutter response that may be a limitation.
This is where a phone scores for candid photography - it is multifunctional whereas a camera has only one function .
The problem is that phones are designed to be used in portrait format. They feel clumsy when being used in landscape. It's possibly this rather than the niceties of shutter response that may be a limitation.
Well I don`t know what SP means to you CB but very little of what I have ever done could be classed as candid, I`m very open in my own approach, even when I`m not noticed I`m still in obvious clear view, I make no attempts to go unnoticed.
The name Street Photography seems such a hideous word to me and not very fitting at all.
The name Street Photography seems such a hideous word to me and not very fitting at all.
Street photography has very little meaning for me, per se.
I distinguish between candid and posed. Aware and unaware. Doesn't matter whether it's outdoors or indoors. Both candid and posed have their merits but that's the distinction in my mind. Not location. .
I distinguish between candid and posed. Aware and unaware. Doesn't matter whether it's outdoors or indoors. Both candid and posed have their merits but that's the distinction in my mind. Not location. .
Just because someone is simply aware of your presence it does not mean it is posed, the above are just split second reactions to me being there, I like been in a lot of my own pictures and often include a bit of me.
The wiki definition is a bit tight 
