When it comes to cameras and creativity, a bad camera you love is better than a good camera you hate, argues Rod Lawton
Where does the value lie in your photos? Does it lie with your unique ‘take’ on the world and your individual vision, or does it lie with the technical quality of your images? Most photographers would say you need both and might assume you can have your cake and eat it, with camera kit that both releases your creative instincts and offers the best possible technical quality.
For me, creative instinct and ‘mood’ are highly elusive. I can be technically correct all day long. That’s not creativity, that’s a process. But ‘seeing’ images is different. This is where I find that some cameras work for me, and some don’t. And I would rather have a photo that inspires and excites me than one that’s technically correct and boring.
I am a scientist by training and background, but I am also obsessed with images and their visual, graphic and emotional effect. I understand everything needed to produce technical excellence, but I’ve realised this doesn’t necessarily translate into exciting imagery.
So my best and most satisfying images, from my perspective, have not been taken with the best equipment. Some of my favourite shots are from my iPhone, my Olympus Micro Four Thirds gear or my old Nikon DSLR kit. None of these is the best technically, but they have helped me ‘see’ shots in a freer, more intuitive way.
I bought a Sony A7R II because of its resolution, and I bought some excellent lenses to go with it. But persevere as I might, it just leaves me a bit cold. It’s as if its technical capabilities are a responsibility, not an advantage.
The opposite example is my iPhone 13. I just feel creatively ‘freer’. I shoot what looks right, and very often it is right. Often I’ll think, ‘I wish I’d taken th
