Wired Cola

I was reading the amusingly data-manic (and graphically sound) Feltron 2008 Annual Report, when I came across this tidbit on page 3: "Photographs taken: 1,468"

The source of all this data (Nick Felton, graphic designer), used four cameras to do his work (EOS 20D, SD870 IS, Leica M6, and "Blackbird Fly"), with most of the photos captured by the first two.

This is from a graphic designer who owns multiple extremely serious photographic instruments, and all I could think was "that doesn't seem like a lot, does it?"

Ahem. I opened my seriously non-serious iPhoto, and looked at the "Last 12 Months" folder.

2467 photos. There will be some fuzz and nonsense in that number, but that's well clear of 2000 photos in a year, almost all of them taken with my reliable little pocket-friend, the Canon SD1000 that TLO bought me as a birthday present in October 2007.

Here is what I believe to be the first photo I took with that camera:

It's not very good. Sorry.

I'll put some of my other favorite pictures taken with that camera in this essay.

The realization that I've taken so many pictures (my iPhoto library count is 7457, though with a chunk pics in there that were taken by TLO, taken by others but imported into my library, plus bits and pieces of pure nonsense in one form or another) suggests to me that I'm more serious about photography than I realized. I'm averaging better than 6 pictures a day over the last twelve months?? That's serious.

Now, about the camera. I've been agonizing over the idea of getting a digital SLR for most of a year. I keep getting closer, as costs tumble and my finances grow with age. But it's still enough of a cost that I have dithered over a noteworthy discretionary expense.

I'm suddenly feeling like it's a lot more justifiable.

But back to that camera I'm using right now. It's the size of a mint tin. It fits in almost all of my pockets, so it comes with me a lot. It is a much appreciated, but both sturdy (I just noticed some lurid dents on its left edge, damage which has done nothing to impair its function) and cheaply replaceable tool, so I'm willing to do dumb things like take it on epic cyclocross rides with minimal protection.

On the other hand, it doesn't have full manual control, and it has all the photographic failings of any super-compact digicam. Don't get me wrong: it's not just a great compact digital camera, it's a great camera, full stop. It takes great pictures, and records detail that would not only be the envy of any film compact ever made, but would also be enviable by a fair number of typical film SLRs loaded with typical film.

So here's what I'm worried about: I'm taking enough photos to justify spending some money on a better class of toy, but if I did so, would I use it as much as the tiny camera? I wrote an essay on this subject three years ago, and I think it holds up well (to update that essay, the Micro Four Thirds system was recently introduced, and is effectively an interchangeable-lens standard designed exclusively for non-SLR (rangefinder or EVF) camera designs. So far, there is one camera out there).

But back to the dilemma. Even a tiny dSLR with a tiny lens (and oh yes, I so want that rig) is still about the size of the biggest, chunkiest compact cameras. Will I carry it? Will I grab it? Will I be willing to spend the kind of cash to pick up some really fun lenses as I go on?

Darnit, people! Solemn Dog needs answers!