What Is It About Certain Cameras…

Pentax 6 X 7; 90mm f/2.8 lens (click to enlarge)

Here's a question for you.  Does using a particular camera seem to bring out your best work?

This is a bit strange and really makes no sense to me but I've had cameras that, when I've used them, have allowed me to create some of my best work.  Consistently.  Time after time.  It is like every time I took it out and used it, I brought back 'keepers.'  Other cameras—on paper equally capable—I've owned didn't seem to allow me to consistently produce my best work.  Why does that happen, after all, cameras are tools?  Machines.  I've wondered if it's something inherent with the camera or is it me?  The camera being the difference makes little sense, or does it?

Have any of you experienced anything like this?  I'm curious if I'm the only strange one that has experienced this.

Yosemite Valley. Same camera and lens as above.

Let me give you an example.  In the film days it seemed that I could not take a bad picture with my Pentax 6X7 medium format camera.  Now that, of course, is hyperbole.  But it seems true.  That was my 'magical' camera for decades.  When I developed my film and made a contact sheet, it seemed all of my photographs were great (again, hyperbole, of course).  All of them.  Now realistically it couldn’t have been all of them but I remember feeling that I couldn’t make a bad photo with that camera.  Typically, out of a roll of the ten exposures on 120 film, the photos were all correctly exposed, in perfect focus, had the exact depth of field I wanted, were perfectly composed and they completely satisfied me.  I loved using that camera! 

Olympus E-M5; Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 lens (click to enlarge)

I haven't really experienced this phenomenon in the digital era. That said, I think it may be somewhat true about my Olympus/OM cameras. Whenever I've gone out using my Olympus and now OM cameras, I bring home a much higher percentage what I judge as better images. Consistently. Nothing out of focus (except for some birds-in-flight shots but, still, a much lower ratio than my other cameras), perfectly exposed, composed exactly as I want them without having to crop, sharp, highly detailed and the colors just seem to me to be what I want in my images. With the Olympus/OM cameras I seem to always be pleased with my work and have more ‘keepers’ than I do with either my Nikon or Fujifilm cameras. As a bonus, the files seem always easier to edit which results in more images as I envisioned them when pressing the shutter button. I think that is one reason I keep coming back to those cameras. I almost always get what I'm after.

I’m not saying my OM cameras are my favorite cameras to use.  That is a different subject.

Olympus E-M5; Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 lens (click to enlarge)

All that said, there may be an emerging exception to the OM cameras since I acquired a Fujifilm X100VI earlier this year.  I have really fallen for that camera and have so far have had extraordinary success with it.  I've been mostly shooting raw plus JPEG with the intention to, when appropriate, use the JPEG files (I know it doesn't give me the absolute best options for quality and editing [yada yada yada] but I'm telling you the files are wonderful!).  I have created a few JPEG film recipes that produce images that I find extraordinarily pleasing right out of the camera and that is a nice bonus.  You've seen many of them in my blog posts detailing my wife's three week road trip earlier this year (you can find a list of all those posts in my 'wrap up' post here).  But all this is still tentative.  I haven't had the camera long enough to place it in that category yet.  Time will tell.

Generally, with my Fujifilm cameras I find myself having to work harder in editing, especially with the sharpening algorithms in Lightroom Classic.  Lightroom is better than in the past but the X-Trans sensor seems to still throw it off.  I've found my self frustrated at times and causes me to have to use DXO or Topaz to demosaic my Fujifilm files more often than I should  (one reason I like to shoot Fujifilm JPEGs).  

The Nikon gear is just more cumbersome to use as it is larger and heavier and I find myself wanting to take the smaller systems.  Great image quality but less convenience.  Less pleasurable to use.  With the OM gear, none of that gets in my way of creating what I want out of my photographs.  As a bonus, I normally don't have to carry any filters except for a polarizer. 

All this makes no sense since as we're talking about machines—computers with lenses, so to speak.  

Other cameras I’ve owned and used, although good cameras in almost every way, are ones I never seem to get a great many images that are visually satisfying or compelling.

What do they, I’ll call them ‘magical cameras,’ have that the other cameras do not?  Is it the way they feel in your hands?  Is it the controls and how they are laid out?  Could it be the menus or color science?  Maybe nothing at all and it is just psychological?  Or just dumb luck.

One thing I thought about was the 'magical cameras' are easier to use.  Not really.  For example, the hulking old Pentax 6X7 is a beast of a camera.  Mine (I still have 2) have absolutely no automation, not even a light meter.  Nothing but a shutter speed dial, aperture rings on the lenses, manual focus and a film winding lever.  Yet I have consistently done some of my best work with those cameras over decades.  Maybe it is because everything is manual and I have to thoroughly think my way through every exposure and immerse myself in the process?  No ‘running and gunning’ as can be done with more automation.

Same with my Olympus/OM cameras.  I find my Fujifilm X-T5 my all time favorite digital camera.  Everything about it just works for me.  I find it very easy to use.  But I don’t get nearly the percentage of ‘keepers’ as I do with the Olympus/OM cameras even though those cameras are more difficult to use and more more complicated in operation (due to all of the features they have that other cameras don't).  It seems to me that the easier a camera is to use would have the effect of freeing up your mind to fully concentrate on composition, etc.  Or, it may be the opposite.  Maybe easy isn't better?  Maybe you have to slow down, be immersive, be in the moment and think things through before pressing that shutter for each exposure?

In the end, I suspect much of this is psychological.  Some cameras just 'click' for us.  They fit the way we see, think, and work. They build confidence and remove friction from the process.  That’s when photography feels most fulfilling to me and the results speak for themselves.

I also believe this phenomenon isn’t unique to photography.  Musicians often find one instrument that unlocks their best playing.  Writers swear by certain pens or keyboards. Chefs have knives they reach for instinctively.  The right tool for the right person can elevate performance in ways that are hard to explain but very real.

Have you had this same experience? Do you own a camera that consistently brings out your best work while others—even if excellent—don’t?  I’d love to hear your thoughts, and I suspect many readers have their own stories of “magic cameras” that just seem to make better photographs in their hands

Join me over at my website, https://www.dennismook.com.  

Thanks for looking. Enjoy!  

Dennis A. Mook  

All content on this blog is © 2013-2025 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.