The book The Great LIFE Photographers published by Thames & Hudson in 2004 with an introduction by John Loengard (ISBN 0-500-54293-7) would, in my opinion, provide a comprehensive introduction into the world of photo reporting, especially for young people and students interested in the history of the craft.
The book's six hundred and eight pages showcase short portfolios of the ninety nine LIFE staff photographers who worked for the world's most famous weekly news and current affairs magazine from its launch in 1936 to the end of the last century. Many of the six hundred photos printed in b+w duotone and colour will be familiar to those who knew the mag in its heyday. The pictures are no less powerful for their reshowing in this collection, the Chinese reproduction quality of which is excellent.
Each portfolio is accompanied by a short biography and picture of the photographer. Naturally perhaps, almost every one of these portraits shows the shooter with his or her equipment.Having been comprehensively reminded recently of how enthusiasts like to know what equipment great photographers use, I made a quick calculation of the hardware visible in each portrait. Where it could be identified, it is named; where not, it is listed as other or as a format type.
Here goes;
5X4 inch or other larger than 6X6cm folder type; 18
Twin Lens Reflex 6X6cms; 12
Nikon Rangefinder S type; 8
Nikon F single lens reflex; 17
Leica S or M rangefinder; 22
Contax rangefinder; 12
Other; 22
Total; 111
There are more than 99 pieces of hardware because some photographers are shown with more than one item. Interestingly 35mm rangefinder cameras top the list with 42 samples, with Leica just tipping the scales over Nikon and Contax.More interesting though is that in many portfolios where the photographer is shown say, holding a Leica, the portfolio pictures were apparently made with a larger format.
Today's 35mm type Dslr and Drf cameras may now be capable of producing a very high level of technical image quality, but they are still no match for the image quality obtained from the digital capture backs of medium format cameras and these, in my opinion, still no aesthetic match for the filmed image.
No change then in the old adage that a 'big'un' beats a good littl'un.', no matter the capture device.
