Many times friends and random people have dropped me lines on what camera I use and what camera I would recommend to buy. A lot of times at the point asking me, people were actually willing to spend 1000 Euros or even more for a camera and got really excited because they thought that just holding that super expensive piece in their hand will make them a good photographer right away.

I decided to state my opinion on camera-mania today. Feel wecome to discuss with me!



Does a good camera take good pictures?

Well, I think: It's not true. First of all, it's not the camera taking the picture, it's actually you. Second of all, to make a good photo really good, you need to edit your picture post to taking it. An image file straight from the camera looks like shit (just like a self developped analogue picture if you don't know what you're doing), no matter how you took it. The difference between all those ugly shots and that one really pretty one is a person that, besides knowing how to take a good photo, knows how to develop that good photo so it reflects their style and aesthetics, in digital even more than in analogue.

When I started to get more serious about photography, I spent half of the day, every day in a photo lab developing my analogue black and white shots, thinking about what chemicals to use, how long to use them, what filter to put in the enlarger in order to get the look I wanted, to try out different exposures for the print and most of the time it took me a while in the lab to figure out what combination made my photo looking best.

Editing is more important than the camera!

Today, it's still the same. It's just that I don't spent that time in a darkroom anymore, I spent it in front of my computer. I don't do manipulation to my pictures (like changing a nose), but I spent hours, sometimes days on figuring out what's the right filter, what's the right curve, what's the right exposure for a shot. So before thinking of buying a more expensive camera, I'd definately recommend you to work on your photoshop skills. This doesn't mean you need to be a pro, but you need to know the basics of light and contrast, exposure and color.

In the beginning, edit your picture, save it as a tif or psd afterwards and then let it sit for one or two days, then look at it again. Usually the first editing is "too much", so take away a bit of all effects, then it's usually better than before.

And then, what camera?

If you've figured that out, you can think of the camera. Today, almost every digital camera that's not older than a decade can take decent pictures. The iPhone camera and other cell phone cameras are great (though I'm not a big fan of hipstamatic and similar apps), many compact and bridge cameras do an amazing job. You really only need an SLR camera if you are sure about that you want to go more professional and most importantly, that you have the skills to figure out how to use the features it has compared to your compact camera. Also, it's an advantage that you can change the lenses. But is that really an advantage? If you look on the market, you'll see that there's plenty of compact or bridge cameras, that fullfill a focal length range from i.e. 5mm - 400mm or something similar. That's rats! I only have a range from 18mm to 200mm and I own a whole drawer full of lenses. They cost me a fortune. But they don't give me more than my old bridge camera, that was cheap and and took awesome pictures. I still sell them. That camera had only 5 Megapixels, it cost 333 Euros (and that's six years ago), but it had a range from 10 - 400mm with a fixed maximum aperture of F2.8 throughout the whole range. But let's not get too technical.

Is an expensive camera worth the price?

If you have rich parents that want to pump lots of money up your butt, or you're incredibly rich yourself, don't bother about cheaper opportunities and just go for a high end camera like i.e. the Canon 5D Mark II. But beware that besides a pretty damn expensive body, you'll also need to spend to a lot of money on lenses in addition. Because if you buy that expensive camera, but only get the cheap kit lense with it, your pictures will not get much better, you'll just get giant files stuffing up your hard drive.

If you're on a budget, like most of us, think about the following: Isn't it more usefull to buy a decent but not too expensive camera, if you're more advanced even an SLR, and then invest in lenses?

What makes a camera expensive?

What's most expensive in a newer camera are crazy Megapixels that nobody actually needs. Unless you want to pin up your photos as billboards above sunset boulevard, something like 6 Megapixels, maximum 10, is around about what you need in order to get high quality looking files. Everything more is luxery, that's nice to have but not obligatory. My camera I've been using for the past 12 months has 14 Megapixels and I've never had a problem making large prints of my photos. Some of my photographer friend's cameras have 20+ Megapixels or more. When you compare the quality of an average or even bigger size print, I can not see a difference. But the price difference is enormous. And they are so much heavier, so much bigger, and so much more intimidating to other people (and I love taking pictures without being noticed for my huge, professional looking camera!).

Another price factor are all those special setting opportunities that people like to have but never use. If you actually know how photography works, all you need is a decent white balance, an opportunity for RAW-files, a manual, an aperure priority and a shutter speed priority mode and a sensor that does not have big noise issues (and of course, a good lense).

In the past one or two years many camera producers came up with HD video modes on digital SLR cameras. That's great, if you actually use it. I do. But most people don't. And by now, even most compact cameras, the iPhone and many bridge cameras do HD video. So there's no need to buy that super expensive camera, unless you really want to go pro.

The lense is most important.

Much more important than the number of megapixels, settings and all that are the facts on the lense. Does it have the range of focal length that you need? Is the maximum aperture big enough for you purpose? And this is the only thing you really should spend money on.

What camera for what purpose?

When people ask me what cameras I can recommend I usually ask back what they want it for, what's their ambition and if they actually want to make paper prints (or billboards?!) of their digital files.

In most cases after the answers to these questions, I either recommend a bridge camera with super zoom with a high maximum aperture throughout the whole zoom range (mostly for travelers or wild life photographers, because they need that crazy zoom range, or for people with less ambition), or I recommend a used or not completely "up-to-date" medium priced DSLR. Because it's not about the camera, it's about the lense. You can get a great camera for less than 500 Euros these days, if you go for an older or used model, you can get it even (much much) cheaper. But do invest in lenses. A good lense can cost up to 1000 or even 2000 Euros.

Good lenses are expensive, but here's the trick.

But it doesn't have to. Good lenses have been produced ever since photography was invented. So go for old lenses, and buy them on Ebay, on the fleamarket, or get them from your grandfather, who most likely has some gems in his closet. Most of Pentax's and Nikon's and even Sony's SLRs still use the same bajonette (the part of the camera where you fix the lense to the body) as back in the days. Back then, almost every camera had a very good lense (mostly a 50mm with a maximum aperture of 1.2, 1.4, 1.7 or at least 2) on it. So there's tons of those on the market. And they're really cheap, because most people don't know they can also be used on newer cameras. They take time to get used to, because they demand a bit more skills and mostly manual focus. But they're worth it, because they train the eye and they teach you to actually "see", and for a new lense with the same feautures you'd pay 10 times as much (or much more). Even for all other SLRs and all other brands there's cheap adapters at your local store or on Ebay to make any camera compatible to almost any lense.

This can save you a fortune. Truly.

What I use?

The lense I use most on my camera is an old Pentax K-lense with 50mm focal length, a maximum aperture of 1.4 and manual focus. A friend who didn't use it anymore gave it to me as a gift after I took some photos of him with a similar lense (but a maximum aperture of 1.7) that I got on Ebay for 25 Euros including shipping. My camera is a superb, but medium priced Pentax K7 with 14 Megapixel and the option of HD-video. I always shoot in either manual, aperture priority or shutterspeed priority mode. I've never used any of the "further" settings it has to offer. If I could, I would get rid of them all to make my camera even smaller and light-weight. I've never had a problem enlarging my photos to a certain size even though I don't have 20+ Megapixels. I've been thinking of selling all my other lenses except of a Sigma 18-50mm 1/2.8 zoomlense that's great for travelling and documentary shots that I also use a lot.

I could also use any other camera if I had the opportunity to use my lenses on it. I just happen to like my camera, because I learned photography on the the same brand and got used to the handling. Once you go with a brand, it's hard to go back. I love how things work on it.

The only small deficit of my camera compared to MUCH more expensive ones, is that my sensor is not full format, which causes a 1.5 cropfactor to the actual focal length of my lenses. This means when I use the 50mm lense it's actually 75mm compared to an analogue camera. But that's okay for me, because with my zoomlense I can go to actual 50mm by using a focal length of 33mm . I'd rather spent the money that I save on travelling instead of on a full format sensor camera. I'm just like that.

Now, look at these photos!


(Taken by me) Pentax K10d (Price today: around 450 Euros) , 10 Megapixel, 50mm, F1.7


(Taken by me) Panasonic Lumix FZ20 (Price today: around 150 Euros, 5 Megapixel, 72mm, F2.8


(Taken by me) Disposable Throw-Away Camera (Price today: around 5 Euros), no settings to change


(Taken by me) Pentax K7 (Price today: around 800 Euros), 14 Megapixel, 18mm, F2.8


(Taken by Tommy Windecker) Canon Ixus 70 (Price today: around 250 Euros), 7 Megapixel, 6mm, F8


(Taken by me) Canon 7D (Price today: around 1300 Euros), 18 Megapixel, 5mm, F8


(Taken by utor/Photocase.de) Sony DSC-W100 (Price today: not found, guess: around 200 Euros), 8 Megapixel, 8mm, F2.8


(Taken by a guest writer on Travelettes.net) Casio EX-Z700 (Price today: around 250 Euros) , 7 Megapixel, 18mm, F5


(Taken by Markus Schwarze) Canon 5D Mark II (Price today: around 2000 Euros), 21 Megapixel, 34mm, F1.4

Now, do you really think it's the price of the camera (the cameras used for these photos have a price range between around 5 Euros to around 2000 Euros). Or the Megapixels? Or was it the photographer, in the end, who took a good picture?

Another thing: does your camera have to be brand new? Think about buying a used one and safe a lot of money, expecially on older models with less megapixels.

Please feel welcome to discuss my opinion by commenting on this post. I hope I helped a few people on making decisions how to decide and what camera to buy.

I give advice for free, but this knowledge has grown over 10 years of experience, and nobody paid me for gaining it. If you feel I was helpful and you can spare a small amount, feel free to donate for my advice. I might give more, if this is worth the time it takes.

via Paypal.

[Photography] [Advise] [Camera]

Photo: Carolin Weinkopf

[Photography] [Portrait] [Love]

Don't forget!

Ostkreuzschule (where I am attending pre-eminent photographer >>Arno Fischer<<'s Master Class) is opening its doors to public tomorrow (June 4th) and showing great art work of the students (and one of my photos) in their exhibition.

Saturday, June 4th (Open Doors)
Behaimstraße 28/30, Berlin-Weißensee


Photo: Carolin Weinkopf

[Exhibition] [Photography] [Berlin]

Almost three years ago, I applied for Journalism School in Berlin. I made it to the next round, but before my interview and knowledge test (for which I practiced for months...) took place, the school basically went bankrupt and canceled the upcoming school year for an indefinate time (>>indefinate<<, still...).

Completely frustrated, in an instant, I decided to go to >>New York<< and almost completely stopped writing, concentrating on photography. Maybe it was the naive thought of failure (though it wasn't even my fault) that my young mind couldn't handle, so I got stubborn and decided: it's over!

I never regretted my decision, because I think I was more talented (and definately more passionate) for photography anyways, though I still get nostalgic sometimes and the lack of practice has definately worthened my writing, though I still do, occasionally.

While organizing hard drives I found my application for Berlin's journalism school the other day and thought I'd share my (text&photo) portrait of "the last of his kind" (application topic), perfumer Lutz Lehmann. I still get tears and my eyes when reading it. Not certainly because of the life crisis and uprising it caused, but much more because I simply felt with this guy and was really touched by his story. I guess I just always get too attached too quickly.

I fall in love so easily...

It's in German, but who cares? (>>Google-Translate<< it!)

Der flüchtige Duft der Zeit

Parfüms nach Gewicht ist die vielleicht kleinste Parfümmanufaktur der Welt, ihr 57-jähriger Inhaber Lutz Lehmann einer der letzten Parfümeure Deutschlands.



Lutz Lehmanns Nase ist die einzige freischaffende Berlins. Täglich drei Stunden Training – „das ist am wichtigsten, neben dem Talent.“ Sorgen macht ihm, dass sie trotz regelmäßiger Übungseinheiten allmählich schlechter riecht, statt besser. „Das ist der Preis des Alters“, sagt er, und sieht traurig aus dabei. Denn seine Nase hat keinen Nachfolger.

Unscheinbar ist der Laden in der Kantstraße 106 von außen. Erst beim Eintreten strömt ein Hauch von Weltgeist, von Hoffnung und Wehmut auf den Charlottenburger Gehsteig. Der Grund lagert drinnen in zahllosen Glasbäuchen: grünlich schillernd bis cognacfarben tauchen Parfüms aus drei Generationen die Szene in ein warmes, weiches Licht.



In den Hinterzimmern jenseits der Theke erschließt sich Lehmanns Welt. Die Tapete löst sich von den Wänden, es scheint, als hätte sie dem süßlich-herben Duft, der sich aus dem geheimen Kellerlabor seinen Weg in die Räume bahnt, mit dem Alter nachgegeben. Schränke säumen den Gang, in den Ecken stapeln sich Kartons. Hier und da ein paar verstaubte Fotos. Die surrende Kaffeemaschine wirkt verloren zwischen den Relikten einer 82-jährigen Familiensaga.

Über Afrika soll Harry Lehmann um 1900 bis Arabien gereist sein, bevor er sich in Berlin geschäftlich niederließ. Im südfranzösischen Grasse hatte der Weltenbummler einst auf Wanderschaft das Parfümhandwerk erlernt. Seitdem war er mit einer Ostseefischerei, arabischen Rennpferden und Immobilien längst zum reichen Mann geworden.

Während im Frühling 1926 Josefine Baker im Bananenrock Berlin den Charleston lehrte, eröffnete Lehmann in der Potsdamer Straße sein Parfümhaus. Bewusst verzichtete er auf Werbung und aufwändige Flakons. In schlichten Glasflaschen konnte er so das Luxusgut zu kleinen Preisen anbieten, ohne an der Qualität zu sparen. Seit jeher gehören Menschen aus jeder Schicht und allen Altersklassen zu den Kunden. Neben den ersten zehn Kreationen bot der Großvater des heutigen Eigentümers Seidenblumen an, auf Wunsch mit einem Tropfen des Lieblingsdufts veredelt.



Über die Blumen hat Lehmann, der Enkel, oft nachgedacht. Die verkaufen sich nicht mehr so gut, Moden ändern sich eben. „Irgendwie gehören sie aber zu uns, genau wie die Parfüms.“ Geändert hat sich über zwei Generationenwechsel hinaus ohnehin nicht viel. Bis auf den Standort, der sich dem bewegten Lauf der Berliner Geschichte des Öfteren anzupassen hatte.

In der Potsdamer Straße wichen die Lehmanns der von Hitler geplanten Nord-Süd-Achse, in der Friedrichstraße wurde das Geschäft im Krieg total zerstört. Nur wenige Blöcke weiter wurde die Familie schließlich aus dem Osten vertrieben. Fortan parfümierte sie weiter westlich, erst am Zoo, seit 1958 in der Kantstraße. Das Inventar kam immer mit, erst seit ein paar Jahren muss es sich den Platz mit Computer, Fax und Drucker teilen.

Nach dem Mauerfall fanden auch viele Ostberliner den Weg zurück zu Lehmann. „Überglücklich“ sind die, „dass ich ihnen auch heute noch ihr Parfüm von damals mischen kann“. Denn wer einmal eins erstanden hat, dessen Duftrezept bleibt in blassblauer Tinte für immer dokumentiert.

Plötzlich klingelt das Telefon, „eine Stammkundin“, entschuldigt sich Lehmann und notiert sich geduldig alle Wünsche. „Wer möchte, kann sich sein Parfüm in die ganze Welt verschicken lassen.“ Rund 50.000 Kunden führt die Kartei. Dazu gehören von jeher auch zahlreiche Prominente. Die behandelt Lehmann streng diskret, noch nie hat er einen Namen ausgeplaudert. Die Dietrich immerhin liebte Veilchen, das hat Lehmanns verstorbene Mutter einmal einer Journalistin verraten.

Neben der Nase gehört Menschenkenntnis zu den Qualitäten des Meisters. Zunächst analysiert er, ob es sich um einen „blumigen, grünen oder orientalischen Typ“ handelt und hält dem Kunden ein paar Düfte unter die Nase, dann gibt er spontan und mit fast anmaßender Präzision seine Empfehlung. So viel Aufmerksamkeit bekommt man heutzutage selten.



Zeit muss mitbringen, wer sich durch das ganze Sortiment schnuppern möchte, denn nach fünf bis zehn Riechproben sind die Rezeptoren in der Nase erst einmal besetzt. Wenn sich unter über 50 Kreationen - neben Klassikern auch immer wieder Neuerscheinungen - nicht das Passende findet, lässt sich die individuelle Note auch zusammenmischen. Besonders anspruchsvoller Kundschaft erschafft der Meister gegen gutes Geld schon mal einen ganz eigenen Geruch.

Das Geschäft läuft, Lehmann kann sich nicht beklagen. Kopfschmerzen bereiten ihm jedoch die EU-Richtlinien, die über sein Handwerk verhängt wurden. „Weil ein paar Laborratten Pickel bekommen haben“, darf er zwar mit Thymian sein Essen würzen, aber nicht mehr seine Düfte. „Moschus, Lavendelöl, alles wurde eingeschränkt.“ Jahrhunderte lang hätten Parfümeure diese Substanzen verwendet. Und wenn denn mal jemand etwas nicht vertragen habe, „Gott, dann habe ich ihm etwas anderes gemischt“. Nun muss er Jahrzehnte alte Düfte mühsam neu entwickeln. „Der Charakter eines Parfüms setzt sich aus 50 bis 200 Duftbausteinen zusammen. Wenn Sie einen davon wegnehmen, verändert sich die Harmonie. Manche Riechstoffe lassen sich durch nichts ersetzen.“



Über das, was kommen mag, wenn die Nase eines Tages aussetzt, will Lehmann heute noch nicht nachdenken. Dem Familiennachwuchs fehlt es an Interesse, an Platz im Laden für Azubis. „Es sieht momentan so aus, als würde das alles hier mit mir sein Ende finden.“

Früher sei die Kantstraße als elegante Flaniermeile über die Grenzen der Stadt hinweg bekannt gewesen. Daraus ist heute ein Sammelsurium von Import-Export-Läden und Fastfood-Restaurants geworden. Mit Lutz Lehmann wird eines der letzten traditionsreichen Geschäfte von dort verschwinden. Der Duft von "Maiglöckchen", "Wüstenwind" und "Eau de Berlin" wird freilich bleiben. Noch 24 Stunden... „Danach“, sagt Lehmann, „ist auch der Duft des besten Parfüms verflogen.“

Text & all Photos: Carolin Weinkopf (2008)

[Photography] [Journalism] [Portrait] [Perfume] [Berlin]

Oh wow! Just found >>this<< and feel very flattered.

Geeee. Äh. Blush.


Screenshots: thecreativeblog.com

[Photography] [Featured]

This young >>guy<< is living my dream.

An architect and designer by education, a year ago, he decided to break all bonds and go on a journey around the world. But unlike most people, he didn't go and layed by the beach or got drunk with a bunch of other foreigners (though, I'm sure he did that as well...). Instead he hired for design jobs around the world, working for food and accomodation, just like the journeymen, back in the days:

"In parts of Europe, as in later medieval Germany, spending time as a journeyman (Geselle), moving from one town to another to gain experience of different workshops, was an important part of the training of an aspirant master. Carpenters in Germany have retained the tradition of traveling journeymen even today, although only a small minority still practice it."



His stories are worth a read and his projects to admire. If I was a man I'd do the same.

Also, check out his analogue >>photography<<.



All Photos: Fabian Sixtus Körner

[Inspiration] [Photography] [Travel]

Today is my roommate's birthday. I love and hate you, Felix. ♥ ♥





All photos: Carolin Weinkopf

[Photography] [Portrait]

(What I've done on friday...)

For a very long time since I moved to Berlin I dreamed of getting into this area at dusk, no people, the security guy (and his dog) still sleeping, capturing the myth of this place to the fullest.

But I never dared.

When I finally went now, it was rather sunny, very bright and the lawn was nice and short. Anyway, I'm glad that in our cleaned up country, we have places like this. Deserted, weird, scary, out of place, and telling a story. And one day, I'll go back at dusk. I promise.

(It was so hard to pick out and edit these pictures, because I've seen tons of these online already, bright and shiny, and though I didn't tell anyone to make sure I would be by myself, it didn't quite work out. Luckily (without knowing, I guess I really >>biked<< that fast) I was there two hours early and one of the first inside, so there were at least no people in my shots... I'm ambivalent about these what so ever, because I don't like to show what's overshown.)






























All photos: Carolin Weinkopf

[Photography] [Black and White] [Wonderweel] [Amusement Park] [Spreepark] [Berlin]

On friday, I biked around the city (very fast - as you see). Where I went? I'll tell you tomorrow!


All photos: Carolin Weinkopf

[Gif] [Animation] [Photography]

In fall 2009 I went to Macedonia, fell in love and kept on coming back. Last summer I went again with a friend, kindly supported by a mobility grant by the European Cultural Foundation, equipment by Globetrotter and a camera by Pentax. Then, last winter I packed my stuff and went back again on my own.



I'm planning my next trip around October or November this year, but before that, you can see many seen and unseen pictures of the project about:blank in real and big at Globetrotter's exhibition ground in Berlin-Steglitz. The pictures will be up all of July - so come and see!




All photos: Carolin Weinkopf

One of my photos from Macedonia will also be on display all year round until March next year in the Ostkreuz Exhibition at Ostkreuzschule in Berlin-Weißensee, opening it's doors next saturday, June 4th. Come by and get drunk with me! It's my first one, ever.

[Exhibition] [Photography] [Berlin]

It very rarely happens I find soulmates in photography. A minute ago, I stumbled upon >>him<<.





All Photos: Daniel Dueckminor

Click on the image to find my alike.

[Inspiration] [Photography]