Recently, I have been evaluating my previous projects and reconsider my camera setup, ask whether it really fulfills my creative needs. The deeper I dig, the more I realize that the camera setups come in two different categories: rigid and liquid. While rigid setups are usually technically correct and offer accurate execution, fluid setups are polar opposite, which are a better tool for creative intentions and flexible execution.
The challenge is finding out which situation works best for and provides a wide enough shooting envelope that covers most of my requirements to be a technically right camera, while still fun for shooting. So far, my current setup is more towards the rigid category, and when it gives technically excellent results, I have started questioning whether it is perfect for my creative process at this level.
Hard setup: technically correct but creatively restrictive
A rigid camera setup is about technical precision. High-megapixel full frame and moderate format DSLR are prime examples of this. This is because they demand careful handling due to their slow autofocus, in-body stabilization and limited shooting speed. While these cameras are going to excel in a controlled environment, where every detail needs to be correct, such as commercial or studio work, they leave much to be desired when the situation is less than the ideal to remove the best of them.
To achieve most from a rigid setup, you often require additional gear like a lens that contains high resolution power, a solid trippai and head, a lighting, external monitor, and a tethard shooting system to check everything on the site. Although this setup often guarantees faster, consistent results with large file latitudes that enable creative legs in post-processing when shooting correctly, it can also slow you down and make the process feel cumbersome-especially when you need to correct every element to remove the best from the system. In projects that need to work rapidly in the book environment, such as shooting-style shooting, rigidity of this level can become a barrier rather than a profit.
This gives results in a narrow shooting envelope, which limits your ability to maximize the ability to setup under different circumstances. Because they are more cumbersome to deploy, you should work within their limits instead of adopting the changing conditions.
Personal criteria of a rigid setup:
-
High megapixels and large sensors: High quality lenses, high shooting discipline and accurate techniques are required to remove all details.
-
More stability is required: a tripod or stable hands are required due to lack of stabilization in the body.
-
Adequate lighting is required: The high-megapixel sensors demand the condition of good lighting for optimal image quality.
-
Slow Shooting Workflow: Autofocus can slow down, and handling must be more intentional.
-
Files with high bitrate and latitude: produce more detailed files that allow for extensive post-processing but take more storage.
Fluid setup: a entrance to creative expression
At the other end of the spectrum, a fluid setup is often designed for adaptability and spontaneity. This allows photographers to move independently, respond to change the light, and hold moments without colliding with technical obstacles. A good example of this is the latest mirrorless camera system, which provides more light and responsible experience.
Mirrorless cameras have a comprehensive shooting envelope these days for their advanced autofocus system, in-body stabilization, better sensor performance and better manual focusing AIDS. This means that they can handle a wide range of conditions ranging from handheld low-light shoots to rapidly moving subjects.
However, a fluid setup comes with a trade-off. Although these cameras provide more creative freedom, they cannot occupy the level of equal expansion of rigid setups-not due to lack of ability, but because their design encourages a sharp-transformation workflow that can sometimes compromise accurately.
An important cause is the illusion of efficiency. These cameras encourage a sharp workflow, which can sometimes give rise to dirty shooting habits. Unnecessary speed can also cause you to be less accurate in your shoot discipline, especially when you are not well aware, so produce the results on all. In addition, there are elements of unexpectedness in focusing focus that can cause close-ways in files with significant moments or low bitrates that shoot the final image with care due to extreme determination power and lack of transparency of large sensors. These make them less ideal for high-detail commercial work, but are perfect for real-world shoots where speed and adaptability matters more.
Personal criteria of a fluid setup:
-
Low megapixels and small size: easy to carry and shoot with minimal attempts.
-
In-body stabilization: Handheld allows for more flexibility in shoots.
-
Excessive forgiveness in low light: Can shoot at slow shutter speed without a tripod requirement.
-
Rapid autofocus and shooting speed: ideal to capture spontaneous moments.
-
Lighter files with low post-processing overhead: makes the workflow easier and more efficient.
Assessing my current setup and finding the right balance
My current gear is a mixture of rigid and fluid setup, although it lends more to hardness – with its strength and weaknesses. On the rigid side, I have a set of Canon 5DSR, a high-megapixel DSLR and technical tilt-shift lens that demands accurate handling. With its limited ISO capabilities, the lack of in-body stabilization, and to extract full details from its sensor requires careful technique, it represents the textbook of a rigid setup. It requires deliberate composition, adequate lighting and stable shooting status to get the best results for shooting with it. Whatever falls less, it will result in a large file of subcare quality.
On the liquid side – or I should say the funny side – I have leaka CL and Fujifilm gFX systemAlthough both of them are away from my ideal fluid setup, they expanded the shooting envelopes of my harsh setup. Leica Cl, while not the most technically advanced camera, is compact, liable and comfortable to shoot, which is an excellent tool for creative, spontaneous shooting. Meanwhile, Fujifilm GFX, despite having a moderate format system, forms a balance between liquidity and accuracy. The advantage of a modern medium format sensor and mirrorless technology reduces slow operation, at least for my intentional shooting style.
It is said, being a commercial hospitality and industrial photographer, who likes to document my hometown, it is important for me to use a tool that balances both hardness and liquidity well so that I can use it for work and fun. My current choice of a well-round hybrid rigid and fluid setup for the work is Canon 5D Mark IV, which is somewhat-the average-megapixel DSLR with a very wide shooting envelope. It attacks a balance between Mirrorless and DSLR systems, offering responsible operations through both shooting with LCD and OVF – preferred my way of shooting and composition.
I know the current mirrorless offerings are very attractive and balance both sides very well, but they are still quite expensive and do not make good commercial understanding-either when I have to switch my entire working gear setup-and I don’t even need the best-and-up features. Although some people may disagree, Canon 5D Mark IV remains my ideal hybrid setup as it provides a wide shooting envelope and makes the most financial understanding for my work, while I look for a better deal on the latest offerings.
At the end of the day, photography is about making options. Do you prioritize technical perfection at the cost of ease, or do you embrace minor flaws coming with more liquid setup? There is no correct or wrong answer in my opinion – only works best for your creative vision. Real magic occurs when you find a balance between control and freedom, allowing your gear to work against you.
