What opinions of yours have changed over time? Technique, equipment, etc

I am just wondering if you guys have had your opinions as time as passed by with regards to just about anything from equipment to PP, etc.

For me so far....
I was shooting RAW+JPG for a long while but am now moving to shooting strictly RAW. I though I would use JPG to save time but it just doesn't seem to be a time saver since I like to tweak the RAWs.

UV Filters - I thought I would want the protection of the filter and in theory it seems like a good idea but I've seen one too many threads about UV filters creating soft images. I have removed my filters with the exception of my B+W on my 28-135. We'll see how long that lasts

Other things?

I started with some knowledge, and no guts, especially with learning the software. I started with shooting JPEG only and in the green box. After shooting with some of the members here, I'm shooting pro, RAW+JPEG, using CS4 and learning LR2. I always thought filters were good, now I use them selectively. My flashwork has improved due to a lot of mistakes. I think the most important knowledge is just to press every button, turn every dial. Also, the gear matters a lot, but mainly for getting the job done more efficiently. I've collected a lot of good stuff over the last 5 years, and it's clear that just buying the gear is not enough. I have to actually learn every item I purchase instead of just wanting to get more.

I have learned that I need to slow down. Instead of making a quick shot, Ive learned that I need to evaluate the events in front of me and anticipate what might happen and be prepared.

When I first started shooting with a dSLR all I wanted to shoot was natural light, now I always have at the very least an off shoe cable and one of my flashes wherever I go.

As I migrated from Film to Digital, I was sure that the technology would allow me to manipulate the 1s and 0s to make a Mona Lisa out of a Stick Figure. Now, I can confirm that if you want a Mona Lisa, you have to shoot a Mona Lisa.

IOW, getting it right in the camera is still the shortest distance between brilliant concept and quality image. It's still all about The Light!

Changing over to shooting in RAW when I got my 50D 4 months ago..

I was a committed Jpeg shooter since working for a newspaper where everything was handled in Jpeg..

I stopped using NDgrad filters, taking two shots or more than 2 shots is really better, no need to carry filters and adapters, no color casts, no need to process in location, etc etc etc.
I can do the same I used to do with the filters at home while drinking a coffee and the results are much better.

See my signature block below? I'm always figuring out new ways to do things or how to do things that I have not tried before.

The only reason I change my hardware is to get a very significant improvement. Today I still work with a 20D, for example. My old Nikon F film cameras (circa 1967) are tucked away in the storage cavern (basement), but I do use the old Nikkor lenses (which are for the Nikon F cameras) on my 20D at times. When I find a camera that will let me do what I need to do and cannot with the 20D, I may get something new.

Over the last 30 years I've done the following:

1. Moved from primarily shooting with zooms, to shooting mostly with primes. I still shoot with zooms, but primes are my preference.
2. Use UV filters only as required to complete weather sealing on my lenses, and then only when required.
3. I moved strictly to RAW about 3 years ago.
4. Established a work flow that includes file back-ups as a integral (and 1st step) of the process

and much, much more. Like Skip said, learning new ways to do things and trying things you haven't tried before is part of the fun of photography.

I all honesty,,SLR photography hasn't changed all that much.. The shooting stage is still the same but how we process and view our finished product has changed from prints/slides to computer screen..

SLR cameras also haven't change all that much.. They are still a light tight box with a lens at one end and a medium at the other with a shutter in the middle.. Exposue and composition is still the same.. The principles of photography haven't changed..

There are some people who believe they've reinvented the wheel with exposure to the right.. I was using the same technique in the 1970s with colour negative film..

Wow, you must be a genius.

yogestee wrote in post #9036772
There are some people who believe they've reinvented the wheel with exposure to the right.. I was using the same technique in the 1970s with colour negative film..

Meaning??

yogestee wrote in post #9036860
Meaning??

Probably meaning he's not familiar with the techniques associated with film development and printing.

I went twenty years without alot of photography in my life, I went from working in a color lab, shooting with pros on nikon f's and borrowed lenses to next to nothing for a very long time. When digital came around I was still thinking 1980's style, that zooms were sloppy and untrustworthy, shortcuts for amateurs basically. I started buying primes exclusively when I bought a digital camera. now I think the canon L zooms on a full frame body are equal to any prime I ever borrowed twenty years ago, and better than some of the primes I have owned in the past few years too. In general, Primes are better. In reality, zooms are good enough and so much more bang for the buck that I sold ALL my primes except my Macro 100. All Zooms all the time, except for the required 100 Macro-everyone should have one.

That photography would be simple....

Heck no!! So much to learn, so many subjects, so many variables in light....and so many people to learn from on here...

I've changed my opinion on lenses, PPing (less is more), colours, moods...you name it...everything opinion has changed over time (only 1.5yrs in playing around with a dslr)..