If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
wrote in message ... Is it just me or do many people her have some kind of devotion to their cameras and lenses; to the point where they are more concerned with the tools than the images they make? That's a fair question. Someone once said there are two kinds of photographers: one kind typically has one battered, grungy camera and takes lots and lots and lots of pictures, and the other kind has all the latest and most elaborate equipment and seldom does any photography. In my impecunious youth I was the first type, but in my steady advance into old geezerhood I'm afraid I have moved quite a bit toward the second. I certainly do have enormous "devotion to [my] cameras and lenses" as you put it, though I have not entirely given up doing a little photography as well. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
On 10/6/09 18:47 , Neil Harrington wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message ... On 10/6/09 17:44 , Rich wrote: On Oct 4, 10:09 am, wrote: Is it just me or do many people her have some kind of devotion to their cameras and lenses; to the point where they are more concerned with the tools than the images they make? It's not you. Too many are pathetically and emotionally tied to their equipment. Just look at the reaction when anyone criticizes a brand. If they could convert neurosis into picture-taking talent, they'd all be publishable. I was on a pro bono shoot South Bend, this July, for Pediatric Brain Tumor Foundation. D300, D700, and an assortment of glass. It was a lot of fun. At one point someone stepped up to me and asked what I was shooting....before I could answer, he's looked down at the camera at my side and said, "Let's see, EOS......." I looked at him and took a step back, "ExCUSE ME?!!" By that time, he'd caught the "Nikon" on my neck strap, and jumped back looking like he'd just called Mr T a racial epithet. "Oh, God, man...I'm so sorry. Sorry, man...Sorry." And he backed away. I laughed about that all the way back to Chicago. It really is more of a religion than it is about a brand. And, if taken in the proper perspective, very amusing. guffaw! That's probably true. On the other hand, of course, there really are only two kinds of people in the world: Nikon owners and the ones who wish they were Nikon owners. (And I am saying that with perfect objectivity, not a shred of personal bias.) Of course. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
On 10/6/09 18:49 , Neil Harrington wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message ... On 10/6/09 08:57 , wrote: On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 18:45:45 -0400, Robert wrote: On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 10:09:44 -0400, wrote: : Is it just me or do many people her have some kind of devotion to : their cameras and lenses; to the point where they are more concerned : with the tools than the images they make? It's just you. Bob Maybe so. Based on the responses, I may be wrong. I just seem to see many many post about this lens or that camera or a plastic part used here or there or someone worried that that this or that camera has 5% more pixels. Time and ime again, their arguments all tend to be, plastic is bad, or this or that lens may resolve a couple of additional lines for 1,000. They tend to embrase the science of photography while ignoring the art of photograhy, the end result. I certainly don't want to suggest that the hardware of photograhy is not important, but don't you agree that a truely talented photographe, with good gear,r is likely to produce far better results than the lesser photographer with the best gear. I guess I should expect an emphises on the hardware since this NG is devoted to a specific type of camera. Pretty much. But consider...the camera is a tool to the art. And the artist playing at a high level begins to depend and interact with his tools in a very intimate way. The science of the tool in artistic hands is understood in the terms of the art, not the science, So discussions tend to be heated, passionate, and very unforgiving of disagreement. Even though with a little patience, it becomes clear that two combatants are actually on the same page, only speaking different language. Try talking acoustics with a musician. Wear pads. There is no doubt a difference between the art and the science of photography. And there are some talented artists out there who really don't fully grasp the science. Just as there are some very skilled photographers out there who don't fully grasp the art. The difference between skill and talent is that skill is learned, talent is inate. Skill understands the science of why it does what it does. Talent understands the emotions of why it does what it does. Skill may be able to express it reasoning more clearly, scientifically, if you will, while talent is less able to express its reasoning scientifically. But it can speak to the emotions of what drives it. Performance differences between skill and talent can be negligible...skill can learn the mechanics of whatever talent does inately...but skill learns the science. Talent pursues the art. And there will usually be more skilled photographers than talented photographers. So, the discussions tend to the science. And since skill is taught, and talent cannot be, there will be fewer discussions by the talent of the art. So, again, discussions tend to be of the science. Then there is the talent, who also becomes skilled, learning the science, pursuing the art. Brilliant photography. There isn't enough space in the room for the ego. It's one of the things that makes them brilliant. But discussions there, tend to be very passionate, and they tend to take the last word, about the science and the art. And...yes, plastic is bad. Other than Nikon plastic. Even Nikon plastic. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ... On 10/6/09 18:49 , Neil Harrington wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... And...yes, plastic is bad. Other than Nikon plastic. Even Nikon plastic. Actually I was making a wee joke (as with other replies in this sub-thread), but seriously, what complaint do you have aboout polycarbonate? It's strong, light, doesn't dent, has been used for camera bodies for decades and is all-around good stuff. I assume most DSLRs still use a metal chassis underneath the polycarbonate for those parts that require dimensional stability, as 35mm SLRs did. Whatever they do, it works well. The word "plastic" is sort of off-putting since it makes one think of milk bottles, delicatessen containers and cheap toys, etc. But there are many very different kinds of plastic, just as there are many different metals. I don't think you'd want an SLR made out of lead or even unalloyed iron or copper. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
On 10/8/09 24:26 , Neil Harrington wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message ... On 10/6/09 18:49 , Neil Harrington wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... And...yes, plastic is bad. Other than Nikon plastic. Even Nikon plastic. Actually I was making a wee joke I realize that. I was making one in return. but seriously, what complaint do you have aboout polycarbonate? It's strong, light, doesn't dent, has been used for camera bodies for decades and is all-around good stuff. I assume most DSLRs still use a metal chassis underneath the polycarbonate for those parts that require dimensional stability, as 35mm SLRs did. Whatever they do, it works well. As with the example posted here, plastics, even polycarbonates shear. And are generally not repairable when they do. Polycarbonates are cheap, easy to manufacture, but when a lens housing, for instance is made in a single casting, the mounting flanges can be shorn off with rough handling. With no way to return them to servicability. Machined parts can be replaced. Polycarbonates may have their place. Many times they're in the wrong places. The word "plastic" is sort of off-putting since it makes one think of milk bottles, delicatessen containers and cheap toys, etc. But there are many very different kinds of plastic, just as there are many different metals. I don't think you'd want an SLR made out of lead or even unalloyed iron or copper. And no one has ever suggested otherwise. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ... On 10/8/09 24:26 , Neil Harrington wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 10/6/09 18:49 , Neil Harrington wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... And...yes, plastic is bad. Other than Nikon plastic. Even Nikon plastic. Actually I was making a wee joke I realize that. I was making one in return. Ah. My apologies. remaining points taken |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
On 10/8/09 12:22 , Neil Harrington wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message ... On 10/8/09 24:26 , Neil Harrington wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 10/6/09 18:49 , Neil Harrington wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... And...yes, plastic is bad. Other than Nikon plastic. Even Nikon plastic. Actually I was making a wee joke I realize that. I was making one in return. Ah. My apologies. remaining points taken Apologies unnecessary. **** happens. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:26:31 -0500, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote: : On 10/6/09 17:44 , Rich wrote: : On Oct 4, 10:09 am, wrote: : Is it just me or do many people her have some kind of devotion to : their cameras and lenses; to the point where they are more concerned : with the tools than the images they make? : : It's not you. Too many are pathetically and emotionally tied to their : equipment. Just look at the reaction when anyone criticizes a brand. : If they could convert neurosis into picture-taking talent, they'd all : be publishable. : : I was on a pro bono shoot South Bend, this July, for Pediatric Brain : Tumor Foundation. D300, D700, and an assortment of glass. It was a lot : of fun. At one point someone stepped up to me and asked what I was : shooting....before I could answer, he's looked down at the camera at my : side and said, "Let's see, EOS......." : : I looked at him and took a step back, "ExCUSE ME?!!" : : By that time, he'd caught the "Nikon" on my neck strap, and jumped : back looking like he'd just called Mr T a racial epithet. : : "Oh, God, man...I'm so sorry. Sorry, man...Sorry." And he backed away. : : I laughed about that all the way back to Chicago. : : It really is more of a religion than it is about a brand. : : And, if taken in the proper perspective, very amusing. So what do you make of me, a three-time Nikon owner in film days who bought a Canon when I went digital because my daughter liked her Canon P&S? Judas |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Adoration of cameras
On 10/8/09 19:05 , Robert Coe wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:26:31 -0500, "D. Peter Maus" wrote: : On 10/6/09 17:44 , Rich wrote: : On Oct 4, 10:09 am, wrote: : Is it just me or do many people her have some kind of devotion to : their cameras and lenses; to the point where they are more concerned : with the tools than the images they make? : : It's not you. Too many are pathetically and emotionally tied to their : equipment. Just look at the reaction when anyone criticizes a brand. : If they could convert neurosis into picture-taking talent, they'd all : be publishable. : : I was on a pro bono shoot South Bend, this July, for Pediatric Brain : Tumor Foundation. D300, D700, and an assortment of glass. It was a lot : of fun. At one point someone stepped up to me and asked what I was : shooting....before I could answer, he's looked down at the camera at my : side and said, "Let's see, EOS......." : : I looked at him and took a step back, "ExCUSE ME?!!" : : By that time, he'd caught the "Nikon" on my neck strap, and jumped : back looking like he'd just called Mr T a racial epithet. : : "Oh, God, man...I'm so sorry. Sorry, man...Sorry." And he backed away. : : I laughed about that all the way back to Chicago. : : It really is more of a religion than it is about a brand. : : And, if taken in the proper perspective, very amusing. So what do you make of me, a three-time Nikon owner in film days who bought a Canon when I went digital because my daughter liked her Canon P&S? Judas That's exactly my point. Shoot what you want. It's the output that matters. If you're producing the images you want to produce, the hardware is irrelevant. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Olympus Cameras - similar / consistent results from most of their cameras? | Paul D. Sullivan | Digital Photography | 20 | August 5th 07 09:03 PM |
Best site for buyers of Digital cameras!!! over 200 cameras reviews :) | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 4 | August 7th 06 01:23 AM |
Digital Cameras,Cameras,Film,Online Developing,More | Walmart | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | December 16th 04 11:52 PM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 09:51 PM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras that use film? | [email protected] | Film & Labs | 20 | January 24th 04 09:51 PM |