>Shawn Wright wrote:
>
>>I don't doubt this, but my point was that very few modem technobricks seems
>to
>>meter much below 1EV, whereas my 4T says it will go to -5EV, which is quite
>a
>>difference. Or as you alluded to, even if they do, most technobrick slaves
>have
>>no idea how to make the camera do what *they* want...
>>Since I work with computers all day long, I have *zero* interest in
>learning
>>yet another computer platform in my photography - it is an escape for me.
>
>Agreed 100%. The OM-4 will, as far as I know, meter lower than most, if not
>all other 35mm SLR. This doesn't mean that other cameras can't take low
>light pictures. It just means that you might have to work harder at it. And
>the F5 can do things very easily that OM-4 users have to work very hard to
>accomplish. All camera brands and models have advantages and disadvantages.
>My point is that technobricks are not the pieces of junk that they are
>sometimes made out to be. We, as Olympus users, consider a technobrick owner
>silly when they put down Oly gear just because it doesn't have the latest
>bells and whistles. We become just as silly when we knock technobricks for
>having those bells and whistles.
>
>Yes, as you said, the real problem is the owners. They won't or can't learn
>the knowledge required to operate their cameras. This would apply no matter
>what camera they own, OM-4 or F5. Many point-and-shoot owners don't even
>understand the half dozen or so features on their cameras. Most of us on the
>list are computer literate, some more so than others. But we all took the
>time and effort to learn something about computers. If we were all to
>purchase N*k*n F5 or F90x cameras
>(whether we want to is another issue), we would probably spend the time to
>thoroughly learn their operation. This is not always the case with their non
>pro owners.
>
>I also like the simplicity of the OM system. Obviously this is one of the
>reasons why we all use it. But what's great about Olympus doesn't take away
>from the good features of some other brand. I'm just sometimes perturbed by
>the bashing that goes on. Just because this is the Olympus list doesn't mean
>we can't appreciate other products for their good points. And yes, they do
>have good points. Please understand Shawn, that I am not addressing any of
>this to you personally.
>
>I agree with you about not wanting to learn another computer system.
>Photography is also an escape for me. I think that's why I've resisted going
>to a digital darkroom. There's something very primal about going into a dark
>room and sticking my hands in smelly chemicals and making a print, as
>opposed to doing it in daylight with a few clicks of a mouse. I actually
>derive a pleasure from it that I can't match using a computer. But this in
>no way invalidates the digital darkroom for others. Everything has it's
>place and time.
>
>Regards,
>John Austin
>
I agree too. Actually I think the advantage of the OM system is that it is
traditional in 900f its design and was designed to be easy to operate for
either new photographers or more experienced photographers who would not
have to unlearn much to use it. Its improvements on tradition were
significant and meaningful in the photographic process: smaller, lighter,
and later metering. In addition it has an elegance of design, use, and feel
that is engaging and does not tempt one to "trade up". The result is a lot
of OM users who became skilled in the operation of the equipment. The
disadvantage, I think, of the "competition" is that they sell features and
have regular model changeovers like cars. So people who chase features end
up never quite learning the complicated new features and have a tendency to
trade for the latest model. So there always going to be amused OM users
smiling at the confusion of users of the "competition."
Another advantage of OM is the encouragement of thought in the picture
taking process. For instance, autofocus, has an advantage in fast action
shooting. But almost no one needs it, because that is not the kind of
shooting most people do, amateur or professional. If you do not have
autofocus and want to take action shots you have to plan ahead, predict the
action, preset focus, and shoot the shot you wanted without AF delay. With
AF there is a tendency, I think, to think less about what you are after,
less need to understand the "game" or the subject and just click what you
see. Since there is a bigger lag generally with more automatic cameras you
miss your shot more so there is a tendency to do multiple shots and pick
out a good one when the prints get back.
My 2 cents.
Winsor
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|