[snip]
> IMO, it's a case of the right tools for YOU. Funny, one often sees
>amateurs huffing and puffing at Disneyworld, dodging postmodern
>mouseketeers under creaking bagfuls of stuff, while some pros go
>and fill National Geographic articles with reams of great pics carrying
>3-4 lenses. Go figure.
>
Well said Doris. Just reading the G's long lists I cranky and sweaty
thinking about the big bag burden.
These days I'm done to one lens one body: 0M4-50/1.2 and an incident light
meter. For a long time it used to be the 35/2, but I found I was cropping so
much at the printing stage. Sometimes I'll throw the 21/3.5 or 85/2 in my
pocket for safe measure.
Saw a Lee Miller show on the weekend (Presentation House Gallery, North
Vancouver) and was truly inspired by the fact that vast majority of the
photos were done w/ a standard lens--she used a rolleiflex for almost all
the field work. The range of her expression is dumbfounding from fashion
photography and surrealism, from the 1945 images of Buchenwald and Dachau to
her "environmental portraits" of Picasso and friends.
Glen
< 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 >
|