Bob Whitmire wrote:
> Didn't mean to imply the 510 was a pro camera. But I'm a pro and I
> use one. <g>
The word "Pro" is like the word "Food". It's pretty generic. Just
like I wouldn't cook hotdogs for a formal dinner, I wouldn't use some
types of cameras for shooting a wedding. I wouldn't take caviar on a
camping trip either.
IF the primary aspect of my money-making photography was dependent
upon "resolution", I surely wouldn't be using an E-1. However, since
my primary aspect of money-making is photographing people and events,
the ability to "get the picture" is actually more important than how
many pixels the sensor might have.
I am continually puzzled by conversations revolving around "dynamic
range". Wedding photography is really tough for some because of the
extremes in contrast (white dress, black tux). I've been totally
spoiled, I guess, because in the pro-forums, this is such a big
issue, but I rarely, if ever, have this problem. I must be doing
something wrong, I guess. ;)
I've looked seriously at the E-500 and the E-330. The E-500 just
didn't do anything for me. Yeah, I can use anything
"professionally", but I'd rather not fight the camera for my
application. What do I mean by "fight the camera"? What about the
mode-dial? How easy is it to bump it out of the desired position?
What about seperate control dials for aperature and shutter-speed?
What about WB adjustment without going into menues? What about a
PC-socket for external flash? It's the little-things like this which
really make-or-break a camera for use in ever-changing conditions and
your brain is tied up with totally non-technical issues.
AG
____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|