To be honest, there is not much wrong with the 5D II, just the finder is
still not as good as the OM, it is critical to us using MF.
With digital I don't have the AF problem which delay my shots but I found I
fire much more than required (I believe everyone do) and this didn't create
more useful shots. I took 240 shots in this 45 minutes photo event where I
used to take 70-90 (2-3 roll) of film in the pass. For many of them I just
shoot before double confirmed the focus and make sure the post and my
composition is the best. I should have been more careful about each shot but
my finger didn't follow. I admit the time pressure is one of the reason but
more important is the 'film' is free. I know this bad habit can be corrected
but it is just not easy so I prefer a total OM system which will slow me
down.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Norton"
> >
>> 5D II is good but no matter how good it is just a electronics device, I
>> enjoy OM much more, the camera and lenses just like precision equipment.
>>
>
>
> Part of this, or maybe even all of it is just operational gestalt. I find
> that when I'm shooting with the OM system I'm "anticipating" the shots,
> whereas with the digital systems I'm "reacting" to the shots.
>
> With the OM-3Ti, I have a constant awareness of the lighting and even
> though
> I may not be shooting at the moment, I'm adjusting things like aperture or
> focus in anticipation of a picture that may happen. With the tactile
> controls, I'm able to just have a start point and as I am looking around,
> as
> I look from one subject to the next I'm focusing or adjusting aperture a
> click or two. When I see the picture I want to take I raise the camera
> and
> the aperture and focus are already close or at the final setting. "Click"
> and the camera is lowered back down in an instant while my eyes are again
> looking for the next picture.
>
> With the digital cameras, I don't have that tactile control mechanism and
> I
> end up using auto-exposure to compensate for the poor control design that
> is
> inherent to all PASM cameras. Same with autofocus--to get the response
> time
> comparable to the prefocused manual camera, we need a gazillion AF points
> and lots of fuzzy-logic to figure things out. No matter how fast a camera
> is, zero to full-press of the shutter-release will delay the picture no
> less
> than a half a second.
>
> This delay, which is so much a part of our lives with AF, is picture
> affecting. For example, when photographing people, the moment you raise
> the
> camera to your face and point it at them, they will look away, change
> expression or something. Anything you can do to eliminate the delay is a
> benefit. With the OM or Leica system, for example, I can raise the camera
> to the eye for framing, click the shutter and have the camera lowered in
> less time than it takes for the AF to figure out which point to use. The
> trick is to be able to take the picture within the one second "recognize
> and
> react" period of your subject.
>
> BTW, I really liked the umbrella picture.
>
> AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|