Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Cameras for all moods

Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras for all moods
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:13:04 -0700
On 8/4/2020 11:27 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
I'm convinced that the "influencers"

How much influence could an influencer peddle, if an influencer could peddle 
influence?

Isn't this some incestuous game? Do they really influence anyone outside of 
their little community?

(smart people

Smart sounding people.

with a youtube
channel or blog) on the Interwebs are really just bunch of ignorant
baboons going "oooo, ahhh, ooooo, ahhhh" over every bobble that is new
and shiny, but really are clueless in regard to what "art" is all
about.

I probably agree, but haven't watched enough to know.

They equate technical specifications with quality, and features
with usability.

Here, there should be a happy medium, Robin Wong, perhaps. People like Mike at TOP completely ignore newer features that actually DO make shots possible that weren't before.

We see it in nearly every area. Cars, bicycles, cameras, watches,
cellphones, espresso makers, computers, etc. Oh, and never forget home
stereo systems!

This part of "We" doesn't, 'cause he doesn't watch, listen to or read that crap.

The fact is that in all of these listed topics, the
"90% Rule" <. . .>

In regards to cameras, this has been well represented by the halo
products, the professional grade products, and the consumer or low-end
products. These days, the halo products are full-frame mirrorless
cameras with 50+ MP sensors. The lenses are massive, highly corrected
monstrosities that cost as much as a brand new Toyota Corolla. The
problem I see with these top-grade items is the overall "usability"
has topped out and actually goes the opposite direction. The more
expensive, bigger, and heavier the item, the less likely I am to carry
it with me.

Huzzah!

This is personal to me with my various camera systems. The recent
acquisition of the Sony A7 Mk2 is a near-perfect example reaching the
90% point with relatively little cost. For $1000, I was able to get a
brand-new full-frame 24MP camera WITH a kit lens.

The A7 and Mk II are really nice, capable cameras. I love them for use with old MF FF lenses But, by the time they have native lenses attached, they go over the "bigger, and heavier the item, the less likely I am to carry it with me." line for me for field use. The 24-240 is a monster, compared to .a comparable µ4/3 lens, Ditto the 16-35.

For just a few dollars more, and I have an adapter to use an entire fleet of
high-quality lenses.

I'm more interested in ancient lenses with interesting flaws and contemporary LensBabies, etc. :-) Most impressive with the OM 600/6.5, though. Would probably do better with the 300/4.5 than I managed with film, too

For the cost of a trade-in of an EXTREMELY
well-used (totally worn out) Canon 6D, I got a Panasonic GX85 with two
lens kit. For a minimal spend, I got three Kodak-CCD Olympus cameras
AND a lens. For another minimal spend, I'm looking to expand that kit
further. Most are comfortably high up on the curve, nesting in
someplace near the 90% point. My investment is low, but the return is
high. Would I like one of those brand-new Sony A7R Mk 23 cameras?
Sure! Would I get value out of it? Probably not.

There are days when I grab a specific camera and set of lenses based
on the specifics of what I'm doing or where I'm going. There are days
when I'll pick something completely different. Sometimes, I'll grab
three systems at once! The point is that no one system is "best" 100%
of the time. They are all compromises. The better systems do more or
even all, but at a cost--both monetary and physical.

The "influencers" are almost always wrong in regards to this. They
equate cost/features/newness with ultimate value, but they miss out on
the intangibles. Just because something is "best" may completely be in
opposition to what is usable.

Yup, always a matter of trade-offs.

However, it is too easy to go the other
way and place unrealistic benefit to something that is actually too
small and limited. Cell-phone cameras certainly fit into this
category. The problem I have with cell-phone cameras is that they
aren't NOT anywhere near the 90% point as a photography tool. What
they do well, they do VERY well, but what they can do well is a
limited subset of my photography needs.

My objections to IQ have been moved way down the list of defects, with the Halide app on iPhone Xs. But the lack of anywhere near enough FL range and the poor ergonomics, it's still my last choice.

The influencers, however, typically determine what photography needs
are based on their own definitions and desires.

As you say below, for yourself, at some point, it gets personal.

If Bokeh is your god, then deep DoF is a tool of the devil.

The fun thing, among those folks, is that their definitions of good bokeh are all over the place, and often directly contradictory.

I would like to delve into why I grab a specific camera for a specific
type of picture, but that goes deep into my own definitions and
desires as a photographer.

Yup Yup

Personal Preferences Moose

--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz