At 8/4/2020 02:45 PM, Ken wrote:
>Am I going for a long hike (8+ miles) or is it a quick out-and-back?
>Is this about getting out and hiking or is it about taking pictures?
>Is there significant elevation gain involved?
>What are the weather conditions like?
>Am I feeling artsy?
>Do I have a headache or does my back hurt?
>Am I feeling guilty about something sitting unused for too long?
>Are the lighting and color conditions better served by one camera over another?
>Are the batteries charged?
I would put "Are batteries charged?" first, if I am heading out the door.
Choices get harder if packing for a trip.
And weather: Is it sunny out or is it sunny out?
What will fit in my bike camelbak?
Did I meditate? (or stretch)
Color? Yes, my cameras all shoot in color.
Are the cactus in bloom?
Are the clouds nice?
Do I need 3 more pounds of water to go with my 2 pounds of camera gear?
What looks like the most Fun to use?
Guilt? none.
Except I am guilty of buying new stuff. My simple criteria is whether I am
having *fun*. I also enjoy the technical side of cameras. I don't need to
justify what I decide to get. I may listen to influencers, but I can get past
the hype. I let curiosity be my guide. Opinions are rampant.
I'm glad that Sony came out with a camera I have been wanting for a long time -
a 12mp, very good low light, camera. My gear acquisition stopped for a long
time at the 12mp Canon 5D. The 5D provided decent noise, compared to the E-1,
had enough resolution, was a responsive camera, and served me well. I also miss
the 180mm macro on that 5D. Here are some older 5D photos I went back and found
(all but one uncropped, Canon 180mm macro on 5D):
https://photos.app.goo.gl/Wo6fjwGNnniSikdC9
https://photos.app.goo.gl/RK2i9QGEqJu4o3XD7
https://photos.app.goo.gl/3nzQYoJSyXS94JyZA
https://photos.app.goo.gl/4adeeXSm78yHRMAJ8
https://photos.app.goo.gl/ieHvhMwe2nf9qKrY7
https://photos.app.goo.gl/SPbVyxh8kPseB5737 (slightly cropped)
those were fun shots to take.
I fear, as Rod Planck does, that the 180mm macro may be a thing of the past.
The 100mm macro on the 5D was not too bad:
Clematis Ken may have referred to in another post a while back?
https://photos.app.goo.gl/izNsAarBKb34ZrXh6
https://photos.app.goo.gl/NZ1S85yRSGkuvxNc8
If all one does is post online, 2mp or less. For printing, 20mp+ is nice to
have.
I tried out the A7Riv, 62mp monster, just because. I found it not so
satisfying. It is a nice camera with important improvements (better grip,
smoother shutter, better controls, nice operating it...). Unfortunately the
high resolution is not it. I was attracted to the higher res EVF, (for one),
but soon found that it was a moot point. The EVF is limited by the camera
sensor noise performance. In low light, the sensor updates at such a rate the
sensor noise dominates in the EVF. I satisfied my curiosity, though, and will
likely be selling it. I'm more likely to grab the A7iii when heading out the
door. Or the GX9.
Ironwood tree in bloom - stack of 9, A7Riv, 90mm macro.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZFrKsTBxSU3PV5BZ9
The new A7S iii, 12mp, low light performer, is the kind of improvement I can go
for. I like new tech and what capabilities it might bring. I don't have any
ascetic, frugal criteria I have to live by. Here is a decent review of the new
A7S. More photography and less talk. He is concerned with how it performs in
the field. The low light capability is impressive (about mid-way).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y94nSdgHnI0&feature=emb_logo
My number one criteria is: am I having fun with the gear? Do I need new stuff?
No, but life is short...
Photon Counter - WayneS
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|