>> to adapt new styles as they develop. Sporting photography, for example,
>> has gotten so radical that it is nearly impossible to do a fraction of the
>> stuff today without AF, fill-flash (high sync speeds!!!)
>
>What about FP flash, e.g. the T280? I admit you get more shape
>distortion with the slow shutter synch of 1/60, but really I want
>fill flash up to 1/1000, which is higher than the shutter
>synch speed on either Nikon's or Canon's most expensive models.
FP is good, but not powerful enough. To be fair though, the current
"style" is normal or slow speed flash with plenty of motion in the picture
from panning the camera with the subject. But... outdoor fill-flash while
maintaining a shallow DOF is still a problem.
>I notice most of these "extreme" pics use vertical format, perhaps
>in an attempt to minimize the shutter distortion of the vertical
>travel (read: unreliable and fragile) shutters in the
>wonderbricks.
Hmm... Unreliable and fragile? You mean more so than the curtains? The
overuse of the vertical format has to do with magazine use. Most photos of
this genre are taken with covers or single page full-bleeds in mind. If
projection is the market, then horizontal format is required.
>What is really called for is an additional
>high-speed in-lens leaf shutter, which would open and close while
>the focal plane shutter was open. When I see one of those from
>Nikon or Canon I'll call those companies innovative. Innovation
>is not providing useless features; it is identifying a problem
>and solving it. Most of the wonderbrick features are answers
>in search of questions. In this I include matrix metering and
>program modes.
Would be nice, but expensive, cumbersome, noisy, and lots of added
complexity that would slow things down. You think we have shutter lag now?
Matrix metering and program modes DO WORK GREAT--provided you have
experimented with them to know their characteristics. In some lighting
situations, I use nothing but the ESP metering in the IS-3 to determine
proper exposure.
>I'll admit that fast autofocus is needed to take action shots with
>shallow depth of field. If you want that. In normal (for me) use
>on a tripod, autofocus is a hindrance because it needs more hands
>than I have. For candid people shots, a wonderbrick is too
>intrusive. For wildlife: I don't know, but would be worried about
>the noise of the motorized film advance. AFAIK autofocus is not
>yet up to following a fast bird through an f8 mirror lens anyway.
Wonderbricks aren't for every situation, just as the OM-1 isn't for every
situation. If I need silent operation, why not just use a Lieca M6? My
Mamiya press is absolutely silent with the exception if the "BING" of the
mechanical leaf shutter. Unfortunately, that sound is so unusual these
days that it attracts attention by its uniqueness.
>In a year or two (or maybe now), the best solution to this would
>be a digital camera. The "motor drive" would work at frame synch
>speed, and the photographer would choose the best shot from
>the buffer.
Actually, go one step further... $25,000 gets you a digital video camera
that takes 29.97 frames a second and has greater resolution than any of the
digital still cameras generally available. Not only that, but it will
store over an hours worth, in digital format, on tape. How many frames it
that????
>Anyway, since we've now seen this shot, no one ever needs to
>take it again. This style was invented by Leni Riefenstahl for the
>1936 Olympics, using special high-speed cine cameras, and is
>hardly new.
Same could be said for any wildlife or nature shot. I've already seen a
picture of Yosemite Valley by Ansel Adams. No need for anybody on this
list to ever take another. Save film and be creative everyone! (It has
been said that every possible shot has already been taken. This was said
back in the 40's).
Whether a shot has already been done is irrevelevent because it is what the
clients want.
>I don't like many of the trends, Velvia luridness being a perfect
>example.
Luridness still sells. In fact, I'm seeing more saturation and picture
over-processing than ever before. The advantage of the flatter films is
that it is more flexible to work with during pre-production. Let's not all
jump all over Velvia now. It's a tool, just like IR films and B&W films
are tools. I could say that IR photography is idiotic because it's not my
chosen favorite format. My biggest problem with Velvia is heat sensitivity.
>The amateur market is still much bigger than the professional
>market; Nikon sells many more N50's than F5's, and more junky E
>lenses than pro glass.
However, if it wasn't for the flagship models like the F5 they would lose
the amateur market. Case in point, the Canon EOS line didn't really take
off until the EOS-1 was introduced. Without a flagship model, Canon's
development appeared disorganized and unfocused and didn't attract the
masses. But how many Rebels and have sold in comparison to EOS-1s?
>In a 35mm camera for landscape work I need: depth of field
>preview, no built-in motor (it scares the wildlife), very sharp
>lenses, light weight, availability of mechanical body, extreme
>robustness, either manual or aperture priority, and preferably a
>spot meter. There is *no* such affordable camera: only the Om3Ti
>and Leica. The Nikon FM2N has all but the spot meter.
Again, our needs are different. For you, a wonderbrick would be mostly a
waste.
Ken
Kenneth E. Norton
Image66 Photography
image66@xxxxxxx
(217) 224-5004
< 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 >
|