On the subject of professional use -
I attended the evening session of International Symposium of Aviation
Photographers at the C. R. Smith Museum adjacent to DFW International last
week. Eight well- to un- known aviation shooters presented slide shows at
that session and talked about their work. Only one admitted to still using
manual focus - and he shoots N*k*n. The vast majority shoot C*n*n E*S.
Canon subsidizes several and has featured two from this bunch in their
advertising. Two showed in-camera digital work with a D1 and the Canon
equivalent, but none are using digital for paying work. Sadly, not an OM
user among the bunch. Velvia, Provia and some Kodachrome are films of
choice. Little mention of Ektachrome.
The most impressive work was Mark Schaible's Canon 300 IS shots - 1/60 s at
f/8 handheld air-to-air shots that were razor sharp, and showed 360 degrees
of prop arc. I'm not sure that one could do this with any other piece of
glass. He's just a wet behind the ears kid (25) - but is chief photographer
for EAA's stable of 5 magazines. He shoots a lot and it shows. He often
mounts a camera on the wing of a various ultralights pointing inboard and
sends the pilots off with instructions on how to he wants the shots made.
Ultralights typically have no enclosure around the cockpit. One ultralight
pilot was gone for a long time. Seems he landed at a secluded strip,
undressed, took off again and made a shot of the naked pilot airborne in his
ultralight! It was the only shot on the roll that came out. The
possibilities of large insect impact are too gruesome to contemplate.
Also impressive was the breadth of high-quality work done by two USAF Tech
Sargent photojournalists. A shot of pararescuemen jumping into San
Francisco bay on a training mission was spectacular, as was a head-on night
shot of two B-1B pilots in the cockpit with night vision goggles.
Most disappointing were those done of the Breitlinger Fighters European tour
by a big name Japanese air-to-air shooter. He's clueless about choosing
appropriate shutter speeds for propeller-driven airplanes.
Most disgusting was the story by a former ABC News producer who talked his
way into a job with Lockheed. He'd never sold a still picture when they
stuffed him in the back seat of an F-16 at Edwards and sent him off to shoot
the F-22.
Least believable story was that the chief flight surgeon for the Nevada ANG
shoots air-to-air from the back seat of an F-16 with an . . .
8x10 !!!!!!!!!!!!
Jay miller tells the story. I guess it's true. He says the prints are
really something.
Regards
Gary Edwards
people, places, flight at: http://members.home.com/garyetx/index.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: gwsears <gwsears@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] newly introduced
> I agree with Tom on this one. As serious amateur/hobbiest as well
> as collectors that we all are, the OM is the way to go for the pure
> love of the equipment, as well as the hobby.
>
> But for pro photographers, there's no way OM should be
> considered. The Nikons, Canons rule that venue.
< 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 >
|