Winsor wrote:
<snip>
One point I liked was his reporting of his experiences with running
photography seminars saying that the retired school teachers with
manual equipment got consistently better exposed and sharper results
that younger participants with the latest pro auto equipment.
<<
Not to disagree with Galen or Winsor but this sounds more like
experience and patience than equipment. The kids want instant
results (sans AF cameras) whereas the retired school teachers are
willing to work for that perfect shot. Maybe I'm wrong.
John Cwiklinski
That was the point of the article. The older participants who were
familiar with their equipment versus the younger who had not the
years of experience with their equipment or the discipline to test it
to know its limitations.
Certainly it is a no brainer that anyone can more consistently focus
manually where he wants it than an autofocus camera. That is why MF
is an option on better autofocus cameras. Consistent exposure may be
better with a modern matrix auto exposure system, but a photographer
with a good meter and skills can improve on that. After all a matrix
system is just trying to do electronically for the unskilled what a
skilled photographer does routinely.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
< 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 >
|