I've been shooting most everything in manual mode for a long time. It's
a lot easier to just tweak the shutter speed or aperture a bit than try
to fiddle with an exposure compensation control.
Chuck Norcutt
Ken Norton wrote:
> The snipe bids at the last moment will bring the price up in line. It
> does look to me that this particular one has been used enough so it
> isn't a mint copy. That will affect the price quite a bit, but it also
> means that somebody will be getting a camera that they shouldn't be
> afraid of actually taking outdoors.
>
>> For a while there, I really though life couldn't get better than an OM-1
>> for my needs (an all-manual camera) but boy was I wrong. And it's
>> actually got nothing to do with the multi-spot metering.
>
> 1/2000, right?
>
> I know I like mine and will continue to push it to the limits. Just as
> with the lenses, it's not that this camera takes pictures any better,
> it's that I take better pictures with it.
>
> Anybody thinking that maybe they'd like to get a 3Ti but not sure
> about it? Well, just do it and if after a year you decide that it was
> a wasted effort, just sell it.
>
> With auto-exposure, life is a lot simpler and easier. But how a manual
> camera affects me directly is I am constantly monitoring the light and
> seeing what it is doing. This greater awareness of light is
> translating into better pictures because I end up seeing things I
> normaly don't see. Let me try to explain:
>
> 1. Photographer with auto-everything camera sees subject. Photographer
> with auto-everything camera photographs subject.
>
> 2. Photographer with manual camera sees subject. Photographer with
> manual camera sees light. Photographer with manual camera uses light
> as part of the composition which usually requires relocation and/or
> exposure modification. Photographer photographs subject with improved
> light.
>
> An over-simplified explanation, I'm sure, and worthy of Moose's wrath,
> but it isn't necessarily an either/or issue, but usually just a matter
> of degrees. By increasing the awareness of light, sometimes it's just
> a very very slight change in how the picture is shot that results in
> an occasional dramatic difference, but more typically just the
> difference between "ho-hum" and "ok, this works."
>
> As a varient of explanation #2, I'm more often than not seeing the
> light first, adjusting the exposure along the way and then looking for
> the subject to fit the light.
>
> AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|