Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Lenses, Cameras and family events

Subject: Re: [OM] Lenses, Cameras and family events
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 21:13:54 -0800
On 12/31/2012 7:25 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
> Maybe I need to ask the question of "why upgrade"? Overall, I've been
> pretty satisfied with my gear. All of you who have upgraded from the same
> or similar equipment have been dissatisfied with the upgrades since you've
> been continuing to upgrade.

Welllll, I never upgraded from that stuff.   'Cause I never bought into it.

> Here is an example--how many Micro 4/3 cameras have you bought now?

Two, an E-M5 and a 5 cent E-PL1 as a back-up. ;-)

> So, the Moose does his little jesting about my obscure DMC-L1.

Hey, it worked!

> It turns out
> that this is one of those cameras that you will either love or hate. I get
> a kick out of people falling all over themselves to buy the Fujis for just
> the reasons the L1 was designed. Wow! Welcome to the party--you're a little
> late, though.

I've not fallen for those Fujis, but in fairness, they are very different 
designs, and with a lot more pixels.

> I also get a kick out of Mike Johnson (TOP) who repeatably talks about his
> all time favorite camera kit--The OM-4T and a couple of F2 lenses. He's
> still trying to chase that setup over and over again. Meanwhile, I'm using
> that exact kit to accomplish the type of pictures he's trying to do the
> lazy way today. He's dreaming for another OM-4T instead of having kept and
> used the one he had.

Carrying around a D800 is lazy???

Seriously, I agree with you to some extent. To me, the real point there is that 
Mike's not really, to my mind, a 
photographer in the sense that you or I are, different as we are. He's a 
writer, editor, photo book collector and small 
time gear head. It seems he enjoys looking at other peoples images more than 
making his own.

Can you recall a single image he's posted that you thought was an excellent 
photograph, for its own sake?

He posts grab snaps and test shots. But he's a first rate photography blogger. 
At least I'm hooked, check in every day 
and post occasional replies. That's of far more value to me than another good 
photographer posting images.

> Stop chasing, start shooting!

Yes, Sir!

395 pics, 12/24-26, rain or not, and only a handful are of family. A few strike 
me as pretty good.

> I learned many years ago that it is better for me to upgrade the
> photographer than it is to upgrade the camera.

Oh, do we now have to make a choice?

> We've reached the point of
> sufficiency in technical terms many years ago with our digital cameras.

IQ sufficiency, yeah, pretty much.

> I do want a new digital camera, but I'm very specific about what I want and
> why I want it. Just upgrading for the sake of upgrading isn't going to fly.

IQ is only one part. I upgraded for live view, articulated/tilting screen, high 
ISO, video and size/weight. Although 
aside from dim conditions*, they don't directly affect measurable IQ, in 
practical use, they affect both the IQ of many 
images I take and allow me to take others I would not otherwise be able to 
capture.

I believe I only upgrade for useful added capability - but I may be delusional.

> On a side note, I just got back to the hotel room after shooting some stuff
> down at the docks. OM-3Ti, 28/2 and Neopan 400. Would anybody care to be so
> bold as to suggest that the OM-D EM5 will be a wonderful when it's 15 years
> old?

Well, I didn't think the E-1 was a good camera when it came out. I don't think 
it's gotten any better in the subsequent 
nine years.

What do concern me are pop Photo's accolade as "The Best New Photography Gear 
Of The Year" for the E-M5 and that it just 
won the DPR reader's choice Camera of The Year. Good for Oly at a difficult 
time, though.

> It's a nice camera, but not that nice. Moose would be grousing about
> me using some out of date obscure camera and wishing that I'd buy a new
> camera.

Be fair! I groused not about your digital camera choices, but about the lengthy 
analytical posts about them and paeans 
of praise for them. :-)

> Me thinks some of you guys are into cameras, not photography.

No doubt about it. And nothing wrong with it. Whatever keeps folks enjoying 
life. There were a nice couple of posts, 
with great responses, on this subject on TOP recently.

OTOH, unlike many years ago, I don't fondle cameras, and spend little time 
keeping up with what's out there. When I 
need/want a new camera with capabilities the ones I'm using don't have, I have 
to do a lot of research. I don't have a 
running list in my head. When I say cameras, I mean two. At any time, I have 
one DSLR/ILC and one compact that account 
for about 99% of the photos I take.

You may or may not like what I do, photographically, but it is, for me, all 
about the images. I like taking 'em, I like 
looking at 'em and most of the time, I like processing 'em.

Ahhhh, pulled a chain, got a good response, let my own chain be pulled ...

Pull Chain Moose

* Seattle is an ISO 3200 city in winter.

-- 
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz