Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] I must admit

Subject: Re: [OM] I must admit
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2016 14:25:56 -0800
On 2/6/2016 10:58 AM, Bill Pearce wrote:
Easy to spend the other guy's money. I have the EM5 mark II, and am quite pleased, but I would be even happier with a simplified camera, not a kid's toy. Who in their right mind does in camera photoshopping when all they have is a tiny screen, and the file is forever damaged?

And yet ... I find it easy to ignore the features that are of no use to me. In fact, I tend to forget them, even when they might be of some use.

And some things that have seemed to me unnecessary sops to snapshooters turn out to be useful to pros.I recently read, on some pro's blog, how facial recognition and nearest eye AF on an OM-D was improving his portrait work.

There is a current post on Kirk Tuck's website where he compares using different cameras for different tasks. He recently shot almost identical product shots with a Nikon D810 and a Sony R10. Guess which one won? He draws comparisons between his choices and ownership of several different cameras and systems to a professional chef's kit of knives.

I just looked that up and read it. Some good points and certainly agrees with my own practice. As is common with such analogies, though, there are other professional chefs who say all you need is a paring knife, the biggest chef's knife that fits your hand, and any specialty knives for your own kind of work, boning, bread, etc.

And honestly what I really want is for Fuji to build a digital version of the 
xPan
With maybe AF and white bal. Like that's going to happen.

That's one I don't get. For me, the need for super-wide for landscapes went away with automated panorama stitching. As with so many photographers, I wished for years I could have one of those or the clones, and figured one day I would. But now, I hardly even use my 9-18, but for close quarters. Turn the camera to vertical, pick a FL that gets all the sky and ground, even if it gets cropped off later, and shoot 6-12 overlapping shots. Hand held is more than fine; all that fancy stuff of gadgets to rotate around the lens node, yada, yada, is just unnecessary noise for landscape. 180º or more is a snap.

I do that and get wider coverage, with less distortion and no uneven exposure requiring extra, special $$$ filters. I've done a lot of these, printed up to 22" wide. They are excellent and impress viewers no end. All, I think, wider than an X-Pan shot. An X-Pan would just be another expensive paperweight.

I do kinda wonder why no one has made a 7 mm or so prime for µ4/3 The 7-14 zooms are such monsters. Maybe the sensor stack is think enough that it would have to be a retrofocus design, and almost as big, heavy and $$ish as the zooms? The Panny 14/2.5 is about as tiny and cute a little pancake lens as I can imagine. Something like that in a shorter FL would be nice, say even 9-10 mm, if 7 or 8 isn't possible.

If Wishes were Horses for Courses Moose

--
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