Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Good one! Slobodan Dimitrov On Sep 29, 2006, at 4:44 PM, G Hopkinson wrote: > Slobodan, were you referring to B.D. or me? ;-) > If you hand a DSLR to a Pan Troglodyte, will it Homo Sapiens with > the LCD? > > Cheers > Hoppy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Slobodan Dimitrov [mailto:s.dimitrov@charter.net] > Sent: Saturday, 30 September 2006 01:25 > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] A digital camera without..... > > I think the proper term is simian ape. And yes, any well trained > simian ape can be driven to make a superlative image, with any medium. > > Slobodan Dimitrov > > > > > On Sep 29, 2006, at 8:20 AM, B. D. Colen wrote: > >> Well, it may not be either polite or helpful, Hoppy, it's true - >> and written >> in response to the kind of nonsense we've seen posted over the past >> couple >> days about the ability of any monkey to be a great photographer with >> digital, etc. >> >> As to glass plates v film v digital - market penetration doesn't >> have a damn >> thing to do with it; the transition from film to digital represents >> a sea >> change in capture medium - in the way in which we use light to >> record what >> we see in front of us. And it's the same kind of change we had when >> we went >> from glass plates to film - moving from one capture medium to >> another. The >> fact that there were far fewer people making photographs prior to >> film is >> not the issue. Yes, the creation of film democratized photography. >> But then >> so is the cell phone camera democratizing photography. ( Don't >> forget there >> were many outstanding photographers and editors who scoffed at 35 >> mm cameras >> as 'toys' as 35 was taking over ;-) ) >> >> Sorry, Hoppy, but things have changed in a profound way. If one >> prefers >> using film, great - there's still film and processing available, so >> go for >> it. But at the same time, I think that no matter how much one loves >> film, >> one has to recognize that it is fast becoming an artifact of an >> earlier age. >> Yes, there are still areas of photography in which film is >> superior to >> digital, and dominant. And yes, film will undoubtedly be with us >> for eons to >> come as a 'fine art' medium. But even today, digital and >> photography have >> become synonymous. >> >> So I guess the bottom line is - things change; get used to it >> (please), >> which is not to say that one shouldn't shoot film if one wants to >> do so. :-) >> >> B. D. >> >> >> >> >> On 9/29/06 9:26 AM, "G Hopkinson" <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au> wrote: >> >>> B.D. that's a bit simplistic, suggesting that digital vs film is >>> analogous to >>> film vs glass plates. I doubt that glass plates had >>> the same sort of market penetration that 35mm film has. >>> No question that digital has the majority of the market, but film >>> still >>> remains viable currently. >>> People may choose to use either or both mediums right now. >>> Sayings "things change - get used to it" is neither polite nor >>> helpful in my >>> view. >>> >>> Politely Hoppy >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: B. D. Colen [mailto:bd@bdcolenphoto.com] >>> Sent: Friday, 29 September 2006 21:14 >>> To: Leica Users Group >>> Subject: Re: [Leica] A digital camera without..... >>> >>> Or, even more simply put - you want a digital camera? Buy one. You >>> don't? >>> Don't buy one - stick with film as long as you can; there were >>> undoubtedly >>> people who stuck with glass plates. >>> >>> Things change - get used to it. >>> >>> By the way -the 'hi-speed' frame rate on the digital M8 is the >>> same as the >>> hi-speed frame rate on an M6 with an Abrahamson winder. Oh, and if >>> you don't >>> want to look at the LCD? Don't look it it. If you're chimping it's >>> your >>> fault - not the camera's. ;-) >>> >>> >>> On 9/29/06 1:24 AM, "Nathan Wajsman" <nathan@nathanfoto.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I would not buy a digital camera without a screen, simply >>>> because it >>>> would need to have so many little buttons and wheels in lieu of >>>> the menu >>>> structure that it would be an ergonomic nightmare. >>>> >>>> As for the general comments about "too many features" in digital >>>> SLRs, >>>> the solution is simple--don't use them! The only controls I ever >>>> use on >>>> mine are switching between manual and aperture priority modes, >>>> setting >>>> the ISO speed, changing shutter speed or aperture and formatting >>>> the >>>> memory card. That's it. I never chimp. My LCD is set to display the >>>> picture and its histogram for 3 seconds after taking the picture, >>>> just >>>> so that I can take a quick peak at the histogram if I am so >>>> inclined. >>>> Since I shoot RAW only, my white balance setting is permenantly >>>> on AUTO. >>>> And so on. >>>> >>>> The many features of a 1-series Canon are all there, but they >>>> certainly >>>> don't get in the way of my photography. I have set up the camera >>>> the way >>>> I like it (regarding focus points etc.) and left it like that >>>> ever since. >>>> >>>> All this reminds me of some of the complaining about the aperture >>>> priority mode in the M7 or even the presence of a light meter in >>>> the M6 >>>> (the indications in the viewfinder were distracting etc.). >>>> Solution is >>>> simple: if you don't like AE mode, then don't use it; if you >>>> don't like >>>> the light meter in your M6, then take the battery out. >>>> >>>> Nathan >>>> >>>> David Rodgers wrote: >>>>> Digital cameras have many features. I'm wondering if some >>>>> wouldn't be >>>>> better off with fewer. For instance, what if there was a digital >>>>> camera >>>>> without an LCD preview screen? It'll probably never happen. And >>>>> maybe >>>>> it's not realistic to think it ever would. But if anyone could >>>>> have >>>>> bucked the trend it would have been Leica. What if Leica hadn't >>>>> put an >>>>> LCD on the M8? We'd have screamed, for sure. But might not the >>>>> M8 have >>>>> been a better camera for it? Here's why. >>>>> >>>>> 1) no chimping. My first reaction after snapping the shutter on >>>>> any >>>>> digital camera is to look at the screen to see if I "got it"! >>>>> The irony >>>>> of that is that if I didn't get it I probably just wasted a second >>>>> opportunity because I was too busy looking at the LCD. And so >>>>> what if I >>>>> didn't get it? What are my options? Unless I can fly around the >>>>> world at >>>>> the speed of light and turn back time, it's too late. What time >>>>> I might >>>>> have had I just wasted...chimping. >>>>> >>>>> Consider the case of someone having closed eyes in a shot. It >>>>> takes >>>>> longer to verify that there were no closed eyes than to shoot 5 >>>>> frames, >>>>> which was the old cure for closed eyes. With the M8 we shoot 5 >>>>> frames in >>>>> 2.5 seconds. That's less time that it takes to analyze the LCD. >>>>> Not to >>>>> mention, "Sorry but Uncle Bob had his left eye half shut. >>>>> Everyone line >>>>> up again!" or "Sir could I please get you to walk back under >>>>> that bird. >>>>> I see in my preview window that you didn't have quite the >>>>> expression I'd >>>>> hoped for when it crapped on your shoulder." >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps we need to see images so we can delete the bad ones and >>>>> save >>>>> card space. Yet isn't that one big benefit of digital cameras >>>>> over film? >>>>> Each frame is essentially free, and I'm less constrained by the >>>>> roll of >>>>> 36. Why not just delete bad images later, after they are >>>>> downloaded? >>>>> >>>>> 2) save space inside the camera. I don't know how much room the >>>>> LCD >>>>> takes up, but I'm sure it takes up some. Do away with the LCD >>>>> and you >>>>> can make a smaller camera body. Or better yet, allocate that >>>>> space to >>>>> sensor electronics. (Apart for the M8 place more emphasis on a >>>>> good >>>>> viewfinder. Heck, on many a P&P the LCD has replaced the >>>>> viewfinder). On >>>>> the M8 I'm sure having an LCD meant having a fatter camera. >>>>> >>>>> 3) Longer battery life. That's not a big issue, but it could be in >>>>> certain circumstances. Sure I can turn off the LCD. But it's still >>>>> there. >>>>> >>>>> 4) Longer camera life. Might the LCD be the first thing to go? >>>>> OK, so I >>>>> might be reaching here. I guess we don't really look at cameras >>>>> long >>>>> term today. >>>>> >>>>> 5) Less fear of pressing nose up to back of camera. No explanation >>>>> needed. >>>>> >>>>> OK, I'm sure by now everyone is saying that we still need access >>>>> to the >>>>> menu. After all we've got options to deal with. A simple shutter >>>>> speed >>>>> dial and aperture ring may have been satisfactory way back when, >>>>> but now >>>>> we need to toggle through a thousand and one configuration >>>>> choices. >>>>> Today a simple situation calls for >>>>> "Shades-Down-Red-22-Right-Bleed-Dive-Trips-All-Go" when yester- >>>>> year the >>>>> most complex situation we had to deal with called for >>>>> "Sunny-16-and-Hail-Mary"? >>>>> >>>>> The ability to immediately see results has detracted from the >>>>> discipline >>>>> it takes to make sure we get it right in the first place. >>>>> "Polaroid-like-instant-view-ability" is very >>>>> un-"Leica-M-and-the-decisive-moment"-like. >>>>> >>>>> For those who absolutely must have a preview device here's the >>>>> solution. >>>>> Leica could have offered an LCD as an accessory. Not on the >>>>> camera, but >>>>> a small monitor you could put in your pocket. It would have its >>>>> own >>>>> battery pack, control buttons, and it would easily plug into the >>>>> M8. >>>>> Best of all, just like bright-line finders it could easily be >>>>> misplaced >>>>> allowing Leica yet another source of ongoing revenue. Someone on >>>>> the >>>>> selling side obviously didn't think through all the advantages. >>>>> >>>>> daveR >>>>> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information