Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Peter Niessen writes:
> Dear all,
>
> > George Hartzell writes:
> >
> > "One great feature of my Nikon N90s is
> > that it memorizes all of the exposure information, including focal
> > length, and I can download it into my pc/palm pilot. Going back and
> > looking at the images and the info has been really helpful."
>
> IMHO this is an unnecessary feature, for the following reasons:
IMNSHO, I've taken advantage of it to learn a great deal, so I think
it's a great thing. "Necessary?" Nope. If I were
anal^H^H^H^Hcareful enough, I could just write the info down. I'm not
that rigorous though.
Here are some cases where I've used it to improve my photography:
- depth of field. For given focal length (usually lumped into my
brain as near, far, and really far), what's the right aperture to
use to get a particular look? Did I get what I thought I would
get? Is the bokeh too bokeh-ish? Would it have looked better
with some detail in the surroundings? In these situations, I
bracket and then critique the results. But which was which?
- exposure. How should I interpret what my camera's meter is
telling me? When can I trust it and point-and-shoot, and when
will it do me wrong? In situation's where I'm in doubt, I
bracket, try various modes, and then critique the results. But
which was which?
- focus? Is this frame hosed because a) I was depending on
autofocus mode and the camera blew it or b) I was in manual focus
and I blew it?
- focal length. This isn't really important, but it makes it easy
to keep track of which lenses I've been using. I know, for
instance, that I spend a lot of time at the extremes of the
80-200, and so might consider a pair of primes. BUT, I really do
use the intermediate lengths too. I can also tell you, long after
the fact, which lens I used to make an image. Sure, if I like the
image, it's not really important, but it does help the critiques
(plus us camera-gear-geeks like to know that stuff).
- etc....
Again and again, on this list and on others, the grizzled elders tell
the wet-behind-the-ears newcomers that the way to develop an eye is to
practice, practice, practice. But without critical evaluation, you're
just burning film. You never know if you're doing it right or wrong,
or if this works better than that. When I look at my work, I like to
have all of the info I can to figure out what to do the next time I
see something similar.
I have a shot from Germany, with the 75/1.4, of a passel [sic?] of
little tea roses lit by some sun peaking through a hole in the tarp
overhead. The bright point in the image is just a little too hot for
my taste and I'd gladly trade off some shadow detail to bring it down
a bit. It's bad enough to probably make the slide unusable (some
burning might make it printable though). I'm pretty sure that I was
wide open, but maybe not quite. I tried to always just center the
meter, so that I could critique my results, but I remember thinking
that it might not be the right thing for this situation. Did I try to
compensate or not? I wish that I knew!!!
> Although I never used one, I do not doubt that the Nikon N90 serves
> its purpose very well. I am just amused by these features. There can
> also be no doubt that, if Leica ever introduces something like this,
> I'll praise it.
Yep. It's a great tool. I spent a lot of time figuring out what SLR
system to step into first, and the memo feature was one of the things
which pushed me into the nikon. As I learn and grow, I may stick with
it, may upgrade within the brand, or may change tracks. It still has
a lot to teach me though.
g.