Re: [Leica] lower classes don't use leicas?

[Tarek Charara <tarek.charara@wanadoo.fr>]

le 04.09.2001 16:15, Mxsmanic à mxsmanic@hotmail.com a écrit :

> Tarek writes:
> 
>> My experience also goes for automatic cameras.
> 
> My experience is that automatic cameras (at least those of professional
> quality)
> make decisions no worse than my own in a majority of situations, and often
> considerably better.

Computers in cameras don't take decisions as how to expose your picture. You
do. Automatic exposure or not. That's probably why they invented AE lock et
al.


> 
>> 99% Wow! Fantastic. Great. I think it's more a
>> 80/20 ratio.
> 
> Your experience may differ.

Nothing to do with experience. It's called the paretto (sp) principle. 80%
of my equipment is used for 20% of my pictures and 20% of my equipment for
80% of my pictures. 20% of my clients account for 80% of my billing etc.
etc. a very amusing principle I learned at a business seminar. Now you can
use that to impress your friends.

> 
>> BS. My Arca Swiss is not even a rangefinder
>> and it's a damn good professional camera.
> 
> I do not see the relevance of this.

Neither do I, but I thought it sounded good.

> 
>> You'll need a 1/16000 of a second to shoot
>> at 2.8 with Tri-X rated at 400ISO ...
> 
> No.  Under typical daylight conditions, an extra stop is necessary.  The most
> common exposure for Provia 100F for me in daylight, for example, is f/8 at
> 1/250, or one stop more than the Sunny-16 rule would imply.  Sunny-16 applies
> to
> brilliantly sunlit subjects only.

You must be one brilliantly sunlit subject. Wow! Where are my sunglasses?
BTW I thought you relied on your brilliant computer to take decisions. Don't
bother with thinking...

> 
>> In my original post I suggested a ND filter...
> 
> There is no ND filter built into the M.

Amazing! Have you looked everywhere?

> 
>> I wonder how they used to do it before F5's
>> came out? Huh? Hey Anthony, how did they do
>> it before?
> 
> In many cases, they didn't.  There are some techniques that can work under
> some
> conditions, such as prefocusing, but one notes that many sports photos seen
> today simply were not taken at all decades ago.

Sure thing. I knew a guy 15 years ago who specialised in cars. He had no AF
cameras. Plain ole F1 with a few telephoto lenses. Great pictures.

> 
>> Rewind and put in another roll.
> 
> That is difficult to do in one or two seconds.

> 
>> Or are you trying to tell me that you are so
>> broke you can't afford to do that?
> 
> I am pointing out the realities of taking pictures, although I find it odd
> that
> I must do so on a list nominally discussing photography.

You create the reality you live. My reality doesn't include such situations.

> 
>> Like when you're tired of focusing?
> 
> Yes, or when you can't focus accurately or quickly enough for the
> circumstances.
> 
>> In my career I haven't encountered many
>> situations like that.
> 
> Then you have something yet to look forward to.
>I have encountered such situations.

Good for you


> 
>> Speedy to me means they get the camera repaired
>> before my next assignment ...
> 
> That won't help you for your current assignment.  How far apart are your
> assignments?

Sufficently. Besides I don't rely on one system only.

>> If you can afford them and can carry them why not.
> 
> Indeed.  But many people cannot afford them, and many professional
> photographers cannot justify the expense--in business,
> you must justify expenses, rather than
> simply spend money because it is on hand.

I started my business with one camera and 20% of my earnings. It was obvious
for me to invest in cameras, lenses and other stuff so that I could expand
my business. Many people do this and it has nothing to with "just" spending
money because it's on hand.

>> I guess you still don't get it... I don't buy
>> identical cameras ONLY because one could break.
>> I actually use them.
> 
> Then speaking of them as if you buy them only to protect against equipment
> failure in the context of this discussion is misleading.

I'm sorry if what I said was misleading. On the other hand I never said
anything about how to use your equipment. I thought you were a pro who knew
how to use two or three bodies with different lenses in order to save those
precious seconds when you need to change films or lenses.

> 
>> The original point was answering your statements ...
> 
> I'm still waiting for the criteria applied by Leica to determine whether or
> not
> a photographer is "professional."  I asked you about that several times, and
> you
> haven't answered.