Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Is the issue of camera noise over-rated? - Talk among st yourselves...:-)
From: Bill Satterfield <cwsat@istate.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 13:05:52 -0600
References: <006001c2c6f4$f5671a90$0316fea9@ccasony01>

She did not want her precious little darling disturbed. Mothers, by 
instinct, human or animal, are very protective of their young. The baby 
comes first. This changes after they grow up, then the husband comes first.

bdcolen wrote:

>;-)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Beddoe,
>Neil
>Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 11:37 AM
>To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
>Subject: RE: [Leica] Is the issue of camera noise over-rated? - Talk
>among st yourselves...:-)
>
>
>I took a picture of my friend's daughter asleep after her christening
>ceremony and got a telling-off from her mother for using a loud camera;
>the same camera I had been using to snap away during the ceremony itself
>unnoticed by anyone - an M6.  
>
>Neil
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bdcolen [mailto:bdcolen@earthlink.net]
>Sent: 28 January 2003 15:40
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: [Leica] Is the issue of camera noise over-rated? - Talk amongst
>yourselves...:-)
>
>
>On another Leica list, during a discussion of what camera outfit someone
>have, a responder made the following comment...
>
>"The one thing I 
>might add to my bag is an M-somethingorother to use in 
>situations where near absolute silence is required (and in this 
>regard, nothing but an M fills the bill in terms of 
>interchangeable-lens cameras thus far)."
>
>To which I responded:
>
>"We got talking about the subject of camera noise, quiet, etc., last
>night in the final session of the four-week documentary photo course I
>just finished teaching. And in talking this through I came to a
>startling realization - we tend to grossly over-rate the need for
>"silence." 
>
>Yes, the unobtrusiveness of the Ms is great. But first off, they are not
>nearly as silent as we think they are. Yes, if there is any kind of
>background noise, the "click" disappears - but so does the whine of a
>single SLR. On the other hand, in a place like a church, when there is
>silence or near silence, the click of an M can sound like the report of
>a rifle - not that anyone cares. And THAT's the really important thing
>to consider: ' The person who is most aware of the noise generated by a
>camera is the photographer, who has the camera jammed in his ear. Most
>people being photographed hear the noise as long as they are paying
>attention to the fact that they are being photographed, and then they
>ignore it, and probably cease to hear it. When I'm shooting on a job, I
>use both Ms and Nikon F100s, which are relatively quiet, but hardly
>M-like, SLRS. And I get no more reaction from subjects when I'm using
>the motor-driven reflex than I do when I use the M. I may be more
>comfortable with the M, but it's no big deal to the subject.
>
>If you don't believe this, consider for a moment that a documentary
>photographer like Eugene Richards, who has shot crack addicts, and been
>in potentially life-threatening situations, uses Olympus OM3s and Canon
>F1s - both really "clacky" SLRs, which he shoves to within inches of his
>subjects faces. James Nacthwey uses Canon EOSes, and again, works close
>and does so in hairy situations.
>
>Sure, it's nice to have a quite camera. But we seem to forget to
>important things:
>
>First, cameras, and the noise they generate, is ubiquitous - everyone
>owns a P&S and they all make noise; those noises are part of the
>background music of all important life occasions, as, for that matter,
>are flashes going off;
>
>Second, what is really important is the way the photographer works, the
>way he or she relates to the subject, and not the decibel level of the
>camera."
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>------
>This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
>the designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended
>recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review,
>dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly
>prohibited.  This communication is for information purposes only and
>should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an
>offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation of any
>transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman Brothers.  Email
>transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.
>Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or
>accurate and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is
>subject to change without notice.
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> (RE: [Leica] Is the issue of camera noise over-rated? - Talk among st yourselves...:-))