--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: [OM] Has the time come for the unthinkable? |
|
From: |
sje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
Date: |
15 Dec 98 23:52:57 |
Dave Haynie wrote:
>On the other hand, there is a valid point here. Maybe we're not quite at
>the stage of all this technology getting in the way of actually shooting
>photos
no, for some it can get in the way of producing a *successful* photo.
>it occurred to me that I stick with OM gear
>for much the same reasons Eno's describing musicians seeking out older
>analog grear:
I haven't got anywhere *near* exploring the limits of my acoustic guitar
(and never will), but it gives me more pleasure than any computer, any
synth, any electronic keyboard or electronic hardware. Simple photographic
equipment, with appropriate subject matter, can work in a similar manner. I
don't propose that all sports photogs use a 10x8 field camera, or that macro
specialists get a handheld magnifying lens!
>No one
>really asks the question of whether the technology SHOULD evolve
they don't want to - their jobs/profits rely on it. Whether they are the
manufacturer, retailer, pro consumer, they all require to make a living.
Those of us who are in the position to choose OM, do so because it suits our
needs. I think far too many people are seduced by the so-called endless
possibilities provided by buttons, lcd display panels and 1/8000sec shutter
speeds. It's a triumph of marketing when we buy such things, because
they've convinced us we need something other than what we have already.
Simon E.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
--- End Message ---
