On Fri, 6 Aug 1999 JIM_TEO@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
About Doris' blatherings:
> Of course. I agree 100%. Although if you had to cover a boxing match,
> and were given a pinhole camera to do it, you might not come back with
> as many usable images as the guy with the F5 and the 300/2.8...
> the type of equipment CAN and does make a difference. *= Doris Fang =*
>
> Such comparison is somehow totally out, how could we compare a
> primitive camera to a high tech one? It is just like recording a 100M
> sprint timing using a sundial to a digital watch.
I was hoping the point about TYPES of cameras being better suited
for different jobs could be made in my usual hyperbolic style, but I
see I need to be perfectly literal here. Okay. How about having to
shoot the boxing match with a digital Sinar 8x10 as opposed to an
EOS-1n/300/2.8 ? Or shooting tabletop food set-ups with the
300/2.8 as opposed to the Sinar ? Is this making sense to anyone ?
*= Doris Fang =*
>
> Jim Teo_____________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
> < 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|