It seems to me that our more automated cameras may enhance the
process of producing fine photos. Stay with me on this (g). If one
is shooting a fluid scene, sports, children, any action; the more
automated AF, Program mode cameras in the hands of a photographer
who knows how to use them would free the photographer up to compose
and shoot better photos.
I wager that most of us who have OM-2 and OM-4, etc. use the auto
mode more than manual. We can control depth of field and aperture
while being cognizant of the shutter speed that results from a given
aperture setting. Thus, little if any math or detailed thought
process regarding aperture and shutter speed gets in the way of the
"creative process".
In the time I have had my OM-4t I may have used the manual mode
twice. I find the auto mode to be easier and it does free me up to
"get the shot." This is especially true with children who are
elusive as heck.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Dave Dougherty
I admit I use my OM4T in auto mode most of the time too. However, I
use it mostly with the spot meter which requires the most judgment in
setting the exposure. The OM4T is a long way from an automated
camera as exemplified by most cameras today. I have never felt
comfortable with the manual meter display or the operation of the
shutter speed ring on the OM4T which may be why I prefer automatic.
I have been known to point, focus and press the shutter, but I really
do not feel in control when I do that. I feel like less of a
photographer and only do it when it is the only alternative for a
grab at some kind of image.
My previous experience was many years with a manual camera which I
used mostly in shutter speed preferred mode. A few years after I got
my OM4T I got an OM1N and using it was a revelation in ease for me
both in instantly understanding the display and its mechanical
handling. The improvement over the OM4T in manual was amazing. It is
a delight to use.
I have used modern automatic cameras a little, recently, and I do not
find them to be easy to use - nothing instinctive or quick about an
LCD menu. It is not just what I am used to either. If you take a
look at the steps you are going through to achieve the same end an
automatic camera is much more cumbersome to use. You know, "They
were setting their modes while I took my picture and walked back to
the car." And if you take the time to set it up in advance for the
kind of shooting you are going to do, you can do the same thing with
a manual camera in much less time and without waiting for the camera
to make last minute adjustments - dreaded shutter lag.
As far as spontaneous pictures are concerned that type of photo was
essentially created by Leica users with manual focus, rangefinder
fields, multiple frame lines in the viewfinder and, at best, only a
small meter mated to the shutter speed dial. Seeing the picture
happens in your head and you can confirm it through all kinds of junk
in the viewfinder. Sometimes I suspect only a strong picture will
make it through a busy viewfinder and your quality level will
improve. Of course people had few lenses then and fewer cameras and
they really got to know how to use their equipment.
Well, I went a little far afield from what you were talking about.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
< 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 >
|