I too rely on my E-1 to deliver the bacon. I shot about 300 pictures on
Sunday, all at ISO 800 indoors at West Point, NY (the United States
Military Academy) for an indoor track meet. I guess I could have used
another two stops, but I got about 50% keepers, which is average. Shooting
indoor track, I focus manually on the inside lane anyway, so fast AF
doesn't add any value.
Larger file size? No need for 95%+ of my use. Most people that order my
prints don't go above 5x7, so the extra processing time, energy, and
storage space is just wasted. In fact, I shoot SHQ JPG >95% of the time,
as I don't need the extra flexibility or dynamic range offered in a RAW
image. I talked to a pro last year who shot middle-school sports and he
was shooting at the equivalent of SQ mode on my E-1 (He used a 20D). Why?
His clientèle only ordered 4x6's and the small file size made his CF cards
go further, his post processing workflow faster, and the upload time
quicker.
So I sit back and laugh at the photographers who spend their time arguing
about whether the 30D or the D200 is better. They proudly stand up in the
online forums, beat their chests, and proclaim to the world that "I'm outa
here. I've switched to the new Canikon, and my POS old Nicanon that I had
is crap and is for sale!" And then they post photos with their work and
they're often mediocre at best. Gearheads.
We had a guy come to our local photo club and show lovely black-and-white
20x24's that he'd shot. He unfurled 20 or 30 of them, one after another of
gritty inner-city gym portraits. They really were great. The guy that was
the main subject bought 500 of himself of different poses, but chose color
prints. (Yea, I guess he likes himself!) So what's interesting about
this? The photographer didn't remember what camera he used, "one of the
Canons; I don't remember which one". No proclamations either about the
latest and greatest printer. He had them done at a Sam's Club in central
NJ! They have an Epson 9600 at this particular store and offer 20x24's for
$8.00. Yep, you read it right....$8.00! His black and whites were as
rich and detailed as anything I've ever seen. But we had to really badger
him to reveal where he got the prints done. as he was a little embarrassed.
So, as Michael Reichman wrote about this week: It's not necessarily only
the photographer that matters, and it's not only the equipment. You need
both. But a superior photographer can produce superior photos using
modest, capable equipment. You can't get the shot if the gear can't
perform.
Thanks,
Skip
Original Message:
-----------------
From: AG Schnozz agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 08:54:20 -0800 (PST)
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [SPAM] [OM] So, it's a good camera
I despise this current photographic world where we have to buy a
new camera every 18 months to stay "current". My E-1 is far
from worn out and probably will outlast any practical
application of the camera. Last night I shot 514 pictures in
about 45 minutes and with every click of the shutter (during a
Christmas Children's Musical) only I heard it. Nobody around me
was disturbed other than maybe the occasional time my LCD lit up
==============================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|