I really do intend to get into this in some depth this summer. I have pretty
steadfastly avoided P mode since the days of my Olympus C-6050. (Did it have a
P mode? I know it had something similar.)
But if you suppose the image is the thing, then how you arrive at the image you
perceived is less important. If I get what I want by lifting and shooting a
$5000 camera in P mode, then so be it. Getting the same thing through laborious
computations seems a bit drastic, though truth to tell, knowing how to make the
laborious computations invariably makes deploying P mode more, ah, efficacious.
Even Picasso painted realistic fruit in realistic bowels before he started
coloring outside the lines. Or, more accurately, drawing bizarre lines and then
coloring inside them.
--Bob
On Apr 9, 2011, at 6:43 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> Bob, here's the rub about the P(ark your brains) Mode on the D3. The
> metering system is that 3D-color matrix thingamabob as first expoited in the
> F5. Well, even that is a variation of the one in the F4, but the F4 was very
> hit and miss as to success rate. Regardless, the F5's metering system was
> very stout and the camera could be used in any auto mode without fear. The
> D3 not only carries on that tradition, but has further evolved where the
> camera really slices up the bacon when it's frying time.
>
> This all reminds me of the ansel adams hyper-picky metering. Every wannabe
> AA with a view-camera is using the pentax spot-meter to get 30 readings,
> consults a pocket noteboook, writes down a bunch of stuff, stares at the
> scene some more, repeats the whole process two or three times and then ends
> up with the same exposure as if they would have just stuck in incident meter
> in the air to begin with.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|