On 5/7/2012 2:31 AM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> It's not the weight. A canon 5D is just so... boring/ugly in this era
> of more exciting options.
> The Toyota Minivan of cameras. Where's the passion? The excitement?
> The flair?!
In the images! I so clearly recall when I knew I had bought the right camera.
It was when I looked at my third shot with
the 5D at 100%. The exquisite clarity of the edges of those little petals, the
3-D quality, the color purity - oh my, I
was in love.
If there were a retrofit to add live view and articulated LCD to the 5D, it
would still be my primary camera. I don't
think the MKII or III has matched, let alone improved on, the lucid clarity of
low ISO 5D images.
I won't claim to be entirely insensitive to how cameras look. Some are pretty
ugly, some rather nice looking; the
majority just look like, well, cameras. But the extent to which that affects my
choice of camera is limited to color,
when there is a choice.
When looking for my first DLSR, I thought the plasticy silver finish of the
300D looked tacky. The black of the E-1 was
nicer (although the shape of the 300D is cleaner). But I went ahead and bought
the tacky looking one because it simply
worked better for my needs.
The A650 had a similar silver, plastic finish, while the G10 was very cool
looking. Same Imaging components and IQ,
though, and I went with the uglier one for practical, usage reasons. I still
sometimes miss the articulated screen and
long lens for candids. My daughter-in-law uses it almost exclusively with super
WA adapter on it and regularly blows the
highlights - oh well. Different esthetic.
(Parenthetically, all digital cameras 'should' come in white or silver. Heat is
the enemy of digital sensors, increasing
noise. Early on with my 300D, I set it down on a table in the sun alongside a
black 4T. After just a few minutes, the
black camera was much hotter to the touch.)
> A 5D goes totally against the grain of the Olympus OM aesthetic, which
> Ken N. is perhaps the biggest proponent of.
When I bought an OM-1 around '73, to replace a Nikon Ftn, appearance was
certainly part of the equation, but that Ftn
finder made an attractive camera really ugly - and the OM-1 is pretty. Still,
most of the reasons had to do with things
like size, weight and elegant internal mechanical design.
If you want passion, excitement and flair, get an O-Product to flaunt - and
take pics with something blobby that has
passion, excitement and flair in the images it produces. :-)
Internal Passion Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|