> Not bad at all for an old, tired, ancient, obsolete camera...
But at least it isn't as "obscure" as the DMC-L1.
> When the initial "new girlfriend excitement" of the E-M5 settles into "old
> married guy" status, I'll have to dance with the E-1 from time to time
> just to keep her happy.
This exercise of going through old images is rather fascinating. I've
discovered a trend that I'm not at all happy about:
Months 1-6: Learning the camera. An occasional great shot, but most of
them are of various levels of suckiness.
Months 7-24: Awesome shots. The camera and photographer are one.
Months 25-48: Camera is obsolete. An occasional great shot, but most
of them are of various levels of suckiness.
Months 49-xx: Does this camera even work anymore? All shots suck.
What changed? At month 25, did the camera change? No. The photographer
changed. I know that THIS photographer has let the camera down.
The latest/greatest (in this case, the E-M5) has greatly improved
resolution, high-ISO performance and a myriad of other significant
photographer-aids, but the old gray mare is still capable of
world-class images when the photographer is up to it
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|