The trick with all these review sites is to 1) at least have a working notion
of the criteria at play, and 2) realize that it’s just a review. Grist for the
mill, to coin a cliche. It’s a bit like movie and book reviews. I used to read
the NYT movie reviews faithfully when I had access to them through the
newspaper I worked for. I disagreed with the reviewers more often than not, but
over time I learned how to read the reviews, and judge from their content
whether I was likely to enjoy the movie or the book. Works most of the time.
Occasionally, it doesn’t. A bit like life.
--Bob Whitmire
Certified Neanderthal
On Jan 27, 2014, at 11:29 AM, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In essence, they redefined what
> exposure ISO means and made it completely irrelevant to real-life
> usage. When they first launched this method, I, along with a number of
> other people, addressed it as flawed, but was out-shouted by the
> landscape photographers who were so intent on ETTR as the one and only
> method of exposure determination.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|