Thanks Bob,
That's what I did up until very recently when I procured a nice Sigma
EX 10-20mm for $350 while on a trip to Denver.
: )

Darren

On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Bob Sullivan <rf.sulli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Darren,
> For Ultra-wide shots you might consider stiching several vertical
> shots together.
> (It's a trick I learned from Rob Studdert and the Ozzies...)
> Regards,  Bob S.
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:53 PM, CheekyGeek <cheekyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I liked the blog post.
>> The point was really one for self-examination, and in examining MYself
>> I must admit that if I had spent as much time taking photographs over
>> this past winter as I have acquiring equipment I would have a lot more
>> photographs (and a lot less equipment) to show for it. How's that for
>> being Captain Obvious?
>>
>> That being said, other than a decent focusing rack and a good
>> ballhead, I've just about reached the end of the list of things that I
>> think I need to shoot the sort of things I want to shoot. Meaning I'm
>> ready to take his advice, expecially with Spring here, and start
>> taking more photographs.
>>
>> The thing about equipment is: it doesn't matter how good a
>> photographer is, he/she isn't going to be able to take an ultrawide
>> shot without an ultrawide focal length lens (etc.). Like most truisms,
>> it is only part of the story.
>>
>> Darren Addy
>> Kearney, NE
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:15 PM, William Robb <war...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Sessoms"
>>> Subject: Re: A Crazy Idea
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> And that's been my point all along. The photographer is more important
>>>> than the equipment. Equipment is important, but not as important as the
>>>> photographer. Equipment is only as good as the photographer who uses it.
>>>>
>>>> A poor photographer is still a poor photographer no matter how much he
>>>> spends on gear. Expensive equipment merely gives the poor photographer the
>>>> means to create high resolution lousy images.
>>>
>>> Or, to be more accurate, better technical quality images that are wanting in
>>> terms of composition.
>>>
>>> Really John, do you think that an Adams could have churned out his
>>> esthetically stunning landscapes from the American southwest with a pocket
>>> 110 camera?
>>> Please don't say yes, I will have to mock you if you do.
>>> I don't think it would have mattered how good a darkroom technician he was,
>>> there would still have been a little something missing.
>>> This is an extreme example, but sometimes one needs to use absurd examples
>>> to make succint points.
>>>
>>> You (and a few others it seems) are pretending that it is an either/ or
>>> issue; that a photographer is either an expert or a hack. There are a lot of
>>> photographers who are good enough to benefit from better equipement that fit
>>> into neither of the categories that you presuppose, and whose pictures do
>>> improve with better equipment, be it something with more resolution, or
>>> better noise control, or faster and more responsive performance.
>>> Look at Dave Savage's night photography and how much better it got when he
>>> went to the D700 as an example.
>>>
>>> Carry this forward a bit, I use a K7. A friend of mine uses a D3.
>>> I can do things with his camera that are simply beyond what I can do with my
>>> Pentax.
>>> Does this make me a bad photographer? Perhaps, perhaps not, but the better
>>> equipment definitely does allow me to do things that are beyond my
>>> capabilities with my K7.
>>>
>>> William Robb
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>> follow the directions.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Gone digital? I'm always looking for old Pentax film cameras and
>> lenses to fit Pentax, (either K-mount or M42 screwmount). Also have a
>> weakness for twin lens cameras.
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
>>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>



-- 
Gone digital? I'm always looking for old Pentax film cameras and
lenses to fit Pentax, (either K-mount or M42 screwmount). Also have a
weakness for twin lens cameras.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Reply via email to