Cameron Hood wrote:
>
> Must not have tried the FA* series zooms.
Hi Cameron,
Yes, you're absolutely right. I am now hesitating about
buying any more Pentax gear, so it is also unlikely I ever
will.
John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Don't bring the camera to your eye until you are ready to
take a picture. You are not ready to take a picture until
you know what you want. Assuming that I'm not taking a
picture of some fleeting moment event, that I can't position
myself for, I look at the subject and
Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: "Lasse Karlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 2:12 AM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
> - Original Message --
What's the difference between lawyers and pigs? Pigs don't turn into
lawyers when they get drunk.
How can you tell a dead lawyer in the middle of the road from a dead snake?
The snake has skid marks in front of it.
What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of Lake Michigan? A good
start.
W
03 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "frank theriault"
> Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
>
>
> > I'm only a bike messenger.
> >
> > My
- Original Message -
From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
> There is no such thing as 'time'.
But there is,
- Original Message -
From: "frank theriault"
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
> I'm only a bike messenger.
>
> My brain hurts.
Thats Gods way of punishing you for having been a lawyer.
Serves you right.
William Robb
nd does
eat oats and little lambs eat ivy! ;-)
Michael
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:21 AM
> Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and
> ulti
To me "the present" is the passing of the panorama of real time
happenings to my senses.
That there's an actual lag time to GET past my sensors and to my brain I
really don't care. In the end, reality and time is only as it's
perceived by me.
keith whaley
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
>
> In fact we
I'm only a bike messenger.
My brain hurts.
-frank
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
> In fact we do it all the time. There is a considerable lag between the
> registering of information on the retina and the final production of
> information in the brain. What we see (always) has already happened and is
Rob Studdert wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thursday, July 17, 2003, 12:36:18 AM, you wrote:
> >
> > > On 16 Jul 2003 at 10:30, Michael Bergstrom wrote:
> >
> > >> I held out a fleeting hope that its ability to focus slightly beyond
> > >> infinity would allow me to capture images of objects as they o
Hi Dr.,
it is clear that "being" or "existing" is alway different to
"exlanation" or "imagination" of these. This will be always the
case and no other kind of seeing will change this. I belive only
God sees that way.
You can belive me, I am physicist!
Best regards, Hans.
--- "Dr E D F Williams
--- Dag T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I look at the subject and light and figure out how I want that 3D
> scene
> projected onto a 2D plane.
What version of AutoCAD do you currently use ?
>>> Viewing a vista through one eye tends to give me a pretty good
>>> approximation
ROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
Hø
According to Stephen Hawking time is just the direction of increasing
entropy. That´s why any attempt to tidy up is hopeless, it only
increases the entropy even more some
riginal Message -
From: "Dag T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
> Hø
>
> According to Stephen Hawking time is just the direction of increasing
&g
ED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:21 AM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
Hi,
Thursday, July 17, 2003, 12:36:18 AM, you wrote:
On 16 Jul 2003 at 10:30, Michael Bergstrom wrote:
I held out a fleeting hope that its ability to
tuddert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:21 AM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thursday, July 17, 2003, 12:36:18 AM, you wrote:
> >
> > > On 16 Jul 200
På torsdag, 17. juli 2003, kl. 05:13, skrev Caveman:
Rob Studdert wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I look at the subject and light and figure out how I want that 3D
scene
projected onto a 2D plane.
What version of AutoCAD do you currently use ?
Viewing a vista through one eye tends to give me a
> Hi,
>
> Thursday, July 17, 2003, 12:36:18 AM, you wrote:
>
> > On 16 Jul 2003 at 10:30, Michael Bergstrom wrote:
>
> >> I held out a fleeting hope that its ability to focus slightly beyond
> >> infinity would allow me to capture images of objects as they once appeared in the
> >> past,
>
>
:P You're one of us light cone geeks aren't you.
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Bob Walkden wrote:
> Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 07:05:21 +0100
> From: Bob Walkden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re:
Hi,
Thursday, July 17, 2003, 12:36:18 AM, you wrote:
> On 16 Jul 2003 at 10:30, Michael Bergstrom wrote:
>> I held out a fleeting hope that its ability to focus slightly beyond
>> infinity would allow me to capture images of objects as they once appeared in the
>> past,
> How cool would that
>Anyway, I have prefered primes since then, but ever since I bought
>Cotty's Sigma 80-200/2.8 a while ago, I think I'm developing a soft
>spot for zooms again. The versatility of zooms is just great.
>Especially for travel kits.
Jostein, you're such a nice guy, I'm gonna give you an extra 10mm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I look at the subject and light and figure out how I want that 3D scene projected onto a 2D plane.
What version of AutoCAD do you currently use ?
cheers,
caveman
Don't bring the camera to your eye until you are ready to take a picture. You are not
ready to take a picture until you know what you want. Assuming that I'm not taking a
picture of some fleeting moment event, that I can't position myself for, I look at the
subject and light and figure out how I
Hi!
BR> I think that it is something like practicing scales on a musical
BR> instrument: it's an exercise to make you better, and not an end in
BR> itself.
BR> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, say 50 mm, for
>>say 2 months, say forcing them to
My first lens was a Takumar-A 28-80. As the newbie I was, I got very
frustrated with my own skill. Especially all the shots of backlit
scenes that became dull and grey. When I got a A-50/1.7, I realised
that it was not only me; but also the lens. Years later, on the PDML,
I learned what a dog t
Very shortly after I got my K1000 (as a gift from my
mom; Thanks mom!) I bought the 28-80 Takumar-A
because, of course, I NEEDED a zoom and it was a
Pentax and looked nice, etc. I used it exclusively
for awhile until it loosened up to the point of
absurdity. I could change the framing and focus j
Both primes and zooms have their place. I really don't think it makes all
that much difference whether you use a zoom or a prime for the type of shooting
most of us do. I think it is more a question of what feels good at any one
moment. For many of us it is as much about the experience as the re
>> > Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, say 50 mm, for
>> > say 2 months, say forcing them to shoot, say one film a week, would
>> > help zoom owner improve?
>>
>> I think so. Forcing a single angle of view onto the photographer also
>forces
>> a level of discipline that the zoo
Shooting with just primes is helping me a lot. I have only three primes
right now; 2 A's and a K. I think much more about framing the shot now
than when I had a rebel 2k and and a few zooms.
The zooms can be a good tool to have if their quality is good. If A) An
excellent zoom comes my way on
It quite possible would help the zoom owner ti improve.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> >Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, say 50 mm, for
> >say 2 months, say forcing them to shoot, say one film a week, would
> >help zoom owner improve?
> >
> >
>
>
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Rubenstein"
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
> I think that it is something like practicing scales on a musical
> instrument: it's an exercise to make you better, and not an end in
> itself.
Well put.
William Robb
I think that it is something like practicing scales on a musical
instrument: it's an exercise to make you better, and not an end in
itself. A photographer named David Hume Kennerly did something like this
with a Mamiya 67 with a single wide angle lens (read about him and the
book that was the r
Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
> I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who
write or say that
> you are not a serious or conscientous photographer if you
use zooms. (I
> don't claim that this was said on PDML, but we were
pointed recently to
> an article that did say something like that.)
>
> I
> Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, say 50
> mm, for say 2 months, say forcing them to shoot, say one film
> a week, would help zoom owner improve?
>
> ---
> Boris Liberman
> www.geocities.com/dunno57
I'm not Bruce but I think anyone could benefit from shooting with a
sing
ginal Message -
From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 15:10
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
> Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, sa
I dunno. Show us the pic.
Joseph Tainter wrote:
">The debate is a non-issue."
"There can be no reason why we should not discuss these
trade-offs. If we stopped, PDML would not need to exist and
our lives would be greatly the poorer for its loss."
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by tho
Pieces like that should only be taken seriously by tyros. If you know what you're
doing, as in you know what you'll get on film with what you have, then you are the
true expert for that shot.
People who use a zoom to avoid moving around probably aren't very good photographers
to begin with, and
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who write or say that you
are not a serious or conscientous photographer if you use zooms. (I don't
claim that this was said on PDML, but we were pointed recently to an
article that did say something like that.)
I once waited 6-1/2 hours for the
">The debate is a non-issue."
"There can be no reason why we should not discuss these
trade-offs. If we stopped, PDML would not need to exist and
our lives would be greatly the poorer for its loss."
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who write or say that
you are not a serious or
Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
> It's very simple. Everything in photography is a
trade-off. Everything:
> film format (size), film type, camera bodies, lenses,
whether or not to
> carry a tripod, what one spends, etc. Provided that we
have some
> experience with gear or film, we each make our own
decisio
PDML is where people discover and share their personal experience
in these trade-offs. I think this is welcome as long as it doesn't
become a 'debate'.
Tonghang.
On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Fred wrote:
> > It's very simple. Everything in photography is a trade-off.
> > Everything: [snip] The debate
> It's very simple. Everything in photography is a trade-off.
> Everything: [snip] The debate is a non-issue.
Then we don't need the PDML ???
Fred
43 matches
Mail list logo
