Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: IMO  (Read 21600 times)

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13980
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
IMO
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2009, 07:25:21 pm »

Quote from: lisa_r
1. I believe the forums should be separated by what is in front of the lens (i.e., landscapes, fashion, portraiture, travel, etc. as opposed to by what is behind the lens.) I believe the contributors in the various sections would have more in common then, and perhaps more useful info to share with one another. IMO just because I have a similar camera as the next guy does not mean that we have a lot to share - aside from talking about the cameras themselves...
Doesn't just about every professional have various formats? I think the separation by cameras types is the more gear head/amateur approach. Just my humble opinion.

Agreed 100%.

Cheers,
Bernard

Carsten W

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 627
IMO
« Reply #21 on: December 30, 2009, 07:37:45 pm »

Well, I will risk disagreeing with Lisa. I think that separating this forum into forums grouped by photography type would kill them all. I like reading this forum for the variety.
Logged
Carsten W - [url=http://500px.com/Carste

gdwhalen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
    • http://www.gdwhalen.com
IMO
« Reply #22 on: December 30, 2009, 10:06:53 pm »

From my years of reading these forums it seems to me that some people actually prefer the specs and the tests to the actual shooting.  I will never understand this thought process and it always causes a massive warning sound to go off when I sense that.  I've never been one to buy something and then test the hell out of it.  I can see the images it produces.  I know the situation I shot it with. I know if something doesn't seem right.  Testing, it seems, is  a substitute for actually shooting something interesting.  Don't get me wrong.  Whatever flicks your Bic, but really, does this constant - my test is better than your test - bug anyone else but me??

cyberean

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
IMO
« Reply #23 on: December 30, 2009, 10:17:49 pm »

Quote
It just feels very sketchy not knowing who is selling things and who is not.
we is all sellin' things ...  ; )

... but i too doesn't likes the feels of sketchiness.
Logged

cyberean

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
IMO
« Reply #24 on: December 30, 2009, 10:22:23 pm »

Quote
... it seems to me that some people actually prefer the specs and the tests to the actual shooting.
yes, them peoples is called 'measurbators'.
... and they is an integral part of the ecosystem.
Logged

rogan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 195
IMO
« Reply #25 on: December 30, 2009, 10:56:07 pm »

Quote from: bcooter
IMO

With this in mind I find it completely amazing that for a week or so, there were begs, suggestions and pleas to Michael for this section to become the sole domain of medium format "users".  Mostly to stop the comments of anyone that uses use a "35mm camera" and has an opinion, post a result or worse even a comparison.  

So we got a name change and look at the result.

Now the forum has returned to normal, which means it has become the domain of the medium format sales people. At last count I totaled  5 ( Plus Reps),  From Columbia, England, New York,  Miami  and of course Atlanta and we've got vague and not so vague comments from dealers regarding the validity of a test, comparing two medium format cameras, reprocessing of the files and more posting of mediocre photographs than the cover of a London tabloid with a dig or two thrown in at the dslr 35mm set.

(BTW:  Just a  suggestion to anyone that sells cameras.  Please post a pretty photograph.  Sometimes I think it is the goal of every medium format camera dealer in the world to shoot alley's, skies, grey rainy days,  street bums, Grade C models with amateur makeup and hair, fruit and of course the obligatory color chart, just to prove that their $40,000 camera system can show detail even in an ugly photograph.)

Point is this or any section of any forum is never just about that one single title and never will be.

I do respect Michael and his decision to do whatever he wants with his forum, but lately we've seen a exodus of people who actually make a living working with high end cameras and equipment and other than stopping the dslr talk (to some extent) this forum still mentions post processing, storage devices, tripods, lighting pc vs. mac and of course the constant medium format sales message.

Gosh, they've even run off the photographer who was instrumental in designing the Sinar Artech camera because he showed how close the new Canon tilt shifts were to medium format quality.  That had to send a cold chill up the tripod carrying medium format guys, because the mirror up tripod crowd seems to be the last real domain of the expert pixel peepers.

I'd love to see a rename of this section, but not one based on format, just based on high end cameras.  I don't care if someone is an amateur or professional as long as they are working at the highest level their talents and pocketbooks allow.

In fact call it "money talks" because the price of the previous generation medium format back has fallen to around the price of the last generation high end dslr, or name it "any camera that cost more than $5,000".

I think this would bring healthy debate, an exchange of knowledge and of course there will be the brand worshipers, the format pixel peepers and the sales messages to kill the buzz, but at least it won't be exclusionary.

This opens up discussion of how to make the leap from still to video and back, what system is "actually best" for a certain project and how all of these cameras work in real world conditions.

How about keeping the forum open to imagination, like MT's plunger cam, or some guy that does mount a boris tilt shift on a Canon 5d2, or how about a plunger cam video? . . . anything that is not just the normal, constant talk about pixels.

If not just let it run at whatever it's called today and let Phase and Hasselblad dealers beat themselves into oblivion selling to the last 6 landscape photographers trying to desperately prove that their system really is better than the other guys.

Or let the topics range from comparing 8x10 film to a medium format back, or asking about the Hy6 prism.  I hate to bring this up but 8x10 film cameras and hy6 prism's are somewhat dead end systems.  You may like them, but give it another week and you'll see both on the Antique Roadshow.

The funny thing about all of this is the medium format sales people come on here to move product, but if they throw everyone but a medium format back owner out the door, who they gonna sell to?  Maybe each other, cause they all seem to eventually become absorbed or  work for the "competition".

Now that I think of it, maybe it's best to just let nature and Darwin run it's course.

IMO

BC

I use to think it should be changed to a pro section but today, to me, it seems pros don't use mf anymore. Only the amateurs can afford it and can put up with the awful workflow as they don't have a client up their bum. I'm jealous of them.
I would say I know 100+- working pros personally. Of them maybe 15 own a mf back. Of them, not 1 is less than 3 years old.
Logged

gwhitf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 855
IMO
« Reply #26 on: December 30, 2009, 11:10:10 pm »

Quote from: rogan
but today, to me, it seems pros don't use mf anymore. Only the amateurs can afford it

Most bizarre and ironic sentence I've ever seen posted here. And I agree with it wholeheartedly.

Amateur goes out to shoot, then comes home after sunset. Then thinks, "Hmm I'm hungry, let's go eat, and get a drink", so he does. Pro comes home, then thinks, "Damn, I'm hungry, I need a drink", but then he realizes he's got to convert all those RAWs tonight, into JPGs, for client review tomorrow. So he orders Dominoes, and gets a Snicker bar out of the hotel vending machine. The pro goes thru that routine three or four times, and then miraculously, the fifth job, the Hasselblad is gone and in its place, lying on the bad hotel bedspread is a Nikon or Canon. He still orders Dominoes, but at least he gets eight hours sleep that night.

Key words responsible for the switch:
* Trustable LCD.
* Easy to use Live View.
* Bulletproof fast tethering.
* Fast lenses.
* High ASA.
* Tilt/Shift lenses.
* File sizes appropriate for jobs.
* Rent anything, most anywhere.
* Easy to own backup bodies.
* Video, to throw a bone to clients.
* Good fast autofocus.
* Easy software; no input profiles to mess with.
* Open the box, and get to work.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2009, 11:17:11 pm by gwhitf »
Logged

billthecat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
IMO
« Reply #27 on: December 31, 2009, 12:31:29 am »

I like keeping it a medium format and such forum. This seems to be the main forum around for medium format. There's forums everywhere for small format and for other topics. If you have trouble with your 5D2 you can get an answer in minutes at Dpreview. There really isn't much space just for medium format and larger.

Bill
Logged

ctz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223
IMO
« Reply #28 on: December 31, 2009, 02:14:24 am »

Quote from: rainer_v
hi murray,
thank you.
in fact i dont feel "not wanted" here at all, but what i mean is that i dont enter forums which clearly exclude certain themes with exactly this themes.
i dont do the same with singular treads, someone called it hitch-hiking treads or forums... like that expression.
i.m.o. MR should go back to the naming as it was before, everything was right as it was.



+1!
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25172
IMO
« Reply #29 on: December 31, 2009, 04:29:11 am »

Quote from: carstenw
Well, I will risk disagreeing with Lisa. I think that separating this forum into forums grouped by photography type would kill them all. I like reading this forum for the variety.




I agree with that, and would add that because I earned my crust from fashion and calendar art does not mean that as I don't do much landscape myself I can't or don't appreciate seeing good work in that medium or any other. As I said before, cross-polination is what keeps the species going - look at the alternative: inbreeding.

Rob C

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25172
IMO
« Reply #30 on: December 31, 2009, 04:38:21 am »

Quote from: gdwhalen
From my years of reading these forums it seems to me that some people actually prefer the specs and the tests to the actual shooting.  I will never understand this thought process and it always causes a massive warning sound to go off when I sense that.  I've never been one to buy something and then test the hell out of it.  I can see the images it produces.  I know the situation I shot it with. I know if something doesn't seem right.  Testing, it seems, is  a substitute for actually shooting something interesting.  Don't get me wrong.  Whatever flicks your Bic, but really, does this constant - my test is better than your test - bug anyone else but me??




Your practical 'test by using in real life' system of equipment appraisal is as good as it gets. I think that all of us with any experience already know what's likely to suit us in the field. Whether or not the equipment lives up to the spec is another matter, but you still have to suck it and see really to find out for yourself.

I was stung by both Bronica and Pentax 6x7 systems after my departure from Hasselblad's 500 Series. But I knew Mamiya would never cut it for my work either and, by the time I was emotionally ready to go back into Hasselblad, life had moved on and it didn't make any difference anymore. So there you are - you can read all the brochures, all the user-comments you like, but in the end, it comes down to how stuff works with you.

Rob C
« Last Edit: December 31, 2009, 04:38:52 am by Rob C »
Logged

Wim van Velzen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 372
    • http://www.fotografiewimvanvelzen.nl
IMO
« Reply #31 on: December 31, 2009, 05:24:11 am »

There are too many questions that are simply not subject related, so there will be always a need for something like a MF section. Think about questions like ´best tethered solution for camera X´ or ´how useable are the CF lenses for a Contax camera´ etc.

There is a subforum for landscape photography (as well as for locations). Maybe a studio subforum would be nice and an architecture one? But that wouldn´t handle all the tech questions.


RE: the amount of reps and dealers. If there are not presenting themselves people complain about their absence, if they are there (other?) people complain about their presence. I value their input as long as they make known what they are.
Logged
I don't have a signature.

teddillard

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 717
    • http://www.teddillard.com
IMO
« Reply #32 on: December 31, 2009, 07:35:00 am »

Quote from: cyberean
yes, them peoples is called 'measurbators'.
... and they is an integral part of the ecosystem.

"pixel-peepiential material"

 

(from 1001 Noisy Cameras.  wish I could take credit...)
Logged
Ted Dillard

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2354
    • sammorganmoore.com
IMO
« Reply #33 on: December 31, 2009, 08:37:22 am »

Its a weird old world

Every knows why this board is a bit special - but its hard to define there are two set of nuggets on this board..

Top of the Game Experience

We are lucky over the years to have had people top of their game giving great info - that is really the valuable point - many of those shooters happened to use MF but dont any more all the time

MF specific tech

- Will my $12k bellows camera get infinity focus with a Rodshcher 12mmXXL Digibongle lens - the manufactuers dont know but someone here does
-Ive got Crapture One running on a H1 body and Contax lenses on Panda OS tethered to a Cow - why doenst it work - some one here knows - no helpdesk ever will

Its keeping those top of the game nuggets that are important - even if they relate to DSLRs

The truth is that tech advancements, market pressures mean those people dont always use MF now but if they post in the DSLR boards they are lost in white noise

I dont post here much any more because my D3 and Hassy/22p have worked fine and pleased my clients for years now - really Ive become disinterested in camera tech - which is great

But if Im having trouble tethering my 5dmk2 - I wouldnt want advice from DPReviers - Id want to come here

S
« Last Edit: December 31, 2009, 08:40:27 am by Morgan_Moore »
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Craig Lamson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3264
    • Craig Lamson Photo Homepage
IMO
« Reply #34 on: December 31, 2009, 10:46:21 am »

Quote from: Morgan_Moore
I dont post here much any more because my D3 and Hassy/22p have worked fine and pleased my clients for years now - really Ive become disinterested in camera tech - which is great


Boy there is the money quote of the year (and on the very last day to boot).

I know I've had it with the upgrades to cameras, computers and software.  Not only money bu the time.  There was a day back in 02 when I thought my Sinar's, Horseman's and Hasselblad's would last me until I retired.  Then I bought a 1Ds.  You all know the rest of the story.  

I sense that I'm not alone.  No one asks me about my digital caneras anymore, they jut don't care.  All they want is a good file, and quickly after the shoot, thank you. My current gear gives them that and its paid for, just like my old Sinar's Horseman's and Hasselbald's.  Now if I could only make it to retirement with this stuff....

Lets just talk about photography, and some gear now and then for those who need it.
Logged
Craig Lamson Photo

pcunite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 205
IMO
« Reply #35 on: December 31, 2009, 11:02:01 am »

Quote from: Morgan_Moore
The truth is that tech advancements, market pressures mean those people dont always use MF now but if they post in the DSLR boards they are lost in white noise

I dont post here much any more because my D3 and Hassy/22p have worked fine and pleased my clients for years now - really Ive become disinterested in camera tech - which is great

But if Im having trouble tethering my 5dmk2 - I wouldnt want advice from DPReviers - Id want to come here

This is so true! It is why I come here to read as well. I want to read about MFD pros shooting 35! Another interesting writer is Kirk Tuck who (for fun's sake really, trying to prove a point) is on occasion using tiny cameras to make commercial portraits.

A thought: If they (the market) start giving digital cameras away there will be some shakedowns at first but it will correct itself and true quality work will stand the test. People using MFD by and large make the best images, not because of their gear, but from their skill. The sooner this MFD forum comes to grip with that the more peace there will be around here.
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2354
    • sammorganmoore.com
IMO
« Reply #36 on: December 31, 2009, 11:57:05 am »

There was also a time when worrying about gear worked

My 16mp Kodak Proback basically got me into magazine work because my files were publishable unlike my digital rivals with their 2.4mp nikon D1 s - it put me in the class of the tranny shooters and away from the newspaper only shooters and I was able to deliver a week faster than the tranny boys

"A thought: If they (the market) start giving digital cameras away there will be some shakedowns'

The market does 'give away' digital cameras - or thats what it seems like if you ever forked out for 3 nikon D1 s at $7k a pop

S





Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2017
IMO
« Reply #37 on: December 31, 2009, 02:03:27 pm »

You sure can't please all the people all the time Michael.  I do know one thing.  People have come to you / this forum, often from your credible reviews (before the forum as I did), and your honesty, and experience, is what is attractive.  I think often it is expected to see those qualities in your forums.  It is the factual info or the credible debates that make this place of strong value.....for me at least.  And the regulars I have had contact with have really been stand up people.
Change in the climate of technology is constant, and this forum is a great place for people of different experiences from all walks of life in professional or hobbieist work to appreciate the quality of posts found here and respect others views with a bit of reservation at times, and hope with some true respectable experience, can learn and make transitions from systems more smooth and knowledgable.

I don't know what title is good or bad, but if it keeps the forum NON commercial its a good thing, as there are very qualified dealers that are pro's and I like and respect their view. Douglas has taken time to help me with silly C1 issues (my experience).
But the reason for this uproar in the first place is because we keep hearing how the DSLR is nearly or just as good as MF, and the different examples and same response on how it isnt so, to people that have not even tried one, or used it, or even care to understand the difference...And for their need, they don't need it....better for them.

I won't go into it, but any pro or hobbiest that has a MF can surely appreciate the DSLR and knows that a MF is not to compete in its territoty....And in the same respect, anyone that is critical in IQ knows that the MF has a value for certain situations that are very clear cut where the DSLR cannot compete.  One thing certain is that this closing of gaps, as things are getting better (perhaps without an AA filter on DSLR's  things would be even closer) should shake up the dealers to get a little more agressive on prices, and value in what they put out.

That is my 2...
« Last Edit: December 31, 2009, 02:07:43 pm by Phil Indeblanc »
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

David Eichler

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 841
    • San Francisco Architectural and Interior Photographer
IMO
« Reply #38 on: December 31, 2009, 03:01:26 pm »

Quote from: Phil Indeblanc
You sure can't please all the people all the time Michael.  I do know one thing.  People have come to you / this forum, often from your credible reviews (before the forum as I did), and your honesty, and experience, is what is attractive.  I think often it is expected to see those qualities in your forums.  It is the factual info or the credible debates that make this place of strong value.....for me at least.  And the regulars I have had contact with have really been stand up people.
Change in the climate of technology is constant, and this forum is a great place for people of different experiences from all walks of life in professional or hobbieist work to appreciate the quality of posts found here and respect others views with a bit of reservation at times, and hope with some true respectable experience, can learn and make transitions from systems more smooth and knowledgable.

I don't know what title is good or bad, but if it keeps the forum NON commercial its a good thing, as there are very qualified dealers that are pro's and I like and respect their view. Douglas has taken time to help me with silly C1 issues (my experience).
But the reason for this uproar in the first place is because we keep hearing how the DSLR is nearly or just as good as MF, and the different examples and same response on how it isnt so, to people that have not even tried one, or used it, or even care to understand the difference...And for their need, they don't need it....better for them.

I won't go into it, but any pro or hobbiest that has a MF can surely appreciate the DSLR and knows that a MF is not to compete in its territoty....And in the same respect, anyone that is critical in IQ knows that the MF has a value for certain situations that are very clear cut where the DSLR cannot compete.  One thing certain is that this closing of gaps, as things are getting better (perhaps without an AA filter on DSLR's  things would be even closer) should shake up the dealers to get a little more agressive on prices, and value in what they put out.

That is my 2...

"Closer and closer": that is the thing.  Before the maturing of digital technology, the distinctions between large, medium and small format were much greater. In film days (ah, the pungent smell of stop bath in the morning), 4x5 was standard (no pun intended) for architectural photography, medium format was a practical alternative for some situations, and small format was only occasionally used for this purpose.  Now, some serious architectural photographers can make their living shooting small format exclusively, although they will effectively create medium format images sometimes with stitching. That is a major change. It appears that even some architectural photographers who prefer medium format and use it as much as possible will use small format as a practical and less expensive back up. It seems to me that, if demanding architectural photographers take small format seriously, that warrants some consideration in a sub-forum devoted ostensibly to medium format.

David Eichler
« Last Edit: December 31, 2009, 03:07:46 pm by ZAZ »
Logged

bcooter

  • Guest
IMO
« Reply #39 on: December 31, 2009, 03:21:51 pm »

Quote from: ZAZ
"Closer and closer": that is the thing.  Before the maturing of digital technology, the distinctions between large, medium and small format were much greater. In film days (ah, the pungent smell of stop bath in the morning), 4x5 was standard (no pun intended) for architectural photography, medium format was a practical alternative for some situations, and small format was only occasionally used for this purpose.  Now, serious architectural photographers can make their living shooting small format exclusively, although they will effectively create medium format images sometimes with stitching. That is a major change. It appears that even some architectural photographers who prefer medium format and use it as much as possible will use small format as a practical and less expensive back up. It seems to me that if demanding architectural photographers take small format seriously, that warrants some consideration in a sub-forum devoted ostensibly to medium format.

David Eichler

I've been pulling 3 to 4 am every night (morning) doing post production on this big end of the year rush project so sitting on an opposite desk is my TV.  You know those nights where you turn it on some  channel and you really don't have the time or inclination to change the station, mostly because of the fear something might come on that's interesting that will make you stop working, so last night it was on some cable's pbs station and the guy being interviewed on Charlie Rose was the CEO of Sirius radio.

I didn't really listen, just kept working until I heard this CEO say "the advertising model is not sustainable for media in today's world".

I kind of hit the brakes on that and thought for a moment, what's this guy talking about, then he explained that he was previously the CEO of CBS and came from the days of client's would pay 10's of  millions to run a Super Bowl spot, not be able to track it's results, never know if it worked or not but we're always standing in line to write the check.

He said when Google came out they F__ked up the magic, because for the first time an advertiser could track to see if their promotion was working.  (His words).

In other words he said they pissed on the parade.

That's what digital has done to Music, Photography, Art, Print, all forms of media.  It has pissed on the parade or to be more pc it has changed our role as photographers and more importantly changed the tools we use.

Gone are the days that any camera you buy is a 10 year system and a photographer is hired to shoot One shot.  In fact I don't believe there is any camera in the market that is exactly right for our new job description.

This year every photographer I know has complained about money, but the changes I've seen this year and most of last year was not the money available for a project but the time.  We are now squeezing everything into hours not days, minutes not hours.

Yesterday the client had a change and wanted to add wedding rings to three advertising images.  I sent a production person out to buy 4 rings, put them on white, shot 6 angles of each, built a gallery, send the raws to the retoucher, the gallery to the AD for selection the results to the retoucher and the finished images are out in 4 hours.   4 hours from shoot the rings to the client is downloading the finished images.

I guess my point of all of this in commerce, camera format is not that relevant and surely wasn't in my thought process yesterday when all I had was a few hours to change an image.  Photographers may  think so on the day of the shoot, or may like their favorite system, but once a project has gone through 5 stages of retouching, 6 different crops, people swaps, background changes, it just ceases to be any format.

In fact in the real world what is the format?  A laptop, a 24" monitor, a dell, an apple, an Eizo or a printed page?  Format really is the final destination.

So if any camera makers are reading this forum I suggest tearing it up and starting from a clean sheet.  Forget about formats, ground glass (plastic) 2:3 or 4:5 crops, forget about all this legacy stuff and really step into today.  Make a camera that tethers easy, has an EVIL viewfinder, movable crops, shoots video and stills, live view for critical focus and moveable iso.

Stop this proprietary, secret file format stuff and open the file up so people can write plugs ins and apps that go directly in camera to make any film the look you want.   (See Iphone Apps).  In fact allow me to embed my film look into a raw file that any processor will see (including photoshop).

Write some raw file compression schemes that allow us to get a project into the 500mb territory.  Data storage, backup and delivery is a monster right now and since I'm sitting on hundreds of terabytes of images and each project easily goes to multiple terabytes per project I can't stress how important file size is.  In fact in the last 7 days I've shipped over 2 terabytes of finished images on line through links.  

Stop fooling around with almost video on a still camera system, almost stills on a video camera system and give us something that just requires a change of some module to allow our one system to work in both arenas.  (see RED's wish list).

And most of all when you want information and feedback,  don't go to the photographer's that will do anything to be featured by your camera company, go to the photographers and their clients that are producing work in the new real world.

In fact listen to this Sirius Radio CEO when he says Content Is King, because he's right and I can promise you he doesn't care if it was shot on a Canon, a Hasselblad a Red or a Casio.  He cares if it get's ratings, good customer results and is unique because beautiful and/or unique get's attention.  Of course he also cares about the bottom line and if any of those mentioned brands gets the desired result then he's fine, we're all fine.

In fact if you told this CEO or his ad agency that I contribute on a forum that only allows talk of one type of camera format his eyes would probably cross.  I might as well tell him to forget satellite radio and go back to the phonograph.

So with all of this in mind it's not the camera I think of anymore unless the camera gets in my way and it's definitely not the format of the camera or the ability to produce micro detail under controlled conditions at 200% web crops.  It's what I produce that gets us work and most importantly it's  the final destination of the photograph that I think about . . . that and what's next ?

BC

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up