1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

POLL - Moving sensors

Discussion in 'Weekly Poll' started by Damien_Demolder, Jun 13, 2009.

  1. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    But you addressed a point I wasn't making - never for a moment did I suggest that. And I would ask what experience you have of manual focusing by live view to be so utterly dismissive. As for the rest, well I can only presume you've resorted to insult because you know in your heart of hearts that you've lost the argument. Seldom have I seen an intelligent person both so utterly miss the point so often, write so much invective that could come from Grumpy Old Men or a photographic version of the Daily Mail, or be so unwilling to consider that there might be valid alternatives to his own point of view, or for that matter change the basis of his argument to such an astonishing degree - one moment there's huge pent-up demand for bellows that the manufacturers refuse to satisfy because of the technology, the next there's no demand because photographers have dumbed down because of the technology. As our American friends would say, go figure.
  2. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I think I should report this thread to a Moderator...:D

    Hang on though, Huw and Nick are moderators...

    Fen! ;)
  3. TheFatControlleR

    TheFatControlleR :Devil's Advocaat: Forum Admin

    Moderators are only moderators when they are moderating...

    However, a moderator not involved in the thread is at hand, should the need arise.
  4. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    And there was I thinking they were there to set an example...
  5. parisian

    parisian Well-Known Member

    Well I think that Damien should be denied Mars Bars for 20 minutes for posting an over-inflammatory question.
    Most of the posters are now on medication and we have to find someone to blame :D
  6. TheFatControlleR

    TheFatControlleR :Devil's Advocaat: Forum Admin

    Nah. That's Big Will's job. :rolleyes:
  7. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    That wasn't quite the "example" I had in mind :D
  8. parisian

    parisian Well-Known Member

    He is, however, a good example of a bad example and should be pointed out to the unwary at every opportunity :D
  9. snowqueen

    snowqueen Well-Known Member

    All i can say is....its been an interesting thread to read.
    Ive not picked up my D80 for weeks now, except to finish my final project for college.

    Im having fun with the ensign and rolleiflex .... and learning the whys and hows, when ive reached a point that i have a better understanding of these hows and whys im sure all the photos i take wether with my MF or D80 will be much better .....

    at the moment im enjoying film more than digital ....

    and as for the learning, i have a long way to go, sometimes you guys talk about things i really have no idea about, so i google and then spend hours reading ...

    so, thank you for that, ive learnt alot from you guys :)
  10. Photocracy

    Photocracy Well-Known Member

    I've just started developing & printing my own b&w pictures and feel the same. I love it!

    Nice style! :cool:
  11. sey

    sey Well-Known Member

    re: photocracy
    Oh Peter, Huw - there IS a ray of light!!!! :D
  12. parisian

    parisian Well-Known Member

    Snowqueen - we love ya babe

    Sey, (the sun shines on the righteous.) Huw, Parisian xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Just for you Snowqueen;
    [​IMG] :D
  13. Paddysnapper

    Paddysnapper Well-Known Member

    I am more than delighted you are enjoying film, and you are so right when you say it will improve your digital photography. Without all that basic know how a digital camera will at best be only a point and shoot!
  14. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    Mmmmm, Xpan. Now, if Olympus can just follow up the EP-1 with a Panoramic version, I'd be a very happy (and no doubt much poorer) man! :D
  15. parisian

    parisian Well-Known Member

    Yes indeed, wouldn't a digital, full frame XPan just be the Dogs cojones? :eek:
  16. sey

    sey Well-Known Member

    one can do panoramics with the Dogs cojones!?!? :eek: ;)
  17. parisian

    parisian Well-Known Member

    Only if you can stand the screams of pain :D
  18. alanS

    alanS Well-Known Member

    As I've worked in the electrical, electronics and computer industries all of my working life I'm interested in how these things are viewed by those who share my hobby, photography.

    I think that the introduction of newer technology normally does three things,

    - it opens up new possibilities to more people (although initially it may seem as if it excludes people eventually more people will have access,)

    - it usually raises the quality of the results produced by the masses (note that I say "the masses,") and

    - it sometimes (not always) annoys the purists and traditionalists.

    I suppose that one upside for the purists and traditionalists is that as their beloved equipment becomes less popular it may well fall in price and become more accessible, as we see today with all of the cheap and interesting stuff at dealers and on ebay.
  19. Lazza

    Lazza Well-Known Member

    Great post, isn't that *exactly* what photography should be too? Personal to the individual and enjoyable - The camera (do we/should we now read computer even instead of camera?) manufacturers would rather fool people that it's about using the latest technology they charge you for but anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together can quickly work out that that concept is a total lie.

    Like you, I've only picked up my D200 a handful of times this year and have rather spent time buying back the film cameras I sold to fund my digital gear purchases and using them again in full earnest. Give me back time and effort of film for enjoyment over "spray and pray" digital any day! I read two excellent quotes re: Camera gear by renowned landscape photographer Bruce Perry and how buying the latest gear/technology has no real benefit at all on one's photographic output and the content is very hard to argue against.

    As the man say's, the best camera is the one you are holding. Some great quotes from Bruce:-




    Moving sensors ?!? Pffffffffttttttt! /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif :D
  20. beejaybee

    beejaybee Marvin

    Technically, maybe. Artistically, I suspect not.

    It also depends on whether you're getting your satisfaction from working with cameras & real scenes or fiddling with computers. I've just been looking at a high quality atlas of lunar images which represented the best in the business in the 1960s - i.e. produced by professional astronomers working at isolated mountaintops with huge telescopes; I'm able to regularly produce images which are technically better with a small scope from a poorish site with 2009 technology, but the amount of computer work involved pains me. For me, the really great thing about traditional wet process is that it liberates me from the computer, as well as the sheer joy in handling the mechanical marvels of "retro" kit. And film still works for normal imaging, at least to a technical standard that satisfies me.

Share This Page