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

50 awesome accessories

Discussion in 'AP Magazine Feedback & Suggestions' started by Chester AP, Nov 18, 2018.

  1. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    My copy of the annual 'chocolate camera' issue of AP arrived yesterday (issue dated 24.11.18).
    For a change, this year the chocolate camera has apparently been elevated to the status of being an awesome accessory. And even if truly awesome, surely it's a consumable?

    Whenever I see 'awesome' or 'essential' on the cover I know that something inside is going to annoy me...
    Roger Hicks and Andrew Flannigan like this.
  2. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    Jaw dropping does it for me aargh
  3. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    It's the prices that do that for me. Some of the latest awesome/essential/there's a waiting list for them mirrorless bodies cost nearly twice as much as I have spent of two DSLR bodies and 7 secondhand lenses since going digital in 2007.

    I suspect that a junior member of the AP team was trusted to do the awesome cover text, without any supervision by a responsible adult.
  4. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    You know, you really are an arrogant twerp.
  5. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    In which case I say a hearty "Awesome" to all at AP, because you come over as someone who richly deserves to be annoyed. In fact I think it's essential. ;)
  6. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    I took Chester's comments to be tongue in cheek.
  7. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Given how rude he was to the Editor in another thread, I didn't. He has a track record.
    PentaxManiac likes this.
  8. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    Obviously the chocolate camera reference was 'tongue on cheek' (it's about as useful as the proverbial chocolate fireguard), but my point the abuse of language was not.

    AP is not some third-rate blog written by illiterates, but a serious magazine with a very long history of well-written and informative articles. My point was that 'awesome' does not respect that heritage.
  9. Nigel_Atherton

    Nigel_Atherton Group Editor

    That coverline was written not by a 'junior member of the team' (we don't actually have any of those any more) but by me. AP appeals to people of all ages and the cover is primarily a marketing page whose main purpose is to 'sell' what's inside, not merely describe it like a contents page. As such, superlatives are a requirement, but there are only a limited number to choose from that are short enough to fit the spaces available.
    The English language is ever-changing and every generation introduces new words and phrases and changes the meanings of others, just as yours did from the generation before. Otherwise we'd all still be speaking in Shakespearean English. I'm in my fifties, and I use that word a lot. But then I do live in the 21st century, where words like this are commonly used. You should visit sometime.
    PentaxManiac and EightBitTony like this.
  10. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    Learning and Nigel_Atherton like this.
  11. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    So why doesn't he just **** off. Other titles and web sites are available. Perhaps he has got short shrift there as well.
  12. Bazarchie

    Bazarchie Well-Known Member

    Well said Tony and without the need to use abusive language.

    The editor has a very tough job keeping a magazine alive in the current climate. I expect that maintaining advertising revenue is difficult given the competition and without that income the price of the magazine would need to increase which would not help circulation. If modern language needs to be used in the cover, so be it.
    Nigel_Atherton likes this.
  13. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    I have managed to annoy nearly everybody with my defence of the English language.
    Not with any malicious intent, but I forgot that so some people are so sensitive.

    The online Oxford Dictionary defines and 'awesome' as 'Extremely impressive or daunting; inspiring awe', and 'awe' as 'A feeling of reverential respect mixed with fear or wonder'.

    So, for example, 'awesome' could be used to describe some of Don McCullin's war images, or Beethoven's 9th Symphony, but not a chocolate camera. When AP has something that really is awesome, what word is left to describe it?

    I take the point about the new meanings applied to words - the other common victim is 'essential'.

    But having got past the cover and the chocolate camera, the round 7 APOY image was a deserving winner and many other the other winners were fascinating, Professor Newman's article was something that I hope all AP's reviewers will read, and I note that Roger's impressive Final Analysis was image was taken from this an entry on this Forum.

    As always, I look forward to the next issue.
  14. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    Hahhahaah, I'm not sensitive. You're just sometimes a twonk. I wasn't upset, you haven't upset me, I'm not suffering or in a state of being upset, so have no fear in that regard. I was being judgemental if that helps.
    Roger Hicks likes this.
  15. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    'Is 'twonk' better than 'twerp', or (gasp!) possibly as good as 'awesome'? (I think it's a furry toy, but that maybe a bit 'last century').

    'Judgemental' is never going to upset me.

    I think that it is better to be called (relatively harmless) names here rather than merely be bland and afraid of ever upsetting anybody.

    Have fun.
    Andrew Flannigan and Roger Hicks like this.
  16. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Often the people who call you names are the people whose views you would least like to be associated with. So that's a positive outcome isn't it? :cool:
  17. Andy Westlake

    Andy Westlake AP Staff

    As Technical Editor I've already read it, thanks. I wholeheartedly agree with his comments, I'd love to see lens manufacturers make some smaller lenses and be less obsessive about edge-to-edge sharpness. But as a reviewer, I'll continue to assess lenses on all of their merits, and therefore have to acknowledge the spectacular image quality that the current 'size-no-object' fashion in lens design provides. Indeed this is what the current market seems to be demanding, as otherwise the lens makers wouldn't beep on building ever-bigger and sharper optics.
  18. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    Thank you for your reply.

    I have seen people struggling with the small full frame mirrorless bodies, with enormous short focal length hanging off them that make handling very difficult. Perhaps this situation is the real reason the manufacturers now put image stabilisation in even the shortest focal length lenses.

    Fortunately, for most fittings, the secondhand market continues to offer what we can no longer buy new.
  19. Andy Westlake

    Andy Westlake AP Staff

    Interesting. I've shot with small full-frame mirrorless bodies using all focal lengths from 12mm to 600mm, and I can't say I've ever really struggled or found handling very difficult, although obviously some combinations are better balanced than others. Then again I once remember reading a good piece of advice saying that when you're shooting with heavier lenses, it's best to support the weight by cradling them with your left hand. This approach has stood me in good stead for decades.

    Another interesting hypothesis. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next man, but on this one I'm afraid I'm going to have to run with the simplest explanation based on the observable facts. The real reason the manufacturers now put image stabilisation in even the shortest focal length lenses is because it helps you get sharper images handheld when you want to use slow shutter speeds. It's really useful for shooting in low light without bumping up the ISO, or when you want to use motion blur effects but can't use a tripod. I've illustrated the possibilities of modern IS systems in countless lens and camera reviews.
  20. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    Again, thank you for the reply.
    You have more experience of this than I do, so I'm happy to be corrected. I have played with a friend's Canon APS-C body with his 400 mm IS lens and could immediately see the benefit when shooting handheld with a lens this long, but I hadn't used a shorter IS lens. Thinking again about the people I saw struggling with the small full frame mirrorless bodies and heavy lenses, perhaps their problem was the one highlighted by Matt Hart in the same issue: they could afford the latest and the best reviewed hardware, but didn't even know something as basic as how to hold it properly, and presumably hadn't looked at the relevant part of the user manual. This is not a new problem (see below), but the complexity of modern digital camera perhaps makes it worse.

    Have you ever seen one of the gold-plated Leica SLRs? Many years ago (late 1970s or early 1980s) I met a man at Stourhead gardens who had just purchased one 'because I was told it was the best', but no idea about how to use it. Being a film SLR with a 50 mm lens it was actually very easy to use, and I spent a few minutes showing some of the basics. I don't recall which model it was, but I think it was manual only.

Share This Page