[dafbp]

We get it Canon, Nikon and Fujifilm users, your cameras fly off the shelves. You don’t need to rub it in the faces of Pentax fans.

[Skodadriver]

Hi jhacker. Putting aside his very poor attitude towards just about everything, he forgets that photography is very subjective. The only real test of whether a photograph is good or not, IMO, is whether the photographer who took it is happy with it.

I take photographs and judge what I've taken by whether I like it and am happy with it. But after a time when I look at them again my opinion often changes. This is an example




I hated it enough to stick the lens out on auction.....then liked it enough to share it on my facebook.... now I'm not sure whether I like it or not. Maybe if I keep taking the pills. Must point out that the camera body was a K-5, the lens was Oreston 50mm F1.8, Auto white balance and little PP. Unfortunately my lack of ability means I am unable to critique my photos enough past the "I know what I like" and even then I'm not sure!

[Digitalis]

We get it Canon, Nikon and Fujifilm users, your cameras fly off the shelves. You don’t need to rub it in the faces of Pentax fans

but...but...they have to... to maintain the status quo. You really don't want to be around when their egos implode, getting the blood stains out of the carpets can take weeks.

[6BQ5]

I stopped reading this guy's blog a little while ago. At some point most of his posts turned angry. He must be very frustrated with something going on in his life. I can understand that. There's a lot going on in my life right now too.

I switched over to fstoppers.com. Starting at the last page, I am reading/skimming one page a day until I make it to the front page. Much better website!

[Digitalis]

I Highly recommend The Online photographer - which coincidentally, has made similar comments about cameras in general: they are all perfectly, OK.

[wibbly]

i feel like this general sentiment could be applied to most things that people squabble about endlessly.

it's like the guys who won't give up arguing about ford/dodge/chevy when it comes to trucks.

[normhead]

In his defence, and to the comment, if it makes you happy, I've never seen a happiness quotient cameras. The simple fact is, every time you increase your format size your DoF decreases and it get hard and harder to get a good image. But the pay off when you do get one is often spectacular.

I bet the happiness per image gets less and less, the larger the format gets.

An example from this morning... ƒ11, the kind of D0F that comes standard on small format cameras, probably 8 keepers out of 60 images. Mostly because of exposure experimentation.


Earlier in the morning with a 70mm ƒ2.8. The kind of DoF you just don't get with small format. I like both images, but for me, the larger format has a quality that's completely different than what you can do with a smaller format. The price, 2 keepers out of 80. Lots of fussing and fiddling trying to get it perfect. Both images make me happy, one makes me happier.

[luftfluss]

I Highly recommend The Online photographer - which coincidentally, has made similar comments about cameras in general: they are all perfectly, OK.

Mike Johnston is my favorite singular photographic voice on the Internet.

[UncleVanya]

My counter argument: 90 percent of everything is crap. Only 10% of photogaphic hardware ( bodies,Lenses, strobes,accessories) is worth a damn, the rest should be melted down for scrap.

Only a perfectionist view would agree with this. Unless we are talking about longevity and durability in which case I'm on board.

[normhead]

Only a perfectionist view would agree with this. Unless we are talking about longevity and durability in which case I'm on board.

Then there is always the Bell curve, no matter how good or bad things are, 90% is crap, 9 % is very good, 1% is exceptional. As quality increases the bar moves. If you want your work to be thought of as exceptional, you have to stay ahead of the curve.

IQ is not an absolute, it is always compared to what else is out there.

[boriscleto]

Earlier in the morning with a 70mm ƒ2.8. The kind of DoF you just don't get with small format. I like both images, but for me, the larger format has a quality that's completely different than what you can do with a smaller format. The price, 2 keepers out of 80. Lots of fussing and fiddling trying to get it perfect. Both images make me happy, one makes me happier.

I hear that cold you have broke a brand new bridge...

[normhead]

I hear that cold you have broke a brand new bridge...

The first cable suspension bridge in Ontario and the sonofabitch broke. I was hoping my photographic life was going to get more interesting with these ned cable suspension bridges. I guess that's not going to happen. Looks like they can fix it up with a couple loads of gravel. My guess is ice got under the footings, or maybe the cables shrink a lot when it's cold.

I'm interested in seeing the engineering report. Us Canadians are fascinated by the cold breaking stuff. Usually it's our stuff, so it's a relief when it's someone else's stuff. Maybe this will help the government clue in to the fact it's not very smart having just one road that connects the east half of the country with the west. This is the only bridge across this river.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/nipigon-river-bridge-closed-transcanada-1.3397831

[ChristianRock]

Then there is always the Bell curve, no matter how good or bad things are, 90% is crap, 9 % is very good, 1% is exceptional.

I like the other saying, that 89.4% of all statistics are just completely made up

[UncleVanya]

Then there is always the Bell curve, no matter how good or bad things are, 90% is crap, 9 % is very good, 1% is exceptional. As quality increases the bar moves. If you want your work to be thought of as exceptional, you have to stay ahead of the curve.

IQ is not an absolute, it is always compared to what else is out there.

Well... that's an odd way at looking at a normal distribution. If we assume lens quality runs on standard deviations from an average in a way that is normally distributed (which it may not be) then:

68% falls in the 'average' category. This is what the standard for image making gear is at any given time within a class of equipment. This can be made as narrow as desired or cross all equipment as wide as you want. Definition matters. For our purpose let's take ILC equipment as our population. Let's also limit it to bodies that are no more than 5 years old and lenses no more than 15 years old or still sold. Just for fun.

The next 13.5% up is let's say Really Good but not Excellent. The next 13.5% down is below average but not quite awful.

The next 2.5% up is excellent. The next 2.5% down is awful.

Above this is fantastic one of a kind excellent stuff. At the bottom is total garbage.

But we can play with stats and not really get anywhere. The pro photographers list of gear might be already self-selected into the top two standard deviations of the first list. Within that gear there will still be variation.

[jatrax]

The first cable suspension bridge in Ontario and the sonofabitch broke.

Always bad when engineers forget little things like cold, or wind:

You Tube

You Tube