|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
07-24-2011, 07:15 PM
|
| |
"there is no way I would go back to using stone age cameras."
Not only is *my* best photography consistently better on film cameras, I would challenge ANY digital photographer to shoot the same subject, them using digital, and me using film *with the exception of sports only*, where the automation is really useful - although sports shooters covered plenty well before the invention of the motor drive...) - and I will produce a picture to equal or rival anything captured RAW.
for sharpness, colour etc - I will match any digital image in everything except sheer grain (but that's an aesthetic choice and often enhances a picture anyway).
it's ALL about technique. run and stun is for kids.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-22-2011, 11:53 AM
|
| |
look, i haven't used either (awaiting delivery of my 31mm and 77mm in the the coming days) but a lot of this talk about FL merits a point.
'zooming with your feet' is more necessary - and more beneficial, it's fairly arguable - with wider/shorter FLs. each step/inch makes a bigger difference, the shorter your FL. therefore, the 31 - which translates to a short standard - would benefit more from 'zooming with your feet' than the 43, which translates to a short tele.
i am a bit of prime/sharpness junkie, and just parted with my DA 40 because - though *insanely* sharp - the FL is just not as useful to me (who needs a 60mm equivalent lens? not enough working distance for a natural perspective head-shot portrait, not wide enough for environmental). i cannot envision needing any sharper, and the equivalent FOV of the 43 = 65-66mm. awkward at best. if you just want to shoot your nearest and dearest from a hair too close with enough sharpness to make them rush out and buy a new cleanser and moisturiser, fine. there's a reason why a super portraitist like Jane Bown used an 85mm lens her entire career. is why i am looking at the voigtlander 58mm (closest FL to 85mm equiv, 1.5 x 58 = 87 = PERFICK!). have been manually focussing for 17 years, AF is a luxury it's nice to have but not really necessary for me.
if the 31 becomes a 'short standard' (i.e. equiv FOV of 46mm), that immediately makes it much, much more versatile for general photography/walkaround to my mind. if the rendering is all its cracked up to be, so much the better. fairly sure it will equal the previous standard-setting combo (for me) of a Zuiko 40mm on a 5DII. and that's what i'm after, but with better ergonomics.
now if i had that MZs i'm quietly going about acquiring, that 43 would be *just* right...
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-28-2011, 10:13 PM
|
| |
FA 20-35 f4 zoom for me. Match made in heaven, with the DA15mm in my pocket...
|
