Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

what´s your "all-in-one" ?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I find it strange how a simple question has somehow degenerated to a dialogue on "elitism and purity." Will it descend to hearing from the true believers.
I learned during the early part of my hanging around here, that elitism is not a part of this community's make-up - I mistook this when we were talking about gear and price, and I learned my lesson then. During my time here I have had demonstrated towards me a degree of generosity, open mindedness and acceptance that is impressive Smile With an open mind we can all learn things from each other.

I joke about my stepson, David's digital Nikon, but I don't put him down for it, we have many great discussions about photography and he still see's relevance in my anachronistic gear, via my use of my chosen tools. This is especially true when I have something new or different. For David the choice of a digital camera fits his lifestyle, film fits mine. Can we deride anything that encourages someone's return to his passion and fires his creativity.

Here are a couple quotes we should remember . . .

Quote:
Maybe because it's entirely an artist's eye, patience and skill that makes an image and not his tools.
Ken Rockwell, Your Camera Does Not Matter, 2005


Quote:
There's no correlation between creativity and equipment ownership. None. Zilch. Nada. Actually, as the artist gets more into his thing, and as he gets more successful, his number of tools tends to go down. He knows what works for him. Expending mental energy on stuff wastes time.
Hugh Macleod, How To Be Creative: 10, 08-22-04


Or. . .
Quote:
We could defer to Voltaire . . .
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
j.lukow wrote:
Quote:
There's no correlation between creativity and equipment ownership. None. Zilch. Nada. Actually, as the artist gets more into his thing, and as he gets more successful, his number of tools tends to go down. He knows what works for him. Expending mental energy on stuff wastes time.
Hugh Macleod, How To Be Creative: 10, 08-22-04


That's kind of true - even for gearheads like us.
I mean, although I have gathered a lot of stuff, I tend to use the same lenses on most occasions.
Still, collection and "having" certain lenses esp. when found for a great price is part of the game, part of the fun. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hugh Macleod wrote:
There's no correlation between creativity and equipment ownership

I don't agree
Every time I get a new lens I spend 2 or 3 hours of creativity test shots
If I had only one lens it will stay in a bag and I would not make any shot
Maybe all does theory is true for real artist
But for fool like me equipment is the only source of creativity Mr. Green


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
j.lukow wrote:
I find it strange how a simple question has somehow degenerated to a dialogue on "elitism and purity."

Here are a couple quotes we should remember . . .

Quote:
Maybe because it's entirely an artist's eye, patience and skill that makes an image and not his tools.
Ken Rockwell, Your Camera Does Not Matter, 2005


Taking KR with a pinch of salt, it's generally true within its limitations.

Quote:
There's no correlation between creativity and equipment ownership. None. Zilch. Nada. Actually, as the artist gets more into his thing, and as he gets more successful, his number of tools tends to go down. He knows what works for him. Expending mental energy on stuff wastes time.
Hugh Macleod, How To Be Creative: 10, 08-22-04


Again, within the reasonable limitations imposed by the level of equipment normally carried. There's no point trying to produce a pleasingly focused shot with something that has the optical qualities of a beer bottle. On the other hand, if something happens nearby and all you have to hand is a cameraphone, you use it - at the very least you get a record of the event.

As far as the film/digital debate goes - imo, it's a red herring. For decades I was happy with film, apart from the cumulative cost. Digital is just so damned handy, but like film it has its pros and cons. I really don't care if someone chooses to shoot only film, it's entirely their choice, and like their religion, is none of my business. What I find sad is the attitude often expressed by recent amateurs who have only ever used digital, that film is somehow neolithic. That's their loss - and typical of the 'instant fix' generation. They will never know the nail-biting time spent wondering if a once-in-a-lifetime shot turned out ok, or hoping the lab didn't screw up the film. Smile There's nothing like it.
Though, having said that, I'm surprised by the numbers taking up film for the first time - a minority, true, but hopefully enough in numbers to keep film going in the coming years.

Back to the gear thing...
As I've said before, when I could only afford one lens, it was amazing how versatile that lens was - I used it for portraits, landscapes, action, street, absolutely everything and I produced some decent stuff with it. In fact, during my previous periods of half-decent camera ownership I've usually only had 2, maybe 3 lenses at any one time.

Only now can I reach into a drawer and pick from a range for whatever takes my fancy during the day. Now, I'm spoiled for choice, but it's surprising how many times I just go out with one or two only.

Too much gear is distracting, but it's fun to have, especially at today's prices.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The last few posts make sense,
You need to master your tools before you use them, be it (film+darkroom+print) OR (digiSensor+Photoshop+printing)
Or the inbetweens...!!

The lenses by the way seem a different breed, they can't be generalised, and need to be mastered individually(even two copies of a same model & brand) , have too many different character, so lets stick to discussing them Smile

BTW.. here is what you can get if you spend time mastering a lense.
The lense is one of the crapiest as many say it. 18-55 that comes with canon 300/350/400D..
Please have a look at this Gallery ... you will be pleased you did...


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dakoo wrote:
Please have a look at this Gallery ... you will be pleased you did...

Even with 5 or 7 panoramas a plastic zoom can only give plastic colors
They are good samples for tourist postcard but they have nothing to do with the "I was there" you get from a good lens.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
poilu wrote:
dakoo wrote:
Please have a look at this Gallery ... you will be pleased you did...

Even with 5 or 7 panoramas a plastic zoom can only give plastic colors
They are good samples for tourist postcard but they have nothing to do with the "I was there" you get from a good lens.


I hope, poilu, this is another one of your jokes. Confused

Of course it is much nicer to hold and use a rugged lens, but even "plastic" lenses can produce very nice pictures, AF or MF (yes, there are some plastic MF lenses, too, and good ones).

And I would not agree to you that these photos are only nice postcards! Shocked Some of these frames are really good!


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dakoo wrote:

BTW.. here is what you can get if you spend time mastering a lense.
The lense is one of the crapiest as many say it. 18-55 that comes with canon 300/350/400D..
Please have a look at this Gallery ... you will be pleased you did...


Excellent stuff, if a bit saturated for my taste. He's taken the best bit of the lens and made good use of it by panoramics. It only goes to show what can be done with the humblest of gear.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Carsten wrote:
I hope, poilu, this is another one of your jokes

Yes Robert Mekis make a wonderful job, it is not nice to joke about it.
But my feelings about unnatural colors is true
Artist has the right to adjust his job and in this case the result is pleasant.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
poilu wrote:
But my feelings about unnatural colors is true
Artist has the right to adjust his job and in this case the result is pleasant.


OK, that's right. I do not like these colours, either. But this has nothing to do with the lens, it is the photographer's style, if we like it or not. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Having had a look at the gallery of Robert Mekis ( http://www.robertmekis.com/?kateg=photos&subkateg=landscape ),
I realized another aspect oft photography.

Usually we see a nonessential dichotomy between "photographers eye" (which needs no special gear) or "professional gear" (which shall guarantee professional outputs). I would like to have both. Rolling Eyes

But the pictures of Mr. Mekis show me a third dimension: "the right moment of light". The "right moment of light" often seems to me being a gift or mercy, which I take thankful and with humbleness. (*)

I am fond of landscapes. Very often I interrupt my way to my place of employment e.g. because there is a wonderful fog, broken by strong light of the morning.
And often I am frustrated because duties or the lack of my camera prevent such a spontanous opportunity of fixing a wonderful mood which often is only staying for minutes.
And this way I come back to the idea of this thread: It helps me to catch such rare moments, if I have a reduced gear, which is not a burden to have it always with me, but is versatile as possible.

(*) The wonderful master of photography Josef Sudek wrote:
"... sunlight, even breaking throuh leafage and haze, reveals attributes of objects, locations and space and the viewer, represented through the camera is percepting this disclosure. Under this view, the work of an artist means to express admiration and thankfulness, because life and beauteousness is not a matter of course ...".
(Ian Jeffrey. 2001. Josef Sudek. Phaidon Verlag, Berlin)

Confused I tell you, this was a hard work of translation... Confused

Last edited by Retro on Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:21 pm; edited 4 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I feel that the best way for me to learn and improve, is to try to stick with one venue. My availability of time forces me to use this philosophy. Therefore, the bulk of my serious work is undertaken using a medium format system, which you could say is "one tool".

If I was to take all my tools and use them randomly and interchangeably, then I think, FOR ME, it would slow down my learning process.

That said, I do like to use the 35mm DSLR with the various manual lenses at times. But 90% of my current learning is using the medium format tool.

So, for me, it's "one step at a time". Confused


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
poilu wrote:
dakoo wrote:
Please have a look at this Gallery ... you will be pleased you did...

Even with 5 or 7 panoramas a plastic zoom can only give plastic colors
They are good samples for tourist postcard but they have nothing to do with the "I was there" you get from a good lens.

I agree poilu, & probably so will Robert probably,
The point i was trying to put forward was that its not about the war of lenses, tools.
Its a part of big equation that goes on to making of a photograph.
In one of the interviews Mekis, talks about how he has a location in his mind & he wait & waits for moment when he think the mood, light will be suitable enough to shoot.
And this wait can go on to hours, some times days & in case months.. when he sees that the weather is favorable he goes to a particular location & then shoots.
Ofcourse he will be happy if he can own a ziess T* 20/2.8 with B+W gratuated filters, But not having them hasn't stoped him from bringing to canvas/paper his vision.....
Patience, time, light, compositions there is so much more that too needs to be taken in account..
What i want to bring to disscussion was whatever the tools, mastering it is the only way to bring out ART consistently. (lucky accidently not considered).
Even Orio when he disscussed bringing 3D like image on screen talked more about composing & not about optics the other day. He is a fine example here that he knows his tools, so is consistent with the results.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dakoo wrote:
BTW.. here is what you can get if you spend time mastering a lense

Hi dakoo! Please excuse my previous answer.
I didn't read your message and thought it was a example of "lens doesn't matter".
My ironic answer was out of subject

dakoo wrote:
Patience, time, light, compositions there is so much more that too needs to be taken in account..

I agree of course with all your arguments.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2