[LRflex] Re: Wildlife (almost)
- From: Richard Ward <ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 12:43:28 -0400
Hi David,
I have a question then a comment: When did fish, amphibians, insects, and
arachnids, get re-classified as domesticated pets? I must have missed that in
last months Scientific American. :-)
My comments aren't tongue in cheek! First, when I see that these delicious
images are 70% crops of the original files I am struck at the speciousness of
arguing 4/3rds sensors are inferior to a bigger sensor just because the bigger
sensor is, well, bigger. I see it as roughly analogous to comparing 35mm versus
120 film shooting: below a certain print size it is an argument over how a
photographer wishes to draw, express, and render, the tones and shapes and
subjects within any given image. Above a certain print size it starts to become
a bigger is better rout unless you're a niche artisan shooting niche situations
with niche techniques.
The 4/3, the aps-c, and the full frame, sensors all can be ludicrously
wonderful as tools to make images. Which is better depends on the individual
and their individual needs. We have an embarrassment of riches these days as
photographers. Need to photograph black cats in coal mines? Get a D700 and an
f1.4 lens. Need to shoot angels on the head of a pin? Get a 5dii and an R 100
APO. Need to shoot by candlelight in a nightclub unobtrusively? Get an M9 and a
Noctilux. Need a General Practicioner camera? Choose the one with a body and
lenses you like shooting with.
As for a critique of your Butterflies(?) I would point to the viewer issues
created by blurred areas of an image that don't easily 'fall' into the
foreground or the background. In this case the foliage in one image and much of
the near wing of the insect in the other.
Sincerely
Richard Ward
_____________________________________
On Jul 26, 2011, at 11:40 AM, "David Young" <dsy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The other day, I went for a walk, along the X-country ski trails, with our
> dog, Tiki.
> I'd hoped for some wildlife to "shoot", but there was neither a bird nor
> bear to be seen or heard. In fact, an eerily quiet outing.
>
> That's not to say there wasn't any wildlife...
>
> http://www.furnfeather.net/Temps/Wild-1.html
> http://www.furnfeather.net/Temps/Wild-2.html
>
> though I'm not just sure what these little critters are...
>
> 1/250th or 1/500th @ f11. ISO 400. E3 w/50~200 f2.8-3.5 w/1.4x converter,
> at about 1 meter (3'). Both cropped to about 70% of the original frame.
>
> C&C welcomed, as always.
> --
> David Young - Photographer
>
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
