[rollei_list] Re: "Kodak disposable box cameras" (was: Not My Definition of a Thoroughbred (Re: Nikon vs. Leica))
- From: Allen Zak <azak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 11:34:47 -0400
On Apr 13, 2005, at 12:22 AM, Douglas Shea wrote:
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ardeshir Mehta
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 10:01 PM
> To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: "Kodak disposable box cameras" (was: Not My
> Definition of a Thoroughbred (Re: Nikon vs. Leica))
>
>
> On Tuesday, April 12, 2005, at 07:46 PM, Douglas Shea wrote:
>
>> That's one of the funny things about all of the emphasis we place upon
>> camera and lens quality (and I'm as guilty as anyone); while I'm not
>> suggesting that publishing should be our criteria for assessing value
>> it amuses me to know that a couple of my published underwater shots of
>> sea turtles were taken with Kodak disposable box cameras.
>>
>> Doug
>
> Way to go, Doug.
>
> "f/8 and BE THERE!"
>
> THAT's the way to take pictures.
>
> Cheers.
Reminds me of the time a bunch of amateur photographers were out on a
field trip, everybody but one toting the latest in high tech gear.
That guy was photographing with an ancient box camera held together
with duct tape. Everyone ribbed the fellow, who smiled in reply and
said nothing.
At the next club meeting the resulting prints were displayed and, to
make a long story short, while photographs from the high quality
equipment were excellent, those from the funky box camera were awful.
Allen Zak
Other related posts:
