Subject: Re: Olympus Leads the Japanese MILC Run
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Olympus Leads the Japanese MILC Run
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 16:09:57 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 87
Message-ID: <p3tmqs$g31$1@dont-email.me>
References: <fc8924F2pk4U1@mid.individual.net> <p3otmo$dq9$1@dont-email.me>
<0001HW.201051D40082071C70000456A2CF@news.giganews.com>
<p3qupu$r7s$1@dont-email.me> <180120181707290642%nospam@nospam.invalid>
<p3rb88$i7n$1@dont-email.me> <190120181419596416%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 21:09:48 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cef3d852e3e344c1207c5da85b2c7aca";
logging-data="16481"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX189K/A9w+l5rLNk64/A59nNPLJR/njW7mY="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.5.2
In-Reply-To: <190120181419596416%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+EphRQrFaGqXUhbLMUXWe02RNDA=
Print Article
Forward Article
On 1/19/2018 2:19 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <p3rb88$i7n$1@dont-email.me>, Neil<neil@myplaceofwork.com>
> wrote:
> 
>>>> In the digital world, I'd say that ease of use is pretty important,
>>>> since they're all less efficient than film cameras.
>>>
>>> digital cameras are *more* efficient, since they are not limited by
>>> having mechanical linkages, film transport mechanisms, etc. nor do they
>>> need to have film swapped every 36 shots (or less). control placement
>>> can go *anywhere*, with the space that once was needed for film can be
>>> repurposed for bigger batteries or faster and more capable electronics,
>>> or just make a smaller camera.
>>
>> Those aspects describe flexibility, which I agree are where digital
>> cameras excel. Efficiency is about how easily one can get the shot
>> they're after, and having too many variables is a detriment to efficient
>> management.
> 
> they also describe efficiency.
> 
How?

> no need to stop to change film, waiting for processing, needing to
> bring sufficient film and of the correct type (daylight/tungsten,
> etc.), keeping it cool, etc.
> 
For the pro, there is no need to do any of that anyway because they 
don't shoot willy-nilly, and if they need to shoot a lot of frames on a 
job, they buy a special back which can hold enough film for hundreds of 
frames. So, let's just drop that straw man and focus on efficiency as a 
matter of composition and execution.

>>>> So, control
>>>> placement, menu structure, and a well thought out user interface are the
>>>> most important factors to me.
>>>
>>> that applies to every product.
>>>
>>> there are examples of well thought out digital and film cameras as well
>>> as poorly thought out ones and everything in between.
>>>
>> I already covered that, which is why I prefer Olympus cameras to my
>> Nikon digitals.
> 
> why?
>
Go back and read it. I don't repeat posts.

>>>> I've never been a fan of autofocus, finding it more of a compositional
>>>> hindrance than a benefit. When combined with a varifocal lens, the
>>>> camera becomes pretty useless to me. So, my choices are mostly for the
>>>> least frustrating kits!
>>>
>>> autofocus has the *most* benefit with varifocal lenses, and as a side
>>> benefit, it offers more flexibility for the lens formula.
>>>
>> There are two aspects of this where I'd disagree with you. First,
>> autofocus presumes what you want to focus on, sometimes fights with you,
>> and even in the best of cases screw up with varifocal lenses because the
>> location of focus changes with focal length.
> 
> only when improperly used.
> 
It's a property of every varifocal lens I've used over several decades.

>> Manually, I can focus much
>> more quickly with a zoom lens because the focal point remains constant
>> with focal length. YMMV.
> 
> autofocus automatically adjusts with varifocal lenses, making it
> effectively equivalent to a true zoom. it 'just works'.
> 
That has not been my experience.

> also, you can't focus quicker than autofocus no matter what lens you
> use. autofocus can maintain focus on a moving subject coming directly
> at you or away from you, even adjusting focus as you shoot multiple
> shots while it moves. human reaction time is much too slow to keep up.
> 
I don't need to focus quicker, I need to focus where I want the focus to 
be and have it stay there during composition.

-- 
best regards,

Neil