jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
sreidvt said:
Okay, now that I'm a paid subscriber I've got a couple of questions that weren't covered in Part I:
-- So what, really, IS that little "blue dot" (only now we can see that it's not really blue) on the front? Plausible guesses so far on RFF have been a self-timer signal, an auto-white-balance sensor, or an external meter cell to allow the metering system to calculate the set aperture (which would be needed for EXIF header data since there's no coupling linkage between the lens' aperture ring and the body.) What does it really do, and do bad things happen if you accidentally get a finger in front of it?
-- You discussed the menu system in terms of the buttons on the left of the LCD, but not how it interacts the controller on the right. What does the controller control and how does one use it?
If this stuff is going to be in Part Deux, fine...
S
sreidvt
Guest
Stan98103 said:
Glad to hear it, thanks Stan!
Sean
S
sreidvt
Guest
jlw said:
Hi Jim,
I'm not sure what that thing is but I'll certainly check when I get the production M8. I worked with two M8s but never gave that thing a thought. I believe, however, that it is the self-timer indicator.
I'll discuss the control wheel more in Part 2 but it works in much the same way as similar controls on DSLRs, for example it can be turned to scroll up and down within a menu.
BTW, RFF readers, jlw loaned several of the lenses used in the "Fast Lenses" article I wrote for LL last year and so he did a favor for any of us who were curious about the performance of older Canon RF lenses.
Cheers,
Sean
Oliver
Member
When I was looking at some gear Sean reviewed on RR, I subbed to the site. Well worth the $25 to get his review. As others have said, he covers alot of gear you just don't see others talking about. I got my moneys' worth up front and since then have read about the 5D, D200, Zeiss lenses and more. Those articles are still there, so the deal just gets better over time for new subscribers.
I trust a semi-private review I pay for much more than ad-funded sites. I can't remember the last time I saw a dpreview that didn't end with "Recommended" at a minimum. Same with popphoto. That said, Sean is very even-handed in his comments and anything he covers is usually some pretty desirable kit.
Anyway, another happy subber fwiw
-Oliver
I trust a semi-private review I pay for much more than ad-funded sites. I can't remember the last time I saw a dpreview that didn't end with "Recommended" at a minimum. Same with popphoto. That said, Sean is very even-handed in his comments and anything he covers is usually some pretty desirable kit.
Anyway, another happy subber fwiw
-Oliver
__--
-
Sean:
I just finished reading your article on street photography, which I think is brilliant. A thought that I would like to add: many people posting pictures on the photo forums somehow thinnk that they are documenting something. That's not how I think of what I'm doing — I like to think that I'm depicting rather than documenting. I think this difference is important — at least in what I'm trying to do — and occurred to me while I came across this terminology reading the postscript to Moriyama Daido's book, Shinjuku 19xx-20xx, the one published in Switzerland (and printed the most beautiful glossy paper that I've ever seen). The word depiction is even better in the German version of the text in that book: Darstellung.
You can see my photography (in this case with the Ricoh GR-D) at:
www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
..and by clicking on Bangkok Series you can a more logical presentation, as some of these pictures are part of a book project. Incidentally, I find the GR-D particularly good for this type of photography because it pushes me to a "looser" style that I like.
—Mitch/Potomac, MD
I just finished reading your article on street photography, which I think is brilliant. A thought that I would like to add: many people posting pictures on the photo forums somehow thinnk that they are documenting something. That's not how I think of what I'm doing — I like to think that I'm depicting rather than documenting. I think this difference is important — at least in what I'm trying to do — and occurred to me while I came across this terminology reading the postscript to Moriyama Daido's book, Shinjuku 19xx-20xx, the one published in Switzerland (and printed the most beautiful glossy paper that I've ever seen). The word depiction is even better in the German version of the text in that book: Darstellung.
You can see my photography (in this case with the Ricoh GR-D) at:
www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
..and by clicking on Bangkok Series you can a more logical presentation, as some of these pictures are part of a book project. Incidentally, I find the GR-D particularly good for this type of photography because it pushes me to a "looser" style that I like.
—Mitch/Potomac, MD
S
sreidvt
Guest
malland said:
Hi Mitch,
Thanks very much. That's an important distinction you draw. Certainly, some photographers are trying to make documents and so those priorities are foremost when the pictures are being made. Walker Evans often made a point of clarifying that his work was not documentary (but rather in what he called "a documentary style").
I think that when one is consciously creating a picture from the raw materials of the subject (as is true for representational visual art), however, he or she is indeed depicting.
I'll try to look at those Bangkok pictures today.
Cheers,
Sean
Last edited by a moderator: