Is it snobbery (Page 10): Don't you have something more important to take up your time ?

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Don't you have something more important to take up your time ?

PhotoArtsLA Loc: Boynton Beach

JR1 wrote:

There are some on the forum who list in their profile all the gear they own, D800s etc, is this snobbery, after all who needs to know really

Eg

Nikon D800E, D800, D7100, D7000, D5100, D3200, F5, N90s, S6100. Canon 6D, 7D amd 60D. Couple of Pentax 645's. More glass than I can carry at once

Hmmm... another thought... If you dry fired ALL of those cameras (one at a time) until each dropped dead, picked up the next DSLR and shot it to death, and so on....and concurrently fired an old film camera like the Nikon F2, frame for frame until all the DSLRs were dead... You could then load a roll of film in the F2 and shoot something.

Nothing in the DSLR world is built to old pro standards, rather, they are built to amaze us and leave a beautiful corpse.

MIKE GALLAGHER Loc: New Zealand

Bill gomberg - don't be so stupid. Nekon is exactly right. And it's obvious that you had to quote a specialised field even to invent a point you could quibble about.
Mike

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Sorry, DP.
SS

EDDIEO Loc: Pawleys Island SC

Early, in my professional career I learned that if you want your work to excel and sell, you must have the state of the art equipment. I shot with medium format Hasselblads and Mamiya cameras. I sold 16x20's almost every week. Bloomingdale in NY enlarged some to 9 feet. As to your question, don't try to build a house with a tack hammer.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

PhotoArtsLA wrote:

Hmmm... another thought... If you dry fired ALL of those cameras (one at a time) until each dropped dead, picked up the next DSLR and shot it to death, and so on....and concurrently fired an old film camera like the Nikon F2, frame for frame until all the DSLRs were dead... You could then load a roll of film in the F2 and shoot something.

Nothing in the DSLR world is built to old pro standards, rather, they are built to amaze us and leave a beautiful corpse.

Hey, a beautiful corpse is better than a sharp stick in the eye !?!?
SS

DJ Mills Loc: Idaho

JR1 wrote:

There are some on the forum who list in their profile all the gear they own, D800s etc, is this snobbery, after all who needs to know really

Eg

Nikon D800E, D800, D7100, D7000, D5100, D3200, F5, N90s, S6100. Canon 6D, 7D amd 60D. Couple of Pentax 645's. More glass than I can carry at once

One time I owned one share of the Boston Celtics (honest!) and that allowed me to claim to be an NBA team owner.
Now I'm thinking I need to buy a share in our local camera store. Then I would own all the stuff on the shelves and I could be a snob too.
DJM

Bill gomberg

Nonsense .

Jackdoor Loc: Huddersfield, Yorkshire.

onetimeduck wrote:

Right now I shoot FF but I'm looking into 43s. I'm still trying to figure out which lumix does what. There must be dozens of them.

I've an OMD-5 and D800. 90% of the time I use the M4/3, unless in low light or need a very wide angle. Please check out Olympus before you get Lumix! The operating system is just wonderful...

Bill gomberg

As I feared you took my opinion as a personal attack . So be it .
Sure it's possible to make great pictures with the kit you describe . However , no way culd it meet professional standards .
In addition , it just is'nt rugged enough for professional use .

DebAnn Loc: Toronto

Since you've listed all of yours, what on earth do you need them all for? Bet there's a student or two who could make good use of the older ones.

JR1 wrote:

There are some on the forum who list in their profile all the gear they own, D800s etc, is this snobbery, after all who needs to know really

Eg

Nikon D800E, D800, D7100, D7000, D5100, D3200, F5, N90s, S6100. Canon 6D, 7D amd 60D. Couple of Pentax 645's. More glass than I can carry at once

Bill gomberg

nekon wrote:

I know exactly what I am writing about-You are tal... (show quote)

As I was afraid you'd do , you took my rebuttal as a personal attack .
Sureit's possible to make great pictures with the kit you describe . But , it wouldn't come close to meeting professional standards nor would it be rugged enough to survive in a pro's handling . Just try to imagine that gear being used by a National Geographic photographer as one of many examples .

Bill gomberg

EDDIEO wrote:

Early, in my professional career I learned that if you want your work to excel and sell, you must have the state of the art equipment. I shot with medium format Hasselblads and Mamiya cameras. I sold 16x20's almost every week. Bloomingdale in NY enlarged some to 9 feet. As to your question, don't try to build a house with a tack hammer.

AMEN !

gusto7670 Loc: Tampa, FL

Most of the items that are listed, I don't even know what they are.

When something is listed, I am interested if it something that I have or something that I am planning to buying.

rebride

nekon wrote:

Ultra-wide lenses don't make sense-any wider than 24mm distorts the image. .

nekon wrote:

By the way Ansell would have made great shots with a 35mm disposable camera,(Fuji quicksnap),although he was more of a darkroom artist, than a photographer, per se.

nekon wrote:

A lot of snobs getting irked at this post-a photograph is made using mind and eye; a camera just records the image.

There are now lenses wider than 24mm (35 equiv.) that have none or no distortion to speak of. I love a 24mm but one is not made for my camera yet.
Ansel like most all zone photographers (pre) visualized a scene with post production in mind. Deciding on an exposure with negative development adjustments to put tonal values where wanted with fine tuning in print development.
Mind and eye>camera>darkroom>print. What more is a photographer to do?