philcycles Posted August 10, 2013 Share #61 Posted August 10, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) While I do haul gear around I find I do 90% of my shooting with a normal lens. With the Leica I use a 2.8 Elmar mostly and with the Blad I use an 80. I used to use wide angles but these days mostly standard lenses. Makes life simple.Sometimes I get really simple and haul out the 3.5 Rollei TLR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 10, 2013 Posted August 10, 2013 Hi philcycles, Take a look here The joy of One camera One Lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Simon Bee Posted August 18, 2013 Share #62 Posted August 18, 2013 Indeed..... rant mode on..... I really don't understand why anyone wants to take photos of a gig on a cameraphone from the middle of the crowd. Assuming they even end up with an image that isn't a blur, or a patch of blown highlights in the darkness, what do they do with them? They stand their watching a live gig from the small LCD of their smartphone, instead of putting the damn thing away and just enjoying the event. Well said James ! Why anyone wants to watch a gig through their phone screen is beyond me, what they should be doing is immersing themselves in the true experiance before it's over. Oh and don't get me started on politeness, that seems to have gone out of the window with the advent of the mobile phone, you're in the middle of a conversation with someone and their phone rings .... you guessed it they stop you dead and answer the phone, there is not much that annoys me more, whats wrong with fumbling for the 'off' button and picking the message up later. Another reason I don't own a mobile phone ( of any kind ) , I hate the bloody things Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted August 18, 2013 Share #63 Posted August 18, 2013 As a family, we have banned bringing mobiles to a meal. Anyone who transgresses and the phone rings or pings, has to leave with the rest of their meal uneaten. There is a campaign against snubbing someone by answering a phone while talking to you. I hope it takes off. I do have both UK and French mobiles. My usage was 3 minutes on my French one and 2 on my UK one last month. Stop Phubbing Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted August 18, 2013 Share #64 Posted August 18, 2013 Another reason I don't own a mobile phone ( of any kind ) So do you not use a car because of all the idiots out on the road? It's not the devices themselves, it's just certain people who use them. Impoliteness has also been with us throughout history. Mobile phones can save lives in emergencies. There are also plenty of ill-mannered people out in the public waving blingy lizard skin Leica cameras about. But we still own and use our more humble versions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted August 18, 2013 Share #65 Posted August 18, 2013 I think the level of courtesy, or lack thereof, extends beyond 'misuse' of mobile phones. According the standards I was brought up to practice, our community is sadly lacking in multiple areas of simple courtesy and consideration. Times, they are a changing. Nothing is for ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted August 19, 2013 Share #66 Posted August 19, 2013 Love the anti-phubbing campaign, Wilson. Impoliteness has also been with us throughout history. Indeed. All this has happened before, and all this will happen again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Benqui Posted August 19, 2013 Share #67 Posted August 19, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) To come back to topic. I am right now in the north of Thailand and just have my MP, rolls of tmax 400,Portra 400 and my 35 summarit with me. It is a lot of fun and very relaxing. No trouble to have the wrong glass for the right moment. It took two days to get used to this philosophy, but right now I dont miss something. Best regards Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted August 19, 2013 Share #68 Posted August 19, 2013 No trouble to have the wrong glass for the right moment. Very inspiring, Marc (though did you not mean "no trouble to have the right glass for the right moment"?). Best of luck in your travels. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted August 19, 2013 Share #69 Posted August 19, 2013 One camera & one lens is fine for personal work and for family photos. But for wedding photography, it would be too limiting. I know people do it ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted August 19, 2013 Share #70 Posted August 19, 2013 They stand their watching a live gig from the small LCD of their smartphone, instead of putting the damn thing away and just enjoying the event. I believe this is a false choice. One can do both at the same time. Well, not at the exact same time, but almost. One can make a pic/video with the phone and also see and enjoy the event. It is not as if one's eyes become glued to the small LCD the entire time. Eyes can move around and alternate attention from one thing to another. In the world of wedding photography, some people are promoting the idea of "unplugged weddings" where the guests are told to not take any photos -- as if they will somehow miss the wedding from the moment they start making photos. I don't agree with this. It is possible to "enjoy the event" and make photos too. People have different ways of enjoying the event. Some people are photographers and that is their way of enjoying the event. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjans Posted August 19, 2013 Share #71 Posted August 19, 2013 To come back to topic. I am right now in the north of Thailand and just have my MP, rolls of tmax 400,Portra 400 and my 35 summarit with me. It is a lot of fun and very relaxing. No trouble to have the wrong glass for the right moment. It took two days to get used to this philosophy, but right now I dont miss something. Best regards Marc Indeed, it's so easy and it almost forces you to compose a picture with more attention. Within two weeks I will be travelling for a few days in Germany with my CM loaded with Portra 400. I also have the zoom version but the Summarit on the CM is such a terrific good lens, and 40 mm is just between 35 and 50, very close to the format focal lenght of 43. It's fun to travel light. Best Roger Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjans Posted August 19, 2013 Share #72 Posted August 19, 2013 Indeed, it's so easy and it almost forces you to compose a picture with more attention. Within two weeks I will be travelling for a few days in Germany with my CM loaded with Portra 400. I also have the zoom version but the Summarit on the CM is such a terrific good lens, and 40 mm is just between 35 and 50, very close to the format focal lenght of 43. It's fun to travel light. Best Roger Oops, I just noticed this in the film M section, sorry. Best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted August 19, 2013 Share #73 Posted August 19, 2013 I believe this is a false choice. One can do both at the same time. Well, not at the exact same time, but almost. One can make a pic/video with the phone and also see and enjoy the event. It is not as if one's eyes become glued to the small LCD the entire time. Eyes can move around and alternate attention from one thing to another. In the world of wedding photography, some people are promoting the idea of "unplugged weddings" where the guests are told to not take any photos -- as if they will somehow miss the wedding from the moment they start making photos. I don't agree with this. It is possible to "enjoy the event" and make photos too. People have different ways of enjoying the event. Some people are photographers and that is their way of enjoying the event. I think maybe in this day and age, that we probably need to re-visit what it really means to 'enjoy the event.' Perhaps it can be argued that the act of 'enjoying the event' for many people also involves the act of recording it. And despite the particular device used, using a film camera or an iPhone still requires some attention by the user. Whether it's a smart phone, a digital camera, or a film camera, the intent is still the same; to record the event. I don't think one can really differentiate between devices and somehow conclude that using a film camera is more 'appropriate.' I think that it's just not as obvious because it doesn't have a bright illuminated LCD panel. And that 'obviousness' is what I think is central here; before the smart phone and digital cameras there were plenty of jerks with film cameras and their flashes popping off at these same events. Part of being human seems to be this tendency to want to record the world for whatever reasons. And those reasons are more important/interesting than the device used which will be constantly changing: e.g., Google Glass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted August 19, 2013 Share #74 Posted August 19, 2013 I think maybe in this day and age, that we probably need to re-visit what it really means to 'enjoy the event.' Perhaps it can be argued that the act of 'enjoying the event' for many people also involves the act of recording it. Exactly! And people record the event because they enjoy it ... and want to remember it. Contrary to what some people believe, photographing an event does not disrespect or ignore the event. Rather, it honors and recognizes the event as something special worth remembering and showing in the future. I agree that one does sacrifice a bit of attention in order to do the photography, but it is a partial and temporary sacrifice, and it is a sacrifice that many people find to be worthwhile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted August 20, 2013 Share #75 Posted August 20, 2013 Exactly! And people record the event because they enjoy it ... and want to remember it. Contrary to what some people believe, photographing an event does not disrespect or ignore the event. Rather, it honors and recognizes the event as something special worth remembering and showing in the future. I agree that one does sacrifice a bit of attention in order to do the photography, but it is a partial and temporary sacrifice, and it is a sacrifice that many people find to be worthwhile. 100%, repeat 100% correct! I virtually refuse to go to a social function without my camera. Actually, I take it everywhere, and use it, overtly or covertly, whichever is appropriate. People often say to me, "not that bloody camera again!" Funny how afterwards they say, "oh, your such a good photographer. You seem to be everywhere. I love you're pictures." Groan. Short memories. It's the only way I can enjoy some occasions. Actually, it's the way I enjoy all occasions. However, I do get annoyed by "wannabe" photographers disruptively using mobile phones and tablets and ......etc held ridiculously out in front and simply disrupting 'proceedings' with no possibility of success in sooo many instances. Footnote: (takes shoe off) When professionally shooting events I often went back without my camera just to enjoy the performance. It simply was not possible to absorb a performance and pre-empt action and shoot it. I have had years of experience and know the two do interfere with each other. Apologies about the rant. It's my past life not letting go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted August 20, 2013 Share #76 Posted August 20, 2013 this is running a bit off topic, but i think what people are dancing around here is whether one is going to an event to take in or consume. are we going to the concert to say we are there or to enjoy the music/art/whatever. there is a difference and i would venture to say that many go to shows concerts art exhibits not to enjoy/take in/ and perhaps be influenced by the performance but to simply be able to say "I was there!" . from here we get the all important phone camera sending the result directly to instagram. the production is merely a footnote. as for taking a camera, and it matters little whether its a leica or iphone for this point, are we trying to bring back with the photo a sense of the art/beauty of what we are experiencing or how it influenced the audience or again simply advertising we are there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted August 20, 2013 Share #77 Posted August 20, 2013 this is running a bit off topic, but i think what people are dancing around here is whether one is going to an event to take in or consume. are we going to the concert to say we are there or to enjoy the music/art/whatever. there is a difference and i would venture to say that many go to shows concerts art exhibits not to enjoy/take in/ and perhaps be influenced by the performance but to simply be able to say "I was there!" . from here we get the all important phone camera sending the result directly to instagram. the production is merely a footnote. as for taking a camera, and it matters little whether its a leica or iphone for this point, are we trying to bring back with the photo a sense of the art/beauty of what we are experiencing or how it influenced the audience or again simply advertising we are there. Photos are a means of communication and can communicate different things for different people, or even different things for the same person. One thing a photo can say is, simply, "I was there". Nothing wrong with saying that, or with making a photo to say it. Saying "I was there" with a photo does not exclude the act of enjoying the music/art/whatever. One can do both. It also doesn't exclude the possibility of trying to bring back with the photo a sense of the art/beauty of what we are experiencing. One can do all three. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted August 21, 2013 Share #78 Posted August 21, 2013 Quite true. My perception is that most people are on one side or the other and each day more snd more are there to consume art rather than be consumed by it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen.w Posted August 21, 2013 Share #79 Posted August 21, 2013 Photos are a means of communication and can communicate different things for different people, or even different things for the same person. One thing a photo can say is, simply, "I was there". Nothing wrong with saying that, or with making a photo to say it. Saying "I was there" with a photo does not exclude the act of enjoying the music/art/whatever. One can do both. It also doesn't exclude the possibility of trying to bring back with the photo a sense of the art/beauty of what we are experiencing. One can do all three.I attended the Lauds service at Notre Dame a few years ago. The singing was incredibly moving and beautiful (the same singing that Claudel attributed his conversion to: "en un instant mon cœur fut touché et je crus") but in front of me was an American tourist recording the whole thing on his mobile phone, no doubt to say "I was there". Sometimes you have to choose between living and photographing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted August 21, 2013 Share #80 Posted August 21, 2013 When I was just a child, my parents took me to the Woodstock Music and Arts Fair. They didn't bring a camera and instead spent the whole time 'enjoying the moment' and 'taking in the experience.' We regret that as a family we have no record of attending that now very famous weekend rock concert in upper New York State. It would have made for some really interesting and unique family photos. And we could have visually reminisced that "we were there!" I think there are many sides to this issue and people will have a variety of reasons why they might be so compelled to record events in their lives. Perhaps "I was there" is a strong reason for many. It falls in line with the "my parents went to Paris and all they bought me was this lousy T-shirt" sort of idea; souvenirs are also part of this "I was there" phenomenon. I don't think we should condemn people for their reasons to record events in their lives. And this isn't a new phenomenon. It's been a human trait since the dawn of time. Whether it's sketching a scene or taking notes in 1660, or using flash cameras in an arena during the Olympics in 1960 (with all those flashes constantly going off in the stands ) It's the same motivation. And I think "I was there" will always be part of it. As will other emotions such as nostalgia, sentiment, and memory. The only thing that changes are the devices used. But what is really a concern is just how conscientious people are about not disturbing others around them. And it's that disruption which can be offensive and I think it's why we are even talking about it. For the record, I don't document everything I do and when I do photograph or record, it's for a specific purpose. I prefer to experience certain events for the moment and in 'real time.' But I really can't fault others for wanting to record their lives for whatever reasons they might have. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.