rwfreund Posted September 2, 2007 Share #101 Posted September 2, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Another case of thread decay. I can smell it. Travel lenses, well, it a depends on where you are going. Use 1 or more depending on your tolerance. Small towns = very wide plus medium long Wildlife = medium long and even longer Theater/pub/concert = as large an aperture as you can carry or afford Grand Vistas = very very wide to medium Psych type artsy shot = any one lens you want. to be prepared for whatever = everything you own. -bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 2, 2007 Posted September 2, 2007 Hi rwfreund, Take a look here TOP travel lens-set for M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
vic vic Posted September 2, 2007 Share #102 Posted September 2, 2007 guy......... that was not advice....... that was sarcasm........ i think i have to clearify myself from time to time....... what i mean , clearly and directly speacking, is that in good hands the SMENA camera can do wonders........ and in many cases, i dont see any advantage of $$$$$ x100000000000 lenses 2 bodies results over SMENA......... im serious.......... photographically talking......... crap junk photos can be eassily done with mmmmmmmmm88888888 sumiluxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x100000000000000000000 bag huge bag........ jackie.......... it would be better if u put a bit more thought in content exposition, aesthetic languege rather than what gear u gonna use............. beleive me....... even without a lens your photography will improve if u will think about those more important things....... otherwise...... ya i agree .......... tools are tools...... no doubt........ but in your case. according to your talks...... those are just tools without masters behind and without worthy picture ......... talks bla bla............ look what i think about those things :::::: imho degeneratography guy......... tell me what was that argument about clients checks ????? i asked u this before so here again ) do i look like cheap slut that u can impress with client checks ??????? maybe i look like poor un-developed boy that is astonished by seeing american wealthy rich (well not exactly maybe) man talking about money and showing his checks ?????? what it has to do with photography.......... u r bad examples of leica photography,......... leica is long culture...... not only "photojournalism" (although this too).......... and pitty that people see this tech-toy-boy face of leica rather than what made it a legend originally........ what carries its real heritage ......... there are many other fine cameras , even finer than leica (rolleiflex, linhof for example are even better build quality) , but none has such a deep photo-art roots as leica in terms of company/brand/lebel that carries it around itself and associeted with................ so ya....... it is important how i or u or we see leica if we come to this place .......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 2, 2007 Share #103 Posted September 2, 2007 hahaha mitch...... first of all thanks for your words ...... second............ kitsch and exellence are not bad words..... they should be seen as stimulators to improve...... develop , enjoy etc etc.......... to change , to refresh, to make new......... no, not even pro needs so much lenses......... bushit.......... as imants call it..... gear-heads....... as i can it tech-toy-boys............. many pros works this way.......... get into some system...... for example .... large format system...... have a set of three basic lenses...... normal lens (probabaly most important general purpose to almost everybody who is serious), one wide and one long........ then some additional lenses can be added according to coomon applications and specialization that the pro comnfronts with.......... for example....... photographer who is in contact with hi-tech production.... for him a good "macro" lens would be good addition to make small items well recordable..... etc........ specialization if needed.......... or may be some may want to add some unique looking lens for some reason.......... some times, many pros are so specialized that they need mostly only their specialized lenses.... this is the "tool" approach......... not the gearhead......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 3, 2007 Share #104 Posted September 3, 2007 hahaha mitch...... first of all thanks for your words ......second............ kitsch and exellence are not bad words..... they should be seen as stimulators to improve...... develop , enjoy etc etc.......... to change , to refresh, to make new......... no, not even pro needs so much lenses......... bushit.......... as imants call it..... gear-heads....... as i can it tech-toy-boys............. many pros works this way.......... get into some system...... for example .... large format system...... have a set of three basic lenses...... normal lens (probabaly most important general purpose to almost everybody who is serious), one wide and one long........ then some additional lenses can be added according to coomon applications and specialization that the pro comnfronts with.......... for example....... photographer who is in contact with hi-tech production.... for him a good "macro" lens would be good addition to make small items well recordable..... etc........ specialization if needed.......... or may be some may want to add some unique looking lens for some reason.......... some times, many pros are so specialized that they need mostly only their specialized lenses.... this is the "tool" approach......... not the gearhead......... Vic, the development of this thread is interesting: it started with a rather silly -- sorry, Citrus -- question of "what lenses should I carry for travel?", which is is not answerable because we don't know anything about the original poster's photography. But it's a common type of question on internet forums, perhaps immortilized by a question a couple of years ago on the photo.net Leica forum where somebody asked, "I'm going to Cracow: what type of film should I take?" And the thread only got interesting because you've been raising deeper questions related to how one photographs and the nature of photography. Now, Mademoiselle Kitsch is a hard task-mistress. Take Jack Sturgess: he is today making the same type of pictures on which he got famous — his models have gotten older but the pictures are the same ones as twenty years ago: he is now producing kitsch because he doesn't take any risks but sticks to what has been earning him a living. Ralph Gibson's recent schlock book on Brazil -- you can see all it's pictures on his website is a similar parody of his earlier self, containing not even a handful of god photographs.Do anything enough and it becomes kitsch. Dare I mention St. Ansell Adams in this context? That is why Picasso changes styles so many times: would you wanted him to be stuck in the kitsch of the Blue Period? Yesterday, as I was out shooting the five hundredth person passing through the right or left side of the frame of my 28mm lens, I felt that my recent street photography was walking straight into kitsch-dom: the kitsch of walk-by shooting. Eventually, we all have to refresh our thinking and consider how, what and why we photograph. —Mitch/Bangkok Flickr: Photos from Mitch Alland Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 3, 2007 Share #105 Posted September 3, 2007 guy......... that was not advice....... that was sarcasm........ i think i have to clearify myself from time to time.......what i mean , clearly and directly speacking, is that in good hands the SMENA camera can do wonders........ and in many cases, i dont see any advantage of $$$$$ x100000000000 lenses 2 bodies results over SMENA......... im serious.......... photographically talking......... crap junk photos can be eassily done with mmmmmmmmm88888888 sumiluxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x100000000000000000000 bag huge bag........ jackie.......... it would be better if u put a bit more thought in content exposition, aesthetic languege rather than what gear u gonna use............. beleive me....... even without a lens your photography will improve if u will think about those more important things....... otherwise...... ya i agree .......... tools are tools...... no doubt........ but in your case. according to your talks...... those are just tools without masters behind and without worthy picture ......... talks bla bla............ look what i think about those things :::::: imho degeneratography guy......... tell me what was that argument about clients checks ????? i asked u this before so here again ) do i look like cheap slut that u can impress with client checks ??????? maybe i look like poor un-developed boy that is astonished by seeing american wealthy rich (well not exactly maybe) man talking about money and showing his checks ?????? what it has to do with photography.......... u r bad examples of leica photography,......... leica is long culture...... not only "photojournalism" (although this too).......... and pitty that people see this tech-toy-boy face of leica rather than what made it a legend originally........ what carries its real heritage ......... there are many other fine cameras , even finer than leica (rolleiflex, linhof for example are even better build quality) , but none has such a deep photo-art roots as leica in terms of company/brand/lebel that carries it around itself and associeted with................ so ya....... it is important how i or u or we see leica if we come to this place .......... Victor your out of line . Stick to what you do and i will stick to what i do. i am extremely comfortable with 3 lenses or 500 lenses or as much freaking gear that I may need because you know what i actually know what to do with it. I don't need you or anyone else telling me how to shoot or what to carry in my bag, if you what to limit yourself to a one trick pony lens than that is you, i like variety and prespective, bokeh , compression , expansion , Dof and no dof and whatever else i may need that a client throws at me. I shoot many DIFFERENT things and limiting myself makes no artistic or business sense. learn something about commercial photography. From this point forward your words are meaningless and you just made the ranks of my ignore list, you maybe interesting to some people but stick your insults were the sun don't shine. I don't need you or deserve this bullshit. My apolgizes to the rest of the forum. I'm done with this conversation And get some better meds these are not working Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted September 3, 2007 Share #106 Posted September 3, 2007 Hmmm... I guess we better let Jim Marshall and Sebastiao Salgado they suck as photographers because they rely on too much Leica gear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 3, 2007 Share #107 Posted September 3, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Victor your out of line...And get some better meds these are not workingGuy, let me "talk you down". It seems to me that all Vic is saying, in his inimatble style, is that, even for commercial photography it's desirable to reconsider and renew what one does. That's not a particularly expceptional thought, and does not warrant your reaction. —Mitch/Bangkok http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 3, 2007 Share #108 Posted September 3, 2007 Hmmm... I guess we better let Jim Marshall and Sebastiao Salgado they suck as photographers because they rely on too much Leica gear.Jack, what on earth are you on about? You're getting more cryptic than Vic. —Mitch/Bangkok http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted September 3, 2007 Share #109 Posted September 3, 2007 Who is Vic??? I'm responding to stnami's earlier comment... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 3, 2007 Share #110 Posted September 3, 2007 Hmmm... I guess we better let Jim Marshall and Sebastiao Salgado they suck as photographers because they rely on too much Leica gear.Kcaj what's that got to do with your public servant thinking..................ps a hammer has multiple uses, I use one to keep a door open for fresh ideas:D And get some better meds these are not working.. I thought that line was reserved for me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 3, 2007 Share #111 Posted September 3, 2007 Yea Mitch it's a danger that we all should be wary of............ the creeping of a formula this shouldn't be mistaken for a style. It is more prevalent in commercial stuff as the client dictates a heap of terms plus the purse strings, so it makes it hard for these guys/girls to maneuver. To straight out ignore that it can be a negative as some here do is a bit on the stubborn/silly side Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveSee Posted September 3, 2007 Share #112 Posted September 3, 2007 Yea Mitch it's a danger that we all should be wary of............ the creeping of a formula this shouldn't be mistaken for a style. It is more prevalent in commercial stuff as the client dictates a heap of terms plus the purse strings, so it makes it hard for these guys/girls to maneuver. To straight out ignore that it can be a negative as some here do is a bit on the stubborn/silly side Meds the same as mine, more or less(now THAT is at issue)... I remember it Bukowski "as the spirit wanes, the form appears"... back on topic: the last two trips were "15-35-50" and "21-25-50-75"... and one this week, prolly, "21-28-50". "Travel" has a LOT of overloaded meaning, yet always seems to imply "reduce to the essential". RF has me "seeing through a lens", not the viewfinder, so I prepare for "Travel" based on how available my gear will be most of the time, and what I'm expecting to shoot+one lens a FL wider... no telling how "big" the view will be... details are a subscript, and so too telephoto. hth+rgds, Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 3, 2007 Share #113 Posted September 3, 2007 Yea the bugger never lost his spirit, so formalism was never an issue plus he was a very good novelist with a hard-work ethic despite the off my face exterior attitude Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtZ Posted September 3, 2007 Share #114 Posted September 3, 2007 hahahhahaha........ but he was using toy gun machines and the camera man was sitting rails .... it just looks like that but not real ) by the way ........ u see that the man is much more than piece of meat ) guy ......... i have a nice camera for u : [ smena ] ) fixed focal lenght........ so that your hands will be tight not to jump into your huge bag to pull out another lens .......... a little bit of russian discipline from those days ) Vic, I love your comments. I bought in 1993 in Leningrad (Oops, St. Petersbourg now) a Lomo LC-A (Russian lens) I got great shots with that camera. There's a lot of vignetting but pictures have something magic. Very tiny and great to have in your pocket. Besides, my best friend is a cosmonaute and Lomo cameras were (I think they are still) used for the Space. I liked very much to see your link to Lomography. Thank you! Cheers! . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 3, 2007 Share #115 Posted September 3, 2007 Guy, let me "talk you down". It seems to me that all Vic is saying, in his inimatble style, is that, even for commercial photography it's desirable to reconsider and renew what one does. That's not a particularly expceptional thought, and does not warrant your reaction. —Mitch/Bangkok Flickr: Photos from Mitch Alland Problem Mitch he has no real style , it's all convoluted and makes Zero sense and one has to wonder why he is he even here in a digital section when one does not own a M8 or even work digital and swears digital is the evil of photography. It's old and it's boring and very much like a troll which this forum has seen a lot more lately. Believe me i much rather have a argument with Imants at least i have respect for him, even though we may not agree on everything. I'm sorry but time and posts and insults leave Victor out in the cold for me anymore. i just don't need the hassle and i'm done with him. I have the right to not like one person here and he just went into that cater]gory , i'm sure it is meaningless to him and as it should be. Moving forward and again i am sorry to other members for my attitude but I just don't need the hassle. After 32 years , i think i know exactly what tools i need to get my job done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 3, 2007 Share #116 Posted September 3, 2007 mitch...... u ask very difficult question here..... im divided many times between the understanding that some artists are limited and between the emotion charge i have towrds their works..... for example jack sturgess ...... u r absolutly rite i guess.... but then, from the other hand, his works that made him famous aree amazing.... the issues that he rises are of course great and he makes it with great style and attitude.... the later photographs are interesting as continuation, but i agree with u, they do not carry the power and the spirit of the earleirs...... ralph gibsonn ....... well he is one of my faves ....... in his brazil there are some nice images but again, i agree with u, nothing that comes close to the power of that great gibson..... in the great gibson u see similarities among works, but they are not boring especially for somebody who already love this style very much...... and of course, the emotional aspect - love of gibsons fotography.... gibson can make whatever he wants....... he is gibson..... not that we should put brazil pics in the same hall of glory as his great works but we will not stop loving him even a bit because his latest works do not lift....... ) about picasso..... and let me oppose it to another my fave painter (most fave asctually) egon schiele........ picasso was changing.... true......... i love it........ david bowie too ) radically changing actually...... his ricness is part of his ability to inovate himself..... i love it very much.... and for me he is even better example of art than egon schiele (where im more attached emotionally) ...... schiele in his mid to later works looks about the same, but once u r attached to the stuff u see those nuences......... u suddenly undersatnd the use of line is different etc and that changes within attitude that give differance and new imapct........ so im not sure if we can call repeated style with little difffrenciation from schiele a kitsch........ but again.... difficult question with many diverse answwers ............ anyway....... i agree ...... kitsch is tough mistress...... but needed..... it should be there in your mind to watch u...... to make u more assartive, more constructive in your critique..... or actually cinstructive critique is something intelectual while the "kitsch-fear" is something more emotional and intuitive - and intuition is important when u work ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 3, 2007 Share #117 Posted September 3, 2007 jack......... u dont really answer my questions....... i guess nothing u can say about it....... anyway...... anyway, there are two monitors between us but still , somehow, "who is vic?" sounds to be not good at all.......... but then maybe good for u that there are two monitors if it really sounds bad.......... ) guy guy......... u r so emotional......... u try to ignore it (emotional reaction to what i write) but it comes through ) im not out of the line....... try to read my comments beyond obsseseve lens info reading......... your money answer, your years of experience answer...... well i feel those are a little bit the negative side-effects of american dream mentality........... dont take me wrong..... success and economic prosperity combined with it is one of my biggest priorities too......... but it is not relevant to descusion we have here......... calm.... and try to understand what i write beyound personal referance to u......... no ...... u r not in line........... tell me , u sell me that magazine care what lens u used...??? lets put it simply, many of the quality magazines (surely in fashion)n are done with mamiya, hasslebad rollei and untill sometime massivly with contax mediums...... they do not have so much lesnes............ ) so give me a brake with that 100000000 lenses and bokeh bokeh focal focal talks............. u ahve mainly two kind of works as pro.......... either u r in one big production (part of it wether improtant or just photographer-clicker) or u r given a project and up to u once the basic guides and the theme was presented to u......... in any case...... no body really talks about how much lesnes u ahve....... and since the photos deal with content, simiotics, and style, almost everything can be done with basic set of lenses plus one or two more specialized lenses accordding to assignemnt or if u insist......... so give me a brake............. bokeh mokeh, fokeh....... resolution..... 24/28 mmmm in the bag 21 75 90 78 238981 3[489r 1p9348r7 p198347 ............ it just sounds to me copy of those nonesesne tech-toy-boy talks rather than pro approach even for half shity magazines.......... now, of course u can do what ever u want.......... man..... im serious........ it is your photography, it is your bag and your back...... and if there is a thing i can care some how about u personally - it is your back only that holds the bag....... all the rest is simply not personal so calm.......... my words are not insult......... take it as constructive critique........... can i give some please..... i know u r photographer with checks from clients and with 100000000 lenses and decades of pro experience........ but still , please let me critisize your works......... ..... please.............. hahha u know that there are many singers for example that sing junk for decades...... a bit popular but manily junk......... popular junk is important for producers , but for talk aboutr photography it is hardly secondary........ so decade expeince ALONE is not a good argument... your photos........ the german academy tour porsche/leica//// is .... how to say it........... family snaps on the crappy style of this genre........ im not sure i would write beside those photos that they are done with leica and 10000 lenses ........ but it is your busness....... there are some people that are impressed with it..... and maybe even admire u for your photos, or for what u sell....... made with noctiluxsumiliux......... this is very bad example of leica photography............ very very bad......... telling u all those things..... of course i got to your zen folio and im basing my stuff only on that (and i dont know your pto works of course cause u dont post it wich i perfectly understand and agree with u as u may notice)......... no on zen folio there is newyourk pics....... sorry again... they look to me as turist who runs over city like spermatozoid to catch more and morte crap pics this is a very bad example of leica photography/culture.............. very bad example.... attitude........... now u want to ignore me ........ go ahead......... will it help u ? ) u give up on your basic rite - discussion......... i know ...... im direct very direct...... but dont let this directness to mislead u.......... i keep dialog and conversation - simply without cute words all around...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted September 3, 2007 Share #118 Posted September 3, 2007 Vic, would you mind to write in normal sentences as everybody else? This would make it much easier to read your threads. Or is there a special reason behind not writing as anybody else? Thanks in advance, Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 3, 2007 Share #119 Posted September 3, 2007 would you mind to write in normal sentences as everybody else?......... it's a normal form of writing for sectors og society,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, one sees it all over the net, text messaging......... even see it in many a uni thesis.etc...stop hiding under that rock:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piers Posted September 4, 2007 Share #120 Posted September 4, 2007 Vic,would you mind to write in normal sentences as everybody else? This would make it much easier to read your threads. Or is there a special reason behind not writing as anybody else? Thanks in advance, Tom What is this guy on? Can I have some? William Boroughs (deceased) eat your heart out--The Naked Leica? This forum certainly delivers good value if word-count is anything to go by... (no, really it delivers good value, stop) PS More relevantly, could someone please offer links to uncropped M8/24mm asph images, classic landscape, and/or reportage at wide aperture/ Many thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.