>In a message dated 3/29/2004 3:42:27 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>I agree with everything you say. ">The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer >From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >One of the small camera disadvantages that I ran into from time to >time while playing the wedding game relates to client respect. >We have been programmed to think of bigger as better (hence the term >"go big or go home"). >I certainly understand that a large noisey camera would be a >disadvantage for street photography, and honestly, I think the same >disadvantage would apply to photojournalism, for many of the same >reasons. >OTOH, as soon as you are working directly with a client, often the >larger camera garners instant respect. >This, in turn, can actually lead to better photos, as it is one more >thing that puts the client at ease about the job. > >William Robb How about big (long) lenses? Can't a huge lens on a smaller camera have the same effect as a big camera? I am thinking specifically of the paparazzi. Some of the lenses one sees them using are huge. Not that they get any respect, though. Marnie aka Doe :-)
