SLR is less stable than non-SLR due to mirror movement.
That's why the mirror lock up feature exists. Any if
you are going to lock up mirror anyway, why bother
carrying around a big heavy camera with "features" you
don't want / need.

If you know you want infinity focus, why not just set it manually
and eliminate the possibiliy of the dumb camera making a 
mistake? I would never use AF for landscapes there is no rush
so why not make sure focus is correct by doing it manually?

JCO

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 2:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?


Autofocus works just fine for landscapes... more often so when focus is
at 
infinity...

OK - here I'll argue a point just to hear myself...

Shooting a landscape with an SLR on a tripod is useful for the same
reason 
as putting any camera on a tripod... stability... a more deliberate 
composition... works especialy well with a ballhead IMO.



Tom C.





>From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
>Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:11:11 -0400
>
>sure you CAN do landscape on a P67, but WHY?
>LF is cheaper and better and lighter. Using
>an SLR for landscape when the camera is fixed
>on a tripod doesn't make much sense to me.
>Of course you would use manual focus regardless
>of format. Autofocus is for grab shots when you
>are in a hurry or cant focus fast enough to action.
>That is exact opposite of landscape photography.
>JCO
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 1:58 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
>
>
>Followup... actually I'd like to try 4 X 5.  I do think one can 'craft'

>a shot regardless of format. That's why I think going to a 67 and all
>manual
>focus will help in that regard.
>
>
>Tom C.
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
> >Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:39:46 -0600
> >
> >>From: "John C.  O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>4x5 is a far superior image quality SYSTEM, it is not because the 
> >>lenses are better, actually some of them are worse than the P67 
> >>lenses, it is just that the film size is so big you don't need as 
> >>much
>
> >>lens resolution to end up overall much sharper than P67. Add to that

> >>the fact that film grain is way less visible with the bigger negs 
> >>and 4x5 pretty much destroys p67 for landscape photography.
> >>
> >>I don't mean to sound harsh but your reply seems to be based on all 
> >>the classic myths and sterotypes associated with LF by people who 
> >>have
>
> >>never done any LF photography.
> >>
> >>JCO
> >
> >You are correct... I have never done LF firsthand, or MF for that 
> >matter. Here's the thing... let's say my personal "Keeper shots/Shots

> >taken
>Ratio"
> >is 1/36, or approximately one per roll (yeah, if I'm lucky).  If I go
>out
> >and shoot 100 frames of 35mm, I might come back with 3 keepers.  If I
>were
> >to only take 20 images on an outing I could come back with nothing
>worth
> >keeping...  what % of your 4 x 5 shots are throwaway?
> >
> >Tom C.
> >
> >
>
>


Reply via email to