John Dallman wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Shel Belinkoff) wrote:
Higher resolution and a faster, bigger buffer make sense, shouldn't add
bulk or weight to a camera.
Higher resolution is fine, but I'm baffled by the need for a faster
buffer. I spot the potential picture, get ready, and take it. If it's a
moving or changing subject I wait for the right moment, near as I can
guess, and press the button.
I guess having learned my photography on a twin-lens reflex with
twelve shots per roll, where you had to wind on with several turns of a
knob, and cock the shutter by hand[1] explains this. I've never used a
camera with any kind of power wind or motor drive; I just don't feel any
need to shoot in bursts.
You are _right_ out of touch! Modern camera design is almost
exclusively based on the premise that the operator will be (or will want
to be like) a sports journalism photographer. Point, squeeze and let
the rapidfire, autofocus, autoexposure, joggleproof mechanism capture a
shot that you would be lucky to come up with in a month of football
matches (what a Godawful thought) with everything manual.
The corollary of that design imperative is a big, bulky camera and lens.
If you want to look "pro", you have to have some huge jewellery around
your neck/sitting on your monopod.
Ned
