Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Frank Theriault wrote:
>
> > You are, of course, correct, insofar as when
> > one says "pro camera", a certain image comes
> > to mind.
>
> True, Frank, but might that image be different for different people,
> based on their own experiences and affectations. For example, someone
> interested in studio photography might be thinking Hasselblad, while
> someone interested in documentary work might think of Leica or a
> certain type of SLR, and a landscape photographer 4x5 or larger format
> view camera.
Precisely my point! When I was typing that post, I had originally typed
in what *my* "pro camera image" is, but then erased it and purposely left
it out for exactly the reasons you set out. It happens (FWIW) to be a
N**** Ftn, 'cause when I first became interested in photography in the
mid- to late-60's, and actually had aspirations to be a photojournalist,
that seemed to be what all the "pros" had around their necks. Mind you, I
had no idea why they might have chosen that camera, or why it might have
been preferred over another, but the fact that two or three of those
bodies were around their necks, black or course, all banged up, was good
enough for me!
regards,
frank
--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
