On Feb 24, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
And what kind of photography is that, really? Have you defined it?
Yes, but you deleted it:
The LX with its superb finders and the old array of high
performance fast lenses made a pretty smick kit for low light
work.
If the new DLSR behaves similarly to the D200 at high ISO I
doubt that I'm going to be overly excited, proof is in the
pudding of course be it a year ore more away. It's apparent
that Pentax are heading in a totally different direction now,
they are carving a niche of kit biased towards small rather
than fast.
I don't see a definition for a "kind of photography" in that
quote, Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment.
What kind of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's
photography.
It says "low light work"; that's photography. In it Rob expands
that for that type of photographs he needs a combination of low
noise in high ISO and bright lenses. He concludes that Pentax is
not moving towards this direction. The subject of the thread is
"Lens Road Map revised".
You do a lot of interpretation for the words "low light work" ...
Rob didn't say that he was doing any, he said the LX and some older
lenses was good for it. He said he liked the LX interchangeable
finders. He's also making an assessment of the D200 without any
experience with it. And presuming that it was substantially worse
than the performance of, say, a D5.
Types of photography I'd consider to be subject categories, like
"portraiture", "landscape", "sports-photo journalism", "editorial",
"product and table-top", "street photography", etc. "Low Light work"
is too broad a term. It refers to a technical capability, not a
photographic endeavor.
To wit: my "low light work"
... people/street photography, hand held, with a fast lens and an
*istDS:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/26.htm
... night urbanscape, hand held, with a fast lens and an *ist DS:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/38p.htm
My feeling is that Rob just wants a Canon 5D. He should just buy one.
No one will think the worse of him for buying a Canon, or if they do
they're being foolish.
The problem with these equipment centric discussions is that they
undermine the priority of photographic endeavors and aesthetics in
favor of spec sheet comparisons.
Godfrey
