Thanks Bob, That's what I did up until very recently when I procured a nice Sigma EX 10-20mm for $350 while on a trip to Denver. : )
Darren On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Bob Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: > Darren, > For Ultra-wide shots you might consider stiching several vertical > shots together. > (It's a trick I learned from Rob Studdert and the Ozzies...) > Regards, Bob S. > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:53 PM, CheekyGeek <[email protected]> wrote: >> I liked the blog post. >> The point was really one for self-examination, and in examining MYself >> I must admit that if I had spent as much time taking photographs over >> this past winter as I have acquiring equipment I would have a lot more >> photographs (and a lot less equipment) to show for it. How's that for >> being Captain Obvious? >> >> That being said, other than a decent focusing rack and a good >> ballhead, I've just about reached the end of the list of things that I >> think I need to shoot the sort of things I want to shoot. Meaning I'm >> ready to take his advice, expecially with Spring here, and start >> taking more photographs. >> >> The thing about equipment is: it doesn't matter how good a >> photographer is, he/she isn't going to be able to take an ultrawide >> shot without an ultrawide focal length lens (etc.). Like most truisms, >> it is only part of the story. >> >> Darren Addy >> Kearney, NE >> >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:15 PM, William Robb <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Sessoms" >>> Subject: Re: A Crazy Idea >>> >>> >>> >>>> And that's been my point all along. The photographer is more important >>>> than the equipment. Equipment is important, but not as important as the >>>> photographer. Equipment is only as good as the photographer who uses it. >>>> >>>> A poor photographer is still a poor photographer no matter how much he >>>> spends on gear. Expensive equipment merely gives the poor photographer the >>>> means to create high resolution lousy images. >>> >>> Or, to be more accurate, better technical quality images that are wanting in >>> terms of composition. >>> >>> Really John, do you think that an Adams could have churned out his >>> esthetically stunning landscapes from the American southwest with a pocket >>> 110 camera? >>> Please don't say yes, I will have to mock you if you do. >>> I don't think it would have mattered how good a darkroom technician he was, >>> there would still have been a little something missing. >>> This is an extreme example, but sometimes one needs to use absurd examples >>> to make succint points. >>> >>> You (and a few others it seems) are pretending that it is an either/ or >>> issue; that a photographer is either an expert or a hack. There are a lot of >>> photographers who are good enough to benefit from better equipement that fit >>> into neither of the categories that you presuppose, and whose pictures do >>> improve with better equipment, be it something with more resolution, or >>> better noise control, or faster and more responsive performance. >>> Look at Dave Savage's night photography and how much better it got when he >>> went to the D700 as an example. >>> >>> Carry this forward a bit, I use a K7. A friend of mine uses a D3. >>> I can do things with his camera that are simply beyond what I can do with my >>> Pentax. >>> Does this make me a bad photographer? Perhaps, perhaps not, but the better >>> equipment definitely does allow me to do things that are beyond my >>> capabilities with my K7. >>> >>> William Robb >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Gone digital? I'm always looking for old Pentax film cameras and >> lenses to fit Pentax, (either K-mount or M42 screwmount). Also have a >> weakness for twin lens cameras. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Gone digital? I'm always looking for old Pentax film cameras and lenses to fit Pentax, (either K-mount or M42 screwmount). Also have a weakness for twin lens cameras. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
