From: Boris Liberman
On 1/31/2011 5:10 AM, William Robb wrote:
> If a good photographer can overcome bad equipment, why is it such a leap
> of logic that better equipment may well help a mediocre photographer to
> take better pictures?
Better technically - sure. They will be better exposed, in sharper
focus, etc. Better artistically - obviously not. However, what the
mediocre photographer will think of themselves? Methinks that's the
interesting one to consider.
> How about better equipment making the process easier/more pleasurable?
> If the camera "just works better", then would it not make better
> pictures no matter what class of photographer is pushing the button?
Yes, that's why they invented automatic gearboxes...
> If equipment didn't matter, St. Ansel would probably have used a Minolta
> 110 since it would have been easier to hump it around Yosemite.
We can't prove or disprove that. St. Ansel is not around for interview.
Boris
FWIW, Adams completed the major body of his work before Kodak introduced
the 110 format.
And again, while equipment does matter, the photographer using the
equipment matters more.
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3413 - Release Date: 01/30/11
--
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.
