In a message dated 8/31/02 8:22:17 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< In a message dated 8/31/02 7:26:57 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << Last of all, I've decided that the quest for absolute sharpness in my > > > slides is not as important as I used to think. A good image will stand > > > out regardless of whether your lens was used wide-open, handheld at > > > 1/30th. I've recently been looking through a couple of Galen Rowell > > > books and found that while some of the images are a little soft, they are > > > still outstanding photographs. So why lust after the greatest ultra- > > > sharp glass? If I want more detail I'll shoot with a bigger format... > > > > >> > > My suggestion, don't go too far down this road. When it is supposed to be > sharp and it can be sharp it's always best to make it sharp. If it's a moody > shot, an artistic interpretation of a scene or a grab shot than sharpness > plays a secondary role. Maximize your excellent camera and lenses by making a > tripod an essential tool of the trade. That said, there is something to be > said about going out on a nice day, without a tripod, and shooting away. It's > better, I suppose to shoot without a tripod than to not shoot at all. > > >So why lust after the greatest ultra-sharp glass? If I want more detail > I'll shoot with a bigger format... > > I'm a firm believer that with good glass and excellent technique you can get > pretty close to the quality of large format in the 35mm world. Especially if > the larger format photographer depends on the format to give good quality and > therefore refuses to use good tecnique. It happens. > > So with 35mm you can get close to having the best of both worlds. It's just > depends on technique and how you want to use the camera. > > Vic > >>
