No wonder, there's war and struggel all over this planet...
This is a list about a very peacefull, artistic, creative subject;
photography!
Don't you all agree?
Jens

'-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Bob Walkden [mailto:bob@;web-options.com]
Sendt: 26. oktober 2002 19:36
Til: Paul Stenquist
Emne: Re[2]: Travel Kit


Hi,

no, he didn't ask if it was correct FOR HIM. He asked

"Would you be happy with the following lenses for a travel kit?".

He asked for our OPINION. I gave an opinion based on 25 years of
travel photography in over 20 different countries, an opinion which
many people might think carries a certain amount of weight. The lenses
he mentioned are too slow, in my opinion and experience, for travel
photography and I would not be happy with them. That's what he asked for,
that's what I replied to. Read the stuff properly. He asked for an opinion,
he got one. It is *only* an opinion, and anybody can disagree with it, or
form another opinion, but nobody has the right to dismiss it as pretentious
nonsense.

---

 Bob

Saturday, October 26, 2002, 9:19:17 AM, you wrote:

> Okay it's just nonsense. The writer of the original message had asked if
> we thought his lens selection was correct FOR HIM. Like most of us, he
> probably can't afford the ultra fast glass. Those are the lenses he
> owns. His choice was correct. They are not too slow to produce great
pictures.

> Bob Walkden wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> >> The primes other than the 50 are too slow, although the focal lengths
are    good.
>>
>> > Pretentious nonsense. For the majority of situations, these lenses are
>> > fast enough.
>>
>> You can call it nonsense if you like, but you've no right to call it
>> pretentious, which is a gratuitous insult and a good way to get
>> another flame war started. I have quite a lot of experience of travel
>> photography. I made it explicit in my post that I was speaking for
>> myself, and everything I wrote is based on my personal experience of
>> travel photography during the last 25 years. If you don't like it then
>> fine, but don't call it pretentious.
>>
>> ---
>>
>>  Bob
>>
>> Friday, October 25, 2002, 9:26:30 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > In reference to a travel kit that includes:
>> >> > 28mm f/3.5
>> >> > 50mm f/1.4
>> >> > 105mm f/2.8 macro
>> >> > 200mm f/4
>>
>> > Bob Walkden wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The primes other than the 50 are too slow, although the focal lengths
are    good.
>>
>> > Pretentious nonsense. For the majority of situations, these lenses are
>> > fast enough. Most of us can't afford ultra-fast glass. In any case, how
>> > often does one shoot in extremely low light with a 200? And the SMC
>> > 200/4 is an excellent lens. When shooting with the 28, a shutter speed
>> > of 1/15 or 1/30 is quite manageable. And that's easy to achieve at 3.5
>> > with most films and lighting conditions. No, they're not premium
lenses,
>> > but they'll take fine pictures. Hell, I've even shot in the dead of
>> > night with my M 200/4. See
http://www.portfolios.com/zoom.wga?User_number=stenquist&imagecount=15
>> > They're not as fast as the big money, big glass. But they're not "too
slow."

Reply via email to