will help you think about other aspects

I’m only interested in the subject, the gubbins used in the process are an inconvenience

I think sfb is looking forward to the fully automated DSLR that as well as the current features choosing exposure, dof, and autofocus. It will also automatically zoom to the optimium compositional focal length, thereby removing any user input.

It will also automatically zoom to the optimium compositional focal length, thereby removing any user input.

no, I like doing that bit :o)
But fiddling with exposure is a bit like adjusting the spark advance on a vintage car…

But fiddling with exposure is a bit like adjusting the spark advance on a vintage car…

No, fiddling with exposure ensures that your focal point is correctly exposed, rather than exposing for the mean of the whole picture.

yeah, but the whole exposure thing is arse. My eyes don’t need it. I object to having to make up for the failures of the medium. It’s like shooting in the dark, the 2 blobs of jelly in my face get everything sharp and clear but the camera usually gives useless streaky blurs 🙁

richpips – Member

But fiddling with exposure is a bit like adjusting the spark advance on a vintage car…

No, fiddling with exposure ensures that your focal point is correctly exposed, rather than exposing for the mean of the whole picture.

Agreed. If you’re not bothered about correctly exposing your photos, then that D300 is wasted on you SFB. A compact would be much easier to carry on rides…. 😉

yeah, but the whole exposure thing is arse. My eyes don’t need it.

Of course they do. Your eyes adjust aperture all the time to perform auto-exposure control – but you still sometimes do manual exposure compensation like squinting or wearing sunglasses in bright light.

I object to having to make up for the failures of the medium.

Sorry, but that’s like saying you enjoy driving, but you’re not keen on the steering part. Working within the limitations of the medium is a fundamental part of photography.

If you’re not bothered about correctly exposing your photos

I just want the camera to work

hen that D300 is wasted on you SFB. A compact would be much easier to carry on rides

I don’t get on with them. They can’t take 6 shots a second and there’s no zoom ring 🙁

Your eyes adjust aperture all the time to perform auto-exposure control

yeah, that’s the point, they just work, and the ‘sometimes’ is very rare.

Working within the limitations of the medium is a fundamental part of photography.

inevitably, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think we can do better. I’m not going to make a virtue of the limitations.

learning composition is a valuable trait. Fair enough, it is how it all interacts in the frame but 90% of the time you want a photo that attracts your attention.

What I will say is composition is like humans; the basic idea of compositonal rules hasent moved on in years. the rule of thirds/golden ratio/golden spiral was being taught in education in the 50’s and 60’s but is derived from a theorum devised before christ was born…

that Canon F1.8 is not a particularly well built lens, but the quality to price ratio is very good, so I would say go for that and have a play at that kind of money.

Looking at your bogtrotter pics simon, one of my favourites was this:

Which works precisely because of the limitations of the medium. The limited dynamic range gives nice solid blacks and contrast. If the same picture contained the full dynamic range of human vision and was exposed “properly” so that the entire scene was clearly visible then it would be a far less interesting shot.

If the same picture contained the full dynamic range of human vision and was exposed “properly” so that the entire scene was clearly visible then it would be a far less interesting shot.

granted, but I’d prefer to have the choice to take out unwanted detail rather than having it done willy-nilly. And interestingly that shot does correspond with what I saw because my attention disregarded the shadow detail 🙂

Well it’s not “done willy-nilly”. You already have the ability to choose which bits should be visible – it’s called exposure 😀

the basic idea of compositonal rules hasent moved on in years.

ie they are stultified. Composition is an artifact of the media used. In the real world there is just stuff and you looking at it

Composition is an artifact of the media used. In the real world there is just stuff and you looking at it

…and to an extent what you, or another viewer are expecting to see.

Composition is an artifact of the media used. In the real world there is just stuff and you looking at it

…and the stuff that you look at that makes you go “Wow!” or “That’s nice/interesting/disturbing/whatever” tends to be because it follows certain compositional rules.

The framing, shape, balance, patterns and juxtaposition of subjects is just as important in “reality” as it is in an image.

I’m not sure what you actually want from a camera simon. You apparently think composition is foolish and exposure is an arse – so what would your perfect camera do?

You apparently think composition is foolish and exposure is an arse – so what would your perfect camera do?

Have ‘Bottom-Recognition’ technology?

Have ‘Bottom-Recognition’ technology?

You mean female ‘Bottom-Recognition’

You mean female ‘Bottom-Recognition’

From most of his shots, it appears he’s not that picky! 😉

Who was it said that a good photgraphy is about what you leave out? All the best (to me if no one else) photos I have ever seen have not reflected reality. They have reflected a part of it and left the viewer to add the rest. From the portrait with the blurred background, to the restricted dymamic range shown by SfB to the the black and white shot of what I assume was a colour landscape to the shot which screams that there is something just outside of shot or just about to happen.

Composition is simply choosing what to include and what to leave out (and of course where to put it in the frame to draw attention to it – or not).

SfB just wants something that allows him to play with only the elements he wants to play with and let the machine look after the ones he doesn’t – which is fair enough. The doesn’t want to walk forwards and backwards and side to side looking for the angle that includes everything he wants so he carries a zoom. I find when using a prime it’s one less thing for me to thing about – actually the same reaon he’s carrying a zoom.

Some things just suit different people differently.

Now Simon – can you resist disagreeing?

The doesn’t want to walk forwards and backwards and side to side looking for the angle that includes everything he wants so he carries a zoom

you mistake me, I want to choose the shooting position and framing – to me that *is* photogrpahy, well, that and critical observation, but once I’ve selected the shot I’d like the camera to capture what I can see and not a compressed, shadow blocked version of it.

If you think a zoom is just to save one walking I wonder how well you understand focal lengths ? I often walk away from my subject to get the isolation of a long focal length. In the conditions I shoot, my zoom gives me far better quality than I could ever get from a prime because I’m able to control the amount of shite getting on the sensor. It’s no good having a sharp image if it’s covered in crap 🙁

I want to choose the shooting position and framing… isolation of a long focal length

Position, framing, depth of field?? That sounds like composition. I thought composition was stultified?

once I’ve selected the shot I’d like the camera to capture what I can see and not a compressed, shadow blocked version of it.

So what would your ideal fantasy camera capture simon? And what controls would you have?

Presumably you’d still want control over depth of field, for the reasons stated above. And you’d still need control over shutter speed to be able to get your freeze-frame water splash pictures. And a zoom. And a flash.

My eyes have none of these features.

Incidentally I assume you are shooting in RAW/NEF mode. IF your shooting in JPG then you can’t really complain about blocked shadows.

I tend to think of focal lengths as viewing angle and perspective. So yes I agree that walking towards someting then zooming out or walking away and zooming in may result in the main subject being the same size in the frame but will change the perspective (and if you like portraits done with an extreme wide angle, which I do, completely distort the subject).

But a lot of the time people zoom in because they are further away than they would like to be – and if you don’t believe me re-read the thread (and I am not acusing you, but read some of the comments)

Anyway – always fun to disagree. And please do note I am disagreeing not slagging. Your views are not without merit – I just chose not to agree with all of them.

The slagging will be provided by others in a minute.