10.26.2017
8 comments:
We Moderate Comments, Yours might not appear right after you hit return. Be patient; I'm usually pretty quick on getting comments up there. Try not to hit return again and again.... If you disagree with something I've written please do so civilly. Be nice or see your comments fly into the void. Anonymous posters are not given special privileges or dispensation. If technology alone requires you to be anonymous your comments will likely pass through moderation if you "sign" them. A new note: Don't tell me how to write or how to blog! I can't make you comment but I don't want to wade through spam!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Scott Bourne has a 70" print of eagles from M43 (Olympus, of course) on display at the photo show in NYC going on now. Picture in his twitter feed
ReplyDeleteRick
If he were a great photographer he'd be able to make an 80 inch print with a one inch sensor camera...
ReplyDeleteIt was 100 feet, but it had top be trimmed to fit into the exhibit
ReplyDeleteHappy Birthday Kirk. Been enjoying your blog for a while now and appreciate the work you put into it.
ReplyDeleteHappy birthday, of course! But, gee, Kirk, once again you tempt me to truck all my Canon FF gear down to the local photo emporium and bazaar and horse-trade for an Oly MD II or whatever it's called, or a Panny or Sony or whatever. I am disturbed by the wonderful quality of these 4/3 sensors. But then, sigh, I go back and look at a portrait - or even better, a distant dance shot I've taken with the 6D body and heavenly 135/2 - at 100% and marvel at how the wonderful quality holds up in the details - so I reckon I'll be holding onto my little fractal miracle machine for a while. I know I could feel perfectly at home with 4/3, but I'm kind of surrounded by stunningly good lenses, in the 135, the 16-35 L IS USM, and the plebeian but ferociously good 24-105. So there you go, so many options, and that ain't a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteThe m4/3 and 1 inch cameras are in the light weight division and the Canon FF and lens are in the heavyweight division. I myslef, have got Nikon FF even heavier lenses than Nikons in comparable focal distance. But I guess that is the point. Much lighter to carry around are the m43 and 1 inch, and the image quality is superb in the hands of skilled photographers like Kirk and others. I have also got Olympus and Panasonic, and have tried Canon, and anyways, all good cameras, especially nowadays in the higher end models in apsc and ff and m43.
ReplyDeleteCan anyone say lens envy? Love those f2 f1.2 and f1.4 lenses. (actually my lens start at f1.8 and f2.8 in Nikon FF.)Cheers, from Adrian. Love reading Kirks blogs for inspiration.(Someday may buy an F1.4 for 50mm.)
Happy Birthday Kirk Tuck! Robin Wong and I on his blog article of the 45mm f/1.2 were almost going to go down to a bet whether you would get an A7R-III or the 45mm f/1.2 M.Zuiko. And a third joined in the debate. I'm pretty sore we didn't arrive at a bet because Robin would have owed me a cuppa somewhere (although he is very obliging and sheperds me around the Kuala Lumpur with care when we meet. Anyway, guess who got a picture taken by Carl Ludik (the Olympus rep in Melbourne?) with the 45mm? It's awesome. https://photos.app.goo.gl/Ma1WrIZKGdanQMag2
ReplyDeleteKirk, this is Gary Friedman. Your blog is awesome; I've been trying to email you but it keeps bouncing back. Please contact me at Gary@FriedmanArchives.com
ReplyDelete(One of the things I wanted to tell you is I love the snarkiness of your blog! :-) ) GF