First, a program note. I was more or less kidding when I wrote my October 28th post indicating that I might lunge for a Fuji camera. I'm not. The X-Pro-2 is very pretty but I'm not convinced that the system offers anything I don't already have. You can stop cautioning me against the purchase, or, conversely, you can stop goading me to give it a try. The next camera on my list of "wants" doesn't exist yet but will be the Panasonic GX9. And I'll probably toss Olympus lenses on the front of it.
Today's info: I love the latest Panasonic cameras and the coolest Olympus Pro lenses but sometimes you gotta go lower tech just to remind yourself that it's your time and energy that make the photographs, not the provenance of the camera and lens in you hands. Since my options are now much more limited (inventory reduction...) I grabbed my G85 and two ancient Olympus half frame lenses (with adapters), the 20mm f3.5 and the 40mm f1.4. The first half of the post is almost entirely shot with the 20mm f3.5. The second half was almost entirely shot with the 40mm f1.4. There's no real takeaway here other than the idea that getting out and shooting trumps sitting at home with cutting edge glass and a computer screen in front of you.
I will say that the older lenses have a different (heavier) look to the files they create.
9 comments:
Love these.
But where did the city get that big blue backdrop? And how is it held up and lot?
(from chilly Wales)
Mark
Nice work! Those old lenses hold up very well.
The old lens I use most these days is my Nikkor 300mm f/4.5 AIS, because it comes in useful at school concerts for close-ups and I don't have anything longer than 60mm for my Fuji. (And speaking of Fuji, I'm not too surprised that you weren't entirely serious about buying into the system. You love exploring different possibilities, I know, but you seem really happy with Micro Four Thirds at present.)
Careful with that talk about "shooting trumps" -- the Secret Service might inquire. :)
Hi Mark, Here in Austin we get about 437 days of sunshine per year. The rest of the time I just spray paint a blue background into the scene...
Damn, it's 72 degrees and sunny here again.
Hey Kirk,
That whole post was a huge tease, I enjoyed everyone tempting you in or scaring you away.
Looking at your pictures of the new condo buildings all I felt was how homogeneous they have become, I am sure those very same buildings are going up here, in Dubai, in Manila. Having both a brother and a Father who are architects I hear them complain about the lack of risk developers are willing to entertain for their projects. Rather like the major small appliance manufacturer who just sent me an image to use in an e-blast, purchased from iStock with their product poorly placed into the scene. Too much sameness.
Completely off topic... Sorry about that.
Abraham, As much on target as I ever am. And, yes, I agree. I'm currently persona non grata on my Facebook community for daring not to like the (regurgitated 1990's) architecture of our new, over budget, long delayed, downtown library building... Gag me with bad architecture.
Don't know how you can tell so much difference between lenses. I'm sure some are sharper than others, but all your photos just look like your photos to me. Nothing wrong with that. Just sayin".
I haven't been to the library yet but my library director did go to the opening and took lots of cellphone photos. For $125 Mil I would have expected more than an ugly mishmash of a building that looks a lot like they recycled about half the convention center plans.
After looking at the interior photos I'm just glad I won't been the person trying to find all the homeless folks hiding out in the there at closing time.
The old lenses make "heavier" files? What does that mean?
Post a Comment