Roger Hicks
Veteran
Perhaps a pertinent question is: what the hell is a 'lazy eye'?
Is it by any chance related to 'woolly thinking'?
Cheers,
R.
Is it by any chance related to 'woolly thinking'?
Cheers,
R.
Fair enough. Actually, a couple of very close and very dear friends suffer from this, so I am familiar with the rational definition. It was the implicit irrational definition that threw me.
Of course you do... because you have a lazy eye.
Fair enough. Actually, a couple of very close and very dear friends suffer from this, so I am familiar with the rational definition. It was the implicit irrational definition that threw me.
I should have said, "what the hell is a 'lazy eye' in this context?"
Cheers,
R.
I never thought saying 35mm gets you more keepers will generate so many :rolls eye: smilies. Perhaps :rolling eyes: is a good exercise for the 'lazy eye'..... someone needs to tell fuji to stop producing the X100s... and i wonder why the Leica 35mm/1.4 costs much, it makes me :roll my eyes:.... And Alex Webb is not very good :rollseye:...
Highlight 1: Same here. No offence whatsoever taken at your fair and reasonable reply.I think it was just meant as a slur (hence my facetious post; which was in no way aimed in your direction BTW).
If "lazy eye" has any real meaning in photography I am yet to encounter it. If it does mean something I have misjudged the author and I apologise. I tend to have a knee-jerk reaction when folks use medical terms as insults.
I should make some attempt to answer the OP. It matters little to me whether I use a 28, 35, 45 or 50; I enjoy taking pictures with any and all of them.
I'm confused: as I prefer 28mm and possibly suffer the lazy eye syndrome...
Huh, when we are at the bar, I always assumed one eye was checking out the waitress. Good to know!
I think the point is that focal lengths are subjective and it totally depends on what type of photography one does. There is no one size fits all approach to photography.
Interestingly that way I see it focal length is the only objective aspect of photography.
The restrictions of a focal length and learning to work in that requires the same approach from everyone.
Superb counterargument!Are you saying that everyone will use a 50mm lens the same exact way? How can that even be possible?
Who can give me a solid definition on "lazy eye" and on "trained eye"?
According to the latest medical studies, the lazy eye loafs along the confines of the viewfinder, hoping to nudge parts of the scene into other areas, but without any real concept of what composition or color correction is. The trained eye however, darts from object to object, slicing across artificial boundries without mercy, only registering things that stand out in its own mind's eye. The trained eye suffers no lazy eye interference, but strives to outdo the other eye at the front of the camera.
How would you separate a lazy eye photographer with a 35mm lens from a lazy eye photographer with a 28mm or 50mm lens?
Oh my, didn't your teachers cover this in grade and middle school? Ask your daughters as I am sure they have already passed all tests on this. They will tell you that actually you don't separate them, you combine them for one all seeing eye. I thought you were a mathematician and understood such things. You have no idea how disappointed I am.
Is there any hope for a lazy eye photographer with a 35mm lens to ever "upgrade" and become a trained eye photographer with a 35mm lens or has it been already shown online that such a move is impossible?
Since per above, they are to be combined rather than a silly 'upgrade,' the question is meaningless. I'm surprised at you and others who think like you, and try to confuse the truely religiously viewfinder gifted. Have you no shame sir?!
These are such important questions on existence and life that RFF must address them here and now.
That at least is true!!!!
The other question is whether a photographer using a 100mm lens is a "super trained eye photographer" or whether any focal length above 50mm throws you back into the slums of lazy eye photographers?
There have been doctors who claimed to have conducted studies to prove what you have just said. However, beware! as most conventional medical wisdom believes them charlatans, and holds to the ancient empirical belief that the phenominum only occurs at 135mm and (to infinity and) beyond.
I am so happy that I favor using 50mm lenses over 35mm lenses because now I finally know that I am an elite photographer with one trained eye ... I think.
Ah, only those who have undergone rigorous testing with 50mm, and conquered themselves first, are comfortable with the 50mm. All others struggle with 35mm and 85mm lenses. After all, you are to be congratulated sir!