drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Goldorak
-
I do not believe a single second of the "I'm done" thing. Unless one stops shooting altogether, one is Never done!
We as human beings change constantly. We're a new person year after year. Same goes for our vision and for our requirements.
One is never done unless not serious about photography.
We as human beings change constantly. We're a new person year after year. Same goes for our vision and for our requirements.
One is never done unless not serious about photography.
pevelg
Well-known
The Lumix DMC-G1 can use M lenses?!?!?
back alley
IMAGES
Turtle
Veteran
uh, oh. You MUST have a 24-28; I don't know how you have been coping up until now. may I suggest: 21, 28, 50, 90 or 25, 35, 50, 90 or 25, 35, 75 or perhaps such FLs that you can cover all these combos
Winogrand used a 28 so you are missing out on all the sorts of photos that could be as good as his; its an undeniable, critical, destructive gaping hole in your lens lineup and therefore your photographic potential.
Last edited:
Goldorak
-
Yes indeed!
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Just found out I'm done, too
Just found out I'm done, too
I've accepted a job offer from a university in Shanghai, and that means a substantial pay cut. So it looks like I will very much be done, and I probably won't be able to afford any more photographic equipment of any kind. I bet I'll even end up paring down my current quiver of lenses, not to mention start learning how to develop (and scan) my own negs.
I thought Turtle's post above was pretty funny!
Every once and a while, to get some perspective, I go and read a DSLR forum. It cracks me up to see people talking about FL coverage in a zoom-based kit. Seriously, saw a massive let all hell break loose debate about whether one could conscionably allow for a gap between 50mm and 70mm (when covering a range from 17 to 3/400).
I love RF-land!
Just found out I'm done, too
I've accepted a job offer from a university in Shanghai, and that means a substantial pay cut. So it looks like I will very much be done, and I probably won't be able to afford any more photographic equipment of any kind. I bet I'll even end up paring down my current quiver of lenses, not to mention start learning how to develop (and scan) my own negs.
I thought Turtle's post above was pretty funny!
Every once and a while, to get some perspective, I go and read a DSLR forum. It cracks me up to see people talking about FL coverage in a zoom-based kit. Seriously, saw a massive let all hell break loose debate about whether one could conscionably allow for a gap between 50mm and 70mm (when covering a range from 17 to 3/400).
I love RF-land!
Last edited:
PMCC
Late adopter.
Where in Shanghai? My offspring teaches at Zhongshan Daxue in GZ.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
STJU = Shanghai Jiaotong University. Zhongshan is also one of China's top universities.
stefan_dinu
Established
I learn not to say done anymore. When I dig in the RF world, I started with a Bessa, then got a Hexar and then two Leica M's. After I bought the MP I was pretty sure the GAS is over. And indeed it was. But just for 35mm.
Now, only 6 months later after I said "I am done", I bought no less than 7 more big cameras and some lenses to asort with.
Now, only 6 months later after I said "I am done", I bought no less than 7 more big cameras and some lenses to asort with.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I suppose it depends on what one is after from photography. Sure, one can always make images with one camera and one lens- I certainly do carry a one camera one lens 'kit' for days on end. But these statements of "I'm done" seem to me to rule out any potential for growth in one's vision.
In some instances absolutely. When one is unable to get on film the images one sees in their head with a 35mm lens but could with a 21- then a 21 is correct. Not owning a 21 and simply declaring that the 35 can do the same thing because you've decided you're 'done' is silly. Some may never need a 21, but to decide at any age that one has every future vision covered is either very dumb or very arrogant.
Today. But in 6 months? 6 years?
Precisely. Change is part of the equation. If we're not changing then we are 'done' but not just with gear.
Last edited:
Fred Burton
Well-known
Our consumption society only works because people are never done. With the economy as it is, we must buy more, not fewer cameras and lenses. The future of the world depends on us. Bunch of counter-culture Hippies.
Krosya
Konicaze
I learn not to say done anymore. When I dig in the RF world, I started with a Bessa, then got a Hexar and then two Leica M's. After I bought the MP I was pretty sure the GAS is over. And indeed it was. But just for 35mm.
Now, only 6 months later after I said "I am done", I bought no less than 7 more big cameras and some lenses to asort with.
And it looks like you had your web site re-designed! I have to say - I liked the old one better. But thats just me. Anyway - what did you get - those 7 new cameras that is?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
After wandering around with my M2 for a while yesterday I'm puzzled ... puzzled as to why realistically I would need any other camera in 35mm. My gear has been trimmed down to way less than it was a year ago but a few hours with this meterless 35/50/90 framelined marvel had me wondering why I don't use it more often and forget the rest.
Or maybe just sell everything else 35mm and buy an MP and keep one each focal length lens to go with it, 35 50 and 90mm ... whoops this is supposed to be about being done!
Or maybe just sell everything else 35mm and buy an MP and keep one each focal length lens to go with it, 35 50 and 90mm ... whoops this is supposed to be about being done!
Last edited:
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Since selling the M8, and enjoying the images on film out of the M7 again, I don't know if I "want" another film M.
The only reason I would do it is to offer the "film only" option for my wedding packages.
That said, I do have a line on a local M7 that seems to be a good deal as well - we'll see.. as for right now - M7, 15mm Heliar, 21mm ZM f2.8, 35mm f1.4 Nokton, 50mm pre-ASPH lux, & 75mm Lux - that seems to be "enough" for the time being.
Cheers,
Dave
The only reason I would do it is to offer the "film only" option for my wedding packages.
That said, I do have a line on a local M7 that seems to be a good deal as well - we'll see.. as for right now - M7, 15mm Heliar, 21mm ZM f2.8, 35mm f1.4 Nokton, 50mm pre-ASPH lux, & 75mm Lux - that seems to be "enough" for the time being.
Cheers,
Dave
Gumby
Veteran
Ever see the movie "Groundhog Day"? That's what I feel like seeing this thread!
telenous
Well-known
I was done ever since I got the M2 and a decent 50mm with a 35mm. I still trade only for the dirty fun of dealing (gear).
I agree in principle with the above. There isn't a magic bullet focal length. Most of the photography that interests me is suited by the 35 and the 50, for example. But there are photographic problems that demand (as in, they can't be solved without) a wider or a longer focal length. And yet, a judicious selection is requisite, for you just can't roam the streets loaded with every single focal length ever divined. That, and of course there is, for most of us, a physical limit of {space in our bags, money in the piggy bank, spousal patience, capacity for self-soothing after having spent another boatload of money}.
In that sense, you have to find the best available focal length, for the sort of thing you want to do. Perhaps prioritize for the kind of photographic problems you encounter the most. That's a kind of problem solving too. And that's what I think people talk about when they say 'I 'm done'.
.
I agree in principle with the above. There isn't a magic bullet focal length. Most of the photography that interests me is suited by the 35 and the 50, for example. But there are photographic problems that demand (as in, they can't be solved without) a wider or a longer focal length. And yet, a judicious selection is requisite, for you just can't roam the streets loaded with every single focal length ever divined. That, and of course there is, for most of us, a physical limit of {space in our bags, money in the piggy bank, spousal patience, capacity for self-soothing after having spent another boatload of money}.
In that sense, you have to find the best available focal length, for the sort of thing you want to do. Perhaps prioritize for the kind of photographic problems you encounter the most. That's a kind of problem solving too. And that's what I think people talk about when they say 'I 'm done'.
.
maddoc
... likes film again.
Or maybe just sell everything else 35mm and buy an MP and keep one each focal length lens to go with it, 35 50 and 90mm ... whoops this is supposed to be about being done!
Better buy an MP-3 + 50/1.4 ASPH LHSA set, the 35/1.4 ASPH and 90/2.0 APO and then you are really done ...
I am not done but my bank account tells me to better be done so ... I am temporarily done
kevin m
Veteran
Well, Orson Welles, who I'd wager is more of an artist than any of us posting here, famously said that "absence of limitations is the death of art."
Perhaps it's not necessary to be literal minded in the application of that idea by purging your camera bag, but the limitation-mindset is helpful to keep the mind focused.
I had decided to keep an M6 for my own pleasure and keep a 40mm lens attached, now, after looking at some old negatives, I'm wondering why I don't just sell it and buy another Canonet. :angel:
Perhaps it's not necessary to be literal minded in the application of that idea by purging your camera bag, but the limitation-mindset is helpful to keep the mind focused.
I had decided to keep an M6 for my own pleasure and keep a 40mm lens attached, now, after looking at some old negatives, I'm wondering why I don't just sell it and buy another Canonet. :angel:
telenous
Well-known
Kevin, I don't disagree at all with the spirit of what you are saying in the present context. Just a point about the Welles quote though - he's among the few moviemen that stretched the boundaries of the cinematic medium, sometimes in conventional ways and sometimes in ways that were completely radical, effectively creating films that were borderline documentaries - fiction ('F for Fake' for instance). Even if he said the above, I don't think he was necessarily too wary about 'limitations' if he felt disregarding them suited his work.
Then again, it all depends on what 'limitations' actually means, doesn't it?