TWoK
Well-known
Sure, which part?
yanidel
Well-known
Interesting references and indeed a lot of confusion on the roots and meanings of "the Decisive moment".
I would nevertheless alter a bit your perception of "à la sauvette". this term comes initially from "vendeurs à la sauvette" which were unauthorized street vendors that would sell and run away as soon as police would show up (they still exist today and sell many fake bags or CD's). So à la sauvette brings to me (as a native French speaker) more the notion of fleeing and save one's fate than simply an hurried moment with unresolved action.
So maybe HCB really meant more shots "quickly stolen" than the terrible translation to "Decisive moments" (which indeed is the moment just before the snap, not the picture itself as we all know that M have huuuuuge shutter lags )
TWoK
Well-known
Unless you pre-set your camera it is much slower to shoot a fully manual camera vs something with some sort of automation. Now of course that's not a popular fact around here, but I don't see how it's open to dispute. If you already have your exposure where you want it, of course you only have to release the shutter, but the M3 is no more prepared for the decisive moment than anything else out there. Shutter lag has never made me miss a shot, just my own stupidity.
KM-25
Well-known
I agree with this. I definitely feel a different sense of readiness with my M3 than my F100. The V/F of the M3 is always "on" in terms of what is going in it, seeing what is about to enter the frame lines. But the F100 is ready to tackle action, using AF, great metering that is always evaluating, etc.
TWoK
Well-known
So you have tangible shutter lag on an M7 or Ikon? What if the 'decisive moment' is in changing light? Can you change from 1/500th @ f/2.8 to 1/50 @ f/1.4 faster than I can just go to 1.4 and release the shutter while the camera does the exposure for me? I love my manual cameras. They just aren't as spontaneous or fast to shoot as an Ikon, etc.
Last edited:
yanidel
Well-known
Take a M8/9 in zone focus. Put it on aperture priority, Auto-ISO and it is the fastest camera in the West. If you shoot wide open, it will be slower but a DSLR might also focus where you did not want to.
It's possible to turn AF off on a DLSR and zone focus.
On a slightly different note, a D700 will take about 40 photos before the buffer fills up and the write speed to the memory card slows down. How many photos can an M8/9 take before that happens?
yanidel
Well-known
Yes, but the scale markings are either 3 meters of infinty on most DSLR lenses. Not the easiest way to zone focus ...
On a slightly different note, a D700 will take about 40 photos before the buffer fills up and the write speed to the memory card slows down. How many photos can an M8/9 take before that happens?
The M9 has a continuous mode ... which I never used. I take photographs, I am not in the military.
Can only speak for Nikon, but a lot of Nikkor lenses (for film and DLSR) have fully usable DOF scales. Not that a DOF scale is really needed when shooting wides.
The M9 has a continuous mode ... which I never used. I take photographs, I am not in the military.
I should have know better than to expect a straight answer from an M9 user with regards to buffer writing speed etc.
Last edited:
yanidel
Well-known
Good to know that some lenses have it. I shoot mostly F1.2 - F4, so DOF management is very important to me, especially on wides such as the 35mm Lux. As I see a potential scene unfold, I always pre-set my lens to the estimated distance to subject and needed aperture, that is why precise markings are very important. This allows to just raise the camera to the eye and click when the"decisive moment" is a go ... and there is no opportunity to fine tune focus.
If I screwed up focus, it is 100% my fault, not the AF that might have locked on the wrong subject.
petronius
Veteran
This starts to turn into a my **** is bigger than your **** discussion.
It´s about the pictures and we should not mind the tools. (Sometimes i try to imagine how the world of photography would look like if Barnack had built a SLR and HCB had used it.)
It´s about the pictures and we should not mind the tools. (Sometimes i try to imagine how the world of photography would look like if Barnack had built a SLR and HCB had used it.)
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
yanidel
Well-known
Then you participate to the wrong thread or need to re-read the initial post.
dfoo
Well-known
How ridiculous. I don't get this. Why does posting the images on the internet mean the images would be crap. Is posting images on the internet somehow a dirty concept now?
dfoo
Well-known
I also don't get this nonsense with watermarks. What are you so afraid of? Someone is going to steal a 640 pixel image and do exactly what with it? Do you honestly think anyone who is going to steal such a small image would ever pay you for anything anyway?
spystyle
Established
I heard that having an expensive camera doesn't certainly mean you can make good photos
larmarv916
Well-known
Hello "yanidel"...being that your in line at the moment...Later in the text the, translation that was offered for as translation was..."photos on the run" Which I saw as being again a better direct description. Thanks for the additional french lesson.
rHytHm
Member
I have given up on water marks a long time ago. Although I am not relying on photography as a main source of income I do earn a fair share (enough that I have to report to the IRS).
Long story short, I sell myself and not the photos I have created. If you upload a low res image you keep the work intact without distracting the viewers eyes. And a low res image deters people from trying to steal the image.
I have no comment on the original post as I am not able to see the image for what it is due to the watermarks obstruction.
Long story short, I sell myself and not the photos I have created. If you upload a low res image you keep the work intact without distracting the viewers eyes. And a low res image deters people from trying to steal the image.
I have no comment on the original post as I am not able to see the image for what it is due to the watermarks obstruction.
Benjamin
Registered Snoozer
Well, I'm sure that it wouldn't have stopped him taking pictures.
Why on earth would it?
On one hand I think that we are incredibly lucky to have so many fine tools at our disposal, and often at relatively low cost, though on the other, it often shows up here that many are dumb struck with the burden of such dear choice.
Bad cameras have taken many fine, insightful, and compassionate photographs, just as fine, precision-made pieces have sat in dusty attics and unskilled hands, and proved that their being is nigh on useless.
I mean, I would of course agree that a Leica is a fine, capable tool and find it to be a perfect instrument in almost everything that I do.
The thing being with fully manual cameras is that they lack the ability to be slow or stupid. That's our part. Nothing quite sickens me more than a camera that thinks. That's my part. If I miss the picture, the moment, any truth in a scene, it's my problem. The camera just blinks, it would be foolish to expect anything more of it. Simplicity inspires.
Of course there are certain things that one has to learn to live, and work with. My cameras are always set to what I expect to happen. Sure, it doesn't always work out, though much comes with experience and just bloody-minded determination.
yanidel
Well-known
Photos on the run obviously is a literal translation that works but simplifies a bit too much the complexity of the term. In French "à la sauvette" derives from the verb "sauver" or "se sauver" which in English can be translated to either "to flee" or "to save". So there is a concept of self protection in "à la sauvette", this is why I personnally get a feeling of it meaning "Quick stolen images", that is images taken quickly without the subject being aware.
Of course, I am not a French teacher
so I could be wrong.