Your SLR Images

1985 - 1955 Chevy BelAir my dream car at the time (17 years old). Some park in Appleton Wisconsin.

Minolta X-700 75-210 zoom (thats all I had with me)
 

Attachments

  • 1985 - SUM - X700- 1 - 001-small.jpg
    1985 - SUM - X700- 1 - 001-small.jpg
    56.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 1985 - SUM - X700- 1 - 002 small.jpg
    1985 - SUM - X700- 1 - 002 small.jpg
    61.5 KB · Views: 0
what SLRs are good at that I can't seem to conquer with a rangefinder at the moment:

4060240496_ebdc3123f8_z.jpg


6960713767_5153f1fb57_z.jpg
 
tunalegs said:
Nice work. What's your opinion on why an SLR works better for you for studio work?
Click to expand...

thanks. well, to be honest, the feel of those giant bodies and knowing they can be abused if needed. when im shooting studio, it's a completely different environment than when i'm shooting with a rangefinder.

SLR is more of a 'get the shot and keep moving' ---very fast paced, and i can unload about 500 actuations in a span of several hours.

for an RF, it's slow for me, especially with the slow speed of the M9 to render each shot. i need the feedback to be instantaneous, so i usually pick SLR as the better tool.

plus, i'd rather much abuse a cheaper body as opposed to one i paid several thousand more for. the m9 won't last like its film predecessors....it's a computer just like any other and has a lifespan as far as its shutter count can take it.

SLRs are definitely more suited in my opinion as the better workhorse. i'm aware of several professionals who use the m9 for studio, but i don't think i could do that.
 
Makes sense. Using relatively large apertures at close distances, the ability to preview DOF is a big bonus for SLRs.


Untitled by berangberang, on Flickr

Was in color but I should have used a warming filter, so I converted this to b&w.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom