kerne
Member
Having a built-in RF doesn't necessarily have to be a deciding factor. There are plenty of ways around it. I have a 520/2 and use the "Smart Measure" app on my Android phone for measuring distance. Works surprisingly well.
https://market.android.com/details?id=kr.sira.measure&hl=en
https://market.android.com/details?id=kr.sira.measure&hl=en
graywolf
Well-known
Actually, the only time you need really accurate distance measurements is fairly close up with wide apertures. Closer than a meter (3ft) you almost have to use a tape measure. But then most roll film non-SLR cameras don't focus closer than that. At f/11 or smaller if you can guess within a meter (yard) you are probably close enough. At long distances use the hyperfocal distance on the DOF scale if you camera has one. Simply put the far f-stop on the infinity mark.
Modern cameras are far more accurate at focus and exposure than the medium requires. Close enough is good enough, for decade after decade photographers got by using charts and guesstimation. Today for some strange reason we seem to think we are dealing with microns when feet are more than good enough.
My first two cameras were old folding Kodak from the 1930's that were given to me as a kid, I never had a light meter, nor used anything but my eyes for estimating focus. After I got a 35mm and started shooting Kodachrome was when I needed a meter (Kodachrome II, ASA 10) had no latitude at all.
Of course photographers have always been gadget freaks, so we like complicated toys, but you do not need all that stuff to take excellent photographs. I guess some of us have a real difficulty telling the difference between fancy toys and functional tools. Not that there is anything wrong with buying a fancy toy if that is what makes you happy.
It amuses me that the snobs confuse the two. They sneeringly call simple cameras "toy cameras" when the opposite is more true. Of course, I am talking about real cameras that were intended to take real photographs with, not plastic lens cameras designed for 5 year olds.
Modern cameras are far more accurate at focus and exposure than the medium requires. Close enough is good enough, for decade after decade photographers got by using charts and guesstimation. Today for some strange reason we seem to think we are dealing with microns when feet are more than good enough.
My first two cameras were old folding Kodak from the 1930's that were given to me as a kid, I never had a light meter, nor used anything but my eyes for estimating focus. After I got a 35mm and started shooting Kodachrome was when I needed a meter (Kodachrome II, ASA 10) had no latitude at all.
Of course photographers have always been gadget freaks, so we like complicated toys, but you do not need all that stuff to take excellent photographs. I guess some of us have a real difficulty telling the difference between fancy toys and functional tools. Not that there is anything wrong with buying a fancy toy if that is what makes you happy.
It amuses me that the snobs confuse the two. They sneeringly call simple cameras "toy cameras" when the opposite is more true. Of course, I am talking about real cameras that were intended to take real photographs with, not plastic lens cameras designed for 5 year olds.