!!

Hello Guest! Kumusta!

Thank you for visiting PiPho Forum!
It would be best if you will register so you can use the additional benefits of the community such as joining events, interacting with fellow members and view the hidden boards of the forum.

 
 
Mabuhay, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Sorry, this shoutbox does not exist.

Recent Classifieds Posts

Recent Forum Posts

Life in New York by likesups
[October 12, 2019, 07:22:57 PM]


VRFPhotography by xcaliber14
[October 07, 2019, 09:53:08 AM]


FS: Nikon D850 dslr 45.7MP Camera body by fotoplace
[September 24, 2019, 07:11:49 PM]


Letting go of all or none at all. by wilybarrozo
[September 22, 2019, 09:41:27 PM]


Happy when It Rains by rarevision
[August 26, 2019, 11:48:13 AM]


Ibat-ibang kababaihan... by rarevision
[August 20, 2019, 05:42:45 PM]


Landscapes & Seascapes For All by mcCoy!
[August 07, 2019, 11:15:58 AM]


Churches, Mosques, Synagogues etc - Places of Worship by rarevision
[August 07, 2019, 12:27:57 AM]


Mga Sikat... celebrity photos by rarevision
[August 07, 2019, 12:20:18 AM]


D7K+ Shoot - January 2013 by Miguelina
[August 02, 2019, 03:11:46 PM]



Author Topic: lens or body? an answer to a myth  (Read 10802 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #40 on: November 10, 2011, 05:42:49 AM »
 Of course it isn't. Not all the time. But most of the time it is. After all, that is why SLRs and DSLRs became popular - the ability to change lenses as the type of shooting demands. If a person got a d3000 or a 1000d and he wants to do bird shooting, that precludes him from doing BIFs. But he can still do bird shooting IF he has a long lens. So, even with a modest d3000, he can still shoot birds, IF he has a long lens.

 But if he got a D3s with only a kit lens, can he do bird shooting? He can, but his success will be very small. And what he lacks in gear, he has to make up for in stealth as now, with a kit lens, he has to crawl to get close and get that shot. And he will likely crop heavily to get all the unnecessary space out of the picture, w/c means he will lose a great deal of pixels.  And if the bird is on the water, well, tough luck because he will also have to swim to get near. And he must swim stealthily so as not to scare that bird away. Now he has to find a way to carry that camera and his kit lens on the water and still make it take pictures!  ;D

  So, even if he has only a 100d, or a D3000, but if he has a long lens, he can do bird shooting. He can have the most expensive body and a cheap lens and he is sunk. Even if he buys an expensive lens if it is a wide angle or a 17-50, it won't cut the mustard for that type of photography. This is why the lens determines things first most of the time, not the body.

 But the need for the lens is determined by a higher power - the type of photography. And only the user can say what interests him most. It is thus imperative that the user/photographer KNOWS his own heart and interest. If he doesn't then it will cost him money jumping from lens to lens and body to body.

  If he is not sure what he wants, then he must stick with his current body-lens combo and explore the world of photography in baby steps. Volt-in and borrow lenses and bodies from friends. Go to seminars, workshops, photowalks, expeditions to find out the diffrent types of photography.  

  If lenses aren't good investments when one knows already what one wants to shoot, and it's not the body either, then what else is there to invest in, short of training yourself?

  And see your last paragraph. You may just have contradicted yourself by totally going wild and not needing a lens at all.  ;D


  The flaw in that argument is that you let specs speak first before need. What is the type of photography you want, you know why you or don't need the shallow DOF. You don't desire an f2.8 or f1.4 lens just "because" it is a fast lens. Your orgasm or lack of it is not the point. The point is what you intend to do with a f2.8 lens.

 The photographer must first define the area of photography he wishes to learn and explore. But since lenses are expensive, even with the entry level ones, may cost still dearly to many, then best to master what one has first. Shoot with the kit lens and do as many types of shooting. Get the feel of it the first few months or at least a year.

 There are exceptions to this of course. Some really know what they want. If so, then it is just a question of money and time. But if one knows what one wants, then surely, when the person is looking for bodies, he already knows he needs such and such body. That should not be a mystery to him. He mustn't pick a d40 or d60 but he wants to do sports shooting. Right off the bat, the body is wrong or very handicapped for that type of shooting.

 But more often than not, most are constrained by cost. Hence, that same sports or action shooter, best just pick a body that is middle ground, with a good fps and AF. Probably not as good as the top of the line for that need, but it should be good enough for him to learn and afford the lenses.  The good news is most middle or top-middle bodies like the 60d and the d7000 are suitable for the task.


  That is not always the case. IF such is the case, why bother buying a dslr or a MILC? Just get a P&S. End of discussion.

  And how did you get to know that you can nail the shot if you haven't tried it or know the particulars of the shoot?  You can't because most don't have a pinhole camera/lens. And nobody has tried it. Have you? Even if you do, situations change. In what capacity will a pinhole camera be effective? How many instances can a pinhole camera be useful?

 You conveniently forgot the type of photography you intend to do. Will you get away with that shot with a d300 and a pinhole in the middle of the night with lampost and building lights and you are to take a picture of the skyline with no tripod?

   You start looking at lenses when your photographic needs change. When the lens is the proper one for the job, and you still have a hard time, maybe it's time to look at changing the body. Or maybe  you just need other accessories like a flash, or an adapter, or ETs, etc.

The last paragraph of my post is 101% consistent. Invest only when you know what you are doing. Same goes with anything in life. Don't settle down and get married when you still can't handle the girl (or lens). Have fun and enjoy the bachelor life. Go out with other girls (cameras).

When you are mature enough, you won't have to look at other girls and although you didn't get the best girl (pinhole camera) she is still more than enough for you.

Marrying Ms Universe when you can barely handle yourself is moronic. You should not even ask if you should marry her. Grow up first.

Marry early and you will regret if you have to divorce the girl of your dreams when your desires become uncontrollable (switch to other brands).

Why is that principle difficult to understand?

Unfortunately, 9/10 photographers advise n00bs to marry early and cross the bridge when they get there. Sad. Very sad.

Pinoy Photography - Philippines Online Photography Community

Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #40 on: November 10, 2011, 05:42:49 AM »

Offline iampoch

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2007
  • Posts: 554
  • Liked: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Olympus, Panasonic
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: OMD-EM5, GX1
  • Nickname: Poch
Re: Re: Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #41 on: November 10, 2011, 06:50:10 AM »


 But like the IvP, it is easier to talk about the bow & arrow and the archer or the Indian. But in photography and any other artistic endeavor, what is not clear is the target. And that is the other thing that the IvP does not talk of, w/c Zen does. The archer, the bow & arrow, and the target = are ONE.


I like this :-) all too often, the subject (i.e. the target) is left behind in discussions. Most simply forget (me included) that subjects don't present themselves to the photographer. More often than not, the photographer composes his/her environment to create his subject.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk
Freedom is the right of all sentient photographers.
Olympus OMD-EM5 | Panasonic Lumix GX-1 | 14mm 2.5 | 45mm 1.8 | 25mm 1.4

Offline Jagner

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2006
  • Posts: 1007
  • Liked: 97
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: KodaK
  • Field: Landscape
  • Nickname: Jon
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #42 on: November 10, 2011, 11:22:09 AM »
The last paragraph of my post is 101% consistent. Invest only when you know what you are doing. Same goes with anything in life. Don't settle down and get married when you still can't handle the girl (or lens). Have fun and enjoy the bachelor life. Go out with other girls (cameras).

When you are mature enough, you won't have to look at other girls and although you didn't get the best girl (pinhole camera) she is still more than enough for you.

Marrying Ms Universe when you can barely handle yourself is moronic. You should not even ask if you should marry her. Grow up first.

Marry early and you will regret if you have to divorce the girl of your dreams when your desires become uncontrollable (switch to other brands).

Why is that principle difficult to understand?

Unfortunately, 9/10 photographers advise n00bs to marry early and cross the bridge when they get there. Sad. Very sad.

Simply because the premise to the argument itself is flawed from the very start.  If you simply stated in your opinion how to go about choosing the correct gear/gadget for you, based on what you wanted/needed/required, then the premise is correct and there should be no discussions regarding the path you took.  But since you took on the statement "lens vs camera body" argument, and stating that one should go body first and later lens, then you have to consider that not everyone here agrees with your opinion.

As for your above notion equating lens and camera bodies with women, marriage and fall out/discontentment - again, for me, is all about not really knowing what you really want and need.  If one can't settle with one woman and continuously goes out on a date often means that the guy himself doesn't know what he really wants in the first place. 

Equating this with this hobby (and any other hobby as well) this is what caterpillar and the more experienced forumers here have been stating from the very start (and why their threads are sticky) One needs to know the destination in order to know  which path to take. 

Cheers











Pasig Shutter Bugs

Offline iampoch

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2007
  • Posts: 554
  • Liked: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Olympus, Panasonic
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: OMD-EM5, GX1
  • Nickname: Poch
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #43 on: November 10, 2011, 11:25:06 AM »
Here's a good take on the subject from DigitalRev:

Small | Large
Freedom is the right of all sentient photographers.
Olympus OMD-EM5 | Panasonic Lumix GX-1 | 14mm 2.5 | 45mm 1.8 | 25mm 1.4

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #44 on: November 10, 2011, 01:39:47 PM »
Simply because the premise to the argument itself is flawed from the very start.  If you simply stated in your opinion how to go about choosing the correct gear/gadget for you, based on what you wanted/needed/required, then the premise is correct and there should be no discussions regarding the path you took.  But since you took on the statement "lens vs camera body" argument, and stating that one should go body first and later lens, then you have to consider that not everyone here agrees with your opinion.

As for your above notion equating lens and camera bodies with women, marriage and fall out/discontentment - again, for me, is all about not really knowing what you really want and need.  If one can't settle with one woman and continuously goes out on a date often means that the guy himself doesn't know what he really wants in the first place. 

Equating this with this hobby (and any other hobby as well) this is what caterpillar and the more experienced forumers here have been stating from the very start (and why their threads are sticky) One needs to know the destination in order to know  which path to take. 

Cheers

Please read the blog again 'coz you did not understand it.

The 3rd paragraph ASKS what do you really want to achieve in photography. I even stated EXPLICITLY that this is more important than the lens vs body question.

Know what you need first then decide. If you can't decide between a lens or body, do not just swallow the default answer of going with a lens. And I offered my opinions in the paragraphs that followed.

Clearly, you did not read the blog or you are blinded by your own biases.

Offline maj_mercado

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 1018
  • Liked: 37
  • Camera: Nikon
  • Field: Landscape
  • Nickname: Mark Mercado
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #45 on: November 10, 2011, 02:45:22 PM »
let me drop my opinion here

body vs lens ... get which ? it depends.

My requirement for a body is one that does a decent 8rw ... usually my largest print. It is 8in x 12in.

And I am contented with my d40 with its 6mp sensor.

for the lens, I've used the kit 15-55 for years until the AF failed.... and yes I got lots of 8rw printed using that combo. I am a happy camper.

now what did I purchase first ? Flash. Why? at that point it is what I need. Now I have more speedlights than I got lenses.

When my kit lens failed, only then I got into primes, a 35mm and later an 85mm. Now I am getting more photos which simply cannot be done with the kit lens. Though honestly I am missing the FOV the 18mm to 35mm the kit provides.

Many recommend getting pro grade glass in lieu of the kit lens. But the question is do you really need it ? If you require the reliability pro grade lenses provides, then by all means splurge.

Many also recommend getting the latest and greatest bodies. Now the questions is, do you really need it ? It might have features that you "might" need 1% of the time. If you require the resolution, reliability and features offered by mid to high end bodies, then by all means splurge.

Many also purchase based on price. If something is more expensive then it must be better. For me, price does not guarantee a better output. If I could get away with purchasing nothing at all, and still get what I need, then why buy ? Just go out and shoot.  :)

Why did I get myself a dslr years back ? Well, I have to say that my previous point and shoot can't simply make a clean 8in x 12in photo  :P

Offline caterpillar

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2007
  • Posts: 1269
  • Liked: 36
  • Gender: Male
    • none
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #46 on: November 14, 2011, 04:35:12 PM »
Please read the blog again 'coz you did not understand it.

The 3rd paragraph ASKS what do you really want to achieve in photography. I even stated EXPLICITLY that this is more important than the lens vs body question.

Know what you need first then decide. If you can't decide between a lens or body, do not just swallow the default answer of going with a lens. And I offered my opinions in the paragraphs that followed.

Clearly, you did not read the blog or you are blinded by your own biases.

  Well, we're either dimwits and didn't get your language, or you are not a good writer enough to make it plain. Your title is also misleading. As stated, there is no myth, except the one you wrote and claimed there was one. Or we could be dimwits and you are not a good writer. ;) That's another possibility.  ;D

   Regardless, you wrote an article that is neither here or there. It's more like making a mountain out of a mole hill. You put a spin on something there isn't worth discussing. There isn't a lens vs body argument as I have always opined. To be original, you could have written an article or your own opinion on a lot of other areas:

  - The Indian vs Pana Myth: What's the Real score?

  - Hyperfocal Distance: what is it, how to use it, when to use it.

  - High pixel count = low IQ: myth or fact?
 
  - Achieving master status in photography - how long, what is needed?

  - 35mm film vs digital - what's the pixel count needed to match film?

  - Separating the wheat from the Chaff: how to spot fakes and misleading articles and bloggers in the world of the Internet.


  Now these areas are fresh and basically no one has written on them. Even if there is one, it needs to be demystified, made easier to digest, or set to focus on specific disciplines and areas, and even updated as some have changed through time (e.g. hyperfocal distance myth).  You can bring the house down and become a sticky yourself if you can write something in these areas. Help a lot of people too by making clear the issues and not muddling things up.

   Let's forget this whole episode and you can start a new article and let's see how it will go, ok?

--- Caterpillar ---

Offline caterpillar

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2007
  • Posts: 1269
  • Liked: 36
  • Gender: Male
    • none
Re: Re: Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #47 on: November 14, 2011, 04:53:46 PM »
I like this :-) all too often, the subject (i.e. the target) is left behind in discussions. Most simply forget (me included) that subjects don't present themselves to the photographer. More often than not, the photographer composes his/her environment to create his subject.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk

 Been wanting to write an article on that. That too is a good fodder of an article, if one knows the underlying structures and know how to present it.
--- Caterpillar ---

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #48 on: November 14, 2011, 11:21:36 PM »
 Well, we're either dimwits and didn't get your language, or you are not a good writer enough to make it plain. Your title is also misleading. As stated, there is no myth, except the one you wrote and claimed there was one. Or we could be dimwits and you are not a good writer. ;) That's another possibility.  ;D

   Regardless, you wrote an article that is neither here or there. It's more like making a mountain out of a mole hill. You put a spin on something there isn't worth discussing. There isn't a lens vs body argument as I have always opined. To be original, you could have written an article or your own opinion on a lot of other areas:

  - The Indian vs Pana Myth: What's the Real score?

  - Hyperfocal Distance: what is it, how to use it, when to use it.

  - High pixel count = low IQ: myth or fact?
 
  - Achieving master status in photography - how long, what is needed?

  - 35mm film vs digital - what's the pixel count needed to match film?

  - Separating the wheat from the Chaff: how to spot fakes and misleading articles and bloggers in the world of the Internet.


  Now these areas are fresh and basically no one has written on them. Even if there is one, it needs to be demystified, made easier to digest, or set to focus on specific disciplines and areas, and even updated as some have changed through time (e.g. hyperfocal distance myth).  You can bring the house down and become a sticky yourself if you can write something in these areas. Help a lot of people too by making clear the issues and not muddling things up.

   Let's forget this whole episode and you can start a new article and let's see how it will go, ok?


Among the responders here, I think you got offended the most. Why don't you counterblog? I will read it.

I chose the word "myth" instead of "lie" or *toink* (I used the latter in the post that followed because I had enough). For me it is a myth. It used to be true when everyone shot with film but is now being used inappropriately in digital photography and is not helping those who are just starting in photography. They, the n00bs, are the main audience of my post. It's them who are pressured to buy "one more lens" instead of concentrating on getting the most  from their gear. Why am I suggesting a good camera over a good lens? Because it has the biggest ROI to speed up the learning process and offers the best chance of keeping the enthusiasm at peak levels. Premium heavy lenses will not cut it. Until you know what you are doing, you should refrain from investing in expensive gear. (Why the heck am I repeating my blog post here anyway? :(  

Unfortunately, the post will inevitably offend those who have opinions stronger than mine. And I expected that. I'm different than the majority of hobbyists. I expect the real pros not to even bother reading my blog but if they do then I say "thank you".  Allow me then to use the appropriate word: it's *toink*. If that's what you want.

I don't claim to be a good writer but I do hope my photos are better than my writing (http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/demosthenesmateojr,   http://flickr.com/dtmateojr).

Over and out.


WARNING FROM MODERATOR: Please don't use foul language. This is your first warning.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 11:40:22 AM by geebee »

Offline retina

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 6464
  • Liked: 1046
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Fujifilm
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: Nikon D750
  • Nickname: Doc A
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #49 on: November 15, 2011, 08:36:01 AM »
Among the responders here, I think you got offended the most. Why don't you counterblog? I will read it.

I chose the word "myth" instead of "lie" or "*toink*" (I used the latter in the post that followed because I had enough). For me it is a myth. It used to be true when everyone shot with film but is now being used inappropriately in digital photography and is not helping those who are just starting in photography. They, the n00bs, are the main audience of my post. It's them who are pressured to buy "one more lens" instead of concentrating on getting the most  from their gear. Why am I suggesting a good camera over a good lens? Because it has the biggest ROI to speed up the learning process and offers the best chance of keeping the enthusiasm at peak levels. Premium heavy lenses will not cut it. Until you know what you are doing, you should refrain from investing in expensive gear. (Why the heck am I repeating my blog post here anyway? :(  

Unfortunately, the post will inevitably offend those who have opinions stronger than mine. And I expected that. I'm different than the majority of hobbyists. I expect the real pros not to even bother reading my blog but if they do then I say "thank you".  Allow me then to use the appropriate word: it's *toink*. If that's what you want.

I don't claim to be a good writer but I do hope my photos are better than my writing (http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/demosthenesmateojr,   http://flickr.com/dtmateojr).

Over and out.

Now, this time you went too much in using your language. That is very deliberate and that is not allowed in this forum.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 11:39:13 AM by geebee »

Offline iampoch

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2007
  • Posts: 554
  • Liked: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Olympus, Panasonic
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: OMD-EM5, GX1
  • Nickname: Poch
Re: Re: Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #50 on: November 15, 2011, 10:30:56 AM »
Been wanting to write an article on that. That too is a good fodder of an article, if one knows the underlying structures and know how to present it.


If you'll write an article on that, I'll wait for it :D I agree, the Indian vs Pana myth has to be debunked, especially since it's quoted so many times. Indian + Pana + Target is always the way to go :)
Freedom is the right of all sentient photographers.
Olympus OMD-EM5 | Panasonic Lumix GX-1 | 14mm 2.5 | 45mm 1.8 | 25mm 1.4

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #51 on: November 15, 2011, 06:16:29 PM »
Thanks for the idea :-)

I have written an introduction to the Indian vs Pana argument: http://dtmateojr.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/its-the-photographer-not-the-camera-is-actually-an-insult/

Offline iampoch

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2007
  • Posts: 554
  • Liked: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Olympus, Panasonic
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: OMD-EM5, GX1
  • Nickname: Poch
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #52 on: November 15, 2011, 06:39:42 PM »
good point :) One thing that I would add to the argument is that the concept really doesn't hold much water, regardless whether a Pro said it or a noob. The grain of truth to the saying is that it's the photographer that takes the picture and not the equipment. However, having the right equipment is just as important. A soldier will not survive without the proper gear in war (regardless of what Hollywood says). Imagine giving a pro photographer a P&S for a fashion shoot and I'd be pessimistic that she/he would be able to deliver print-worthy shots. The equipment will simply be not up to snuff. It's an extreme example, I know, but it's what falls under the "It's the Indian and not the Pana" argument.

But there's an element that's just as equally important in my argument: the model/s. Money shots are dependent on three factors: the photographer's composition and vision (which includes how well she/he planned the shoot), the viability of her/his equipment, and how well the model/s delivered. Like caterpillar said, all three must be in harmony, which is exactly the same thing that my partner told me :)
Freedom is the right of all sentient photographers.
Olympus OMD-EM5 | Panasonic Lumix GX-1 | 14mm 2.5 | 45mm 1.8 | 25mm 1.4

Offline wally

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Tocino + Rice
  • ****
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 207
  • Liked: 7
  • Gender: Male
    • SiWallyNi
  • Field: Portraiture
  • Nickname: Wally
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #53 on: November 15, 2011, 10:03:18 PM »
Thanks for the idea :-)

I have written an introduction to the Indian vs Pana argument: http://dtmateojr.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/its-the-photographer-not-the-camera-is-actually-an-insult/


good point though. but it seems your article defines the "Indian vs Pana" issue a phrase used to give insult to those who do not know how to use their gear properly or worst, walang hilig sa kanila ang photography, although mahilig sila sa photography  ;D

and oftentimes ginagamit din un phrase na yan kung cant afford ka sa expensive gears and here comes a guy naka full battle gear and to justify yourself..."hindi naman yan sa Pana eh"

cant we use that phrase in a positive way? really, hindi nga naman talaga yan sa pana, sa indian yan....which means, pagaralan mo ang photography, ang gears mo, measurebating etc para mas matuto ka sa field na to and gears alone wont answer your skills.

sana parate tayong constructive criticism.

opinion lang  :)

Offline caterpillar

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2007
  • Posts: 1269
  • Liked: 36
  • Gender: Male
    • none
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #54 on: November 15, 2011, 10:54:02 PM »
Among the responders here, I think you got offended the most. Why don't you counterblog? I will read it.

I chose the word "myth" instead of "lie" or *toink* (I used the latter in the post that followed because I had enough). For me it is a myth. It used to be true when everyone shot with film but is now being used inappropriately in digital photography and is not helping those who are just starting in photography. They, the n00bs, are the main audience of my post. It's them who are pressured to buy "one more lens" instead of concentrating on getting the most  from their gear. Why am I suggesting a good camera over a good lens? Because it has the biggest ROI to speed up the learning process and offers the best chance of keeping the enthusiasm at peak levels. Premium heavy lenses will not cut it. Until you know what you are doing, you should refrain from investing in expensive gear. (Why the heck am I repeating my blog post here anyway? :(  

Unfortunately, the post will inevitably offend those who have opinions stronger than mine. And I expected that. I'm different than the majority of hobbyists. I expect the real pros not to even bother reading my blog but if they do then I say "thank you".  Allow me then to use the appropriate word: it's *toink*. If that's what you want.

I don't claim to be a good writer but I do hope my photos are better than my writing (http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/demosthenesmateojr,   http://flickr.com/dtmateojr).

Over and out.


WARNING FROM MODERATOR: Please don't use foul language. This is your first warning.


    I am not offended. Not at all. How can I? Why should I? The article is neither here or there. I read the blog and it is so-so. In fact, it is a bit confusing, as others pointed out. I concur.  So, what is there to be offended?  I didn't write it. You did. Why should I be offended?


  You can call it a myth or any other word. I will go along with it. It does not really matter what you call it. But as I pointed out, there really isn't any myth. Or a "lie." Or a BS. There is one simply because you wrote it. You can call it anyway you want it, but if it isn't so, then it isn't so. I've written my position on the matter. As others. What a good writer does, and academician, is to answer each point in return. Do a rebuttal. So far, you haven't done that. And if you think you did, you don't seem to be doing a good job on that either. A shame. :(

    And the "myth" wasn't a myth either even in the days of film (another one of those "sweeping statements" others have pointed out as well). If any, there wasn't any compelling reason to upgrade or change bodies in the film days either, because, it is easier and better to buy a good 30 Pesos 36-shot roll of film as an upgrade than to spend for a new body. A K-1000 will do as well as an Canon F1 or Nikon F3 for most types of photography as long as you pick the right film. Again, you start craving for the better bodies if you want to go action/sports photography or the like. That is true then as it is now.

  Even in film, the issue of getting good lenses still hold true. I will use the same examples using the all manual K-1000 film camera:

   - You want to be serious macro? Get a macro lens.
   - You want to shoot birds? Get a long FL lens.
   - You want to shoot events/weddings? Get fast lenses
   - etc, etc.

  Aren't those the same things you need to do even with digital? The few caveats is that today's cameras go beyond 5fps and there is no need to buy an expensive motor drive (added cost again). So, where is the "myth" or "lie" or BS again?

  If you think I am kidding about the Pentax K-1000, trust me, they've been used in weddings as I've seen them myself. And there is very little difference in basic function between the K-1000, OM-1, and Nikon FM. What is certain is, you will likely go for the lenses you need to do the job depending on the type of photography you wish to engage in.

   What I have presented is true for the newbie, the intermediate, and the expert. They will all will face the same issues. And in most cases, the "fork" or lenses needs to be addressed. I'm not saying you don't consider a different body. I'm saying that in most situations, digital or film, almost 90+%, one would probably get the solution not by changing bodies, but adding or changing lenses or accessories (TC, ETs, flash, etc).

  Now, you can rebut this if you wish. I expect you to. That's what these fora are for. Discussion. Even debate if need be. As long as we are civil and you are lucid with your rebuttal, then what we'll have is a healthy exchange. It will also sharpen your mind, and force you to write better! ;)

  Finally, if you want to proceed as a writer, be flexible and learn to bend with the wind. Don't be onion skinned. Otherwise, abandon it. Or don't open a thread and point to your blog and ask for comments. A strange way of doing business though. Because blogs, by their very nature, asks for comments.


  As a writer and mind you, if you have a professor in creative writing you know, will tell you, is you have to have  thick skin, and you have to take in the lumps if you want to be a writer. It does not matter if it's literary writing or a blog.

  But you don't even need a CW prof to tell you that if you have basically nothing to say, then better not say it. If you are not sure, then better check your facts and data first. Make sure that you have truly something worth while saying or writing. But don't make controversies when there is none.
 
  And be prepared to be peppered with questions or counter opinions. Trace my posts in Pipho and you will see many people offering a different and even contra position. Do I get mad or fold? No? Why? Because, I did my homework. And if I am wrong, or am not clear, then I simply apologize and say, "you are right, I didn't know that." That's how you learn and become a better writer or photographer, or whatever it is you want to be. Learn to accept criticism. But also learn to defend a position if it has merit. Unfortunately, you haven't done a good job on those. But again, you can learn. We can all learn.

  As for your photos, I am not going to comment on those. Just to remind you - your title and your original post is about your blog and your article, Not about your pictures. That is what we commented and gave our views on. I hate it when people do these side-stepping bit or Ninja Snow Blinding trick. :-\

   As for your pictures, better not ask for a comment on those too. You might find that people can be most cruel critiquing photos than an article. You might regret that more than people giving critique on your writing!

  As for me writing a blog. I've been told as early as 3 years to do that. They say I write pretty good. Trouble is, I don't think I am a good a writer. Honestly. I only write to be of help and usually, I am good at that if I have encountered and experienced that which I am writing. Or if I am trained in that area (like Technology Management or social sciences issues).

  If I am in doubt, I always am clear about my reservations, or make clear that my next statements are guesses or just opinions that still need some solid grounding. That's how I manage to survive. And learn.

  Whenever I can, I try not to drop sweeping statements. And that is why my posts tend to be long. My other teachers (not in writing but in martial arts), will probably cringe at this! Brevity is often equated as a good quality to them. In fact, silence is not just golden but a hallmark of high attainment. I am guilty of not following that adage. But i have to because I don't want to misconstrue my meaning.

  Honestly, I am trying to be helpful to you. But you seem to have misconstrued my suggestions for topics as an affront. I assure you, that is further from the truth. You are not hurting me, but hurting yourself. I think, you should take it as a challenge. Go write some more. Adust. Grow. We don't become good writers in a day. Or even a year or two. But like photography, we have to take pictures. As a writer, you have to keep writing.  

 But when you do, and you do that in the world of the Internet, where every Tom, Dick, and Harry can read and see your work, then you must learn to take the lumps. Some will like your writings/pictures, some won't. But you have to learn from this. Personally, pictures are harder to judge or comment either way. But writing, well, that's easier, especially when people will comment on your ability to communicate. If it's just a question of content, well, for sure there will be differences. The more controversial, the more you have to step up. And I mean, not just technically in terms of writing, but in logic, clarity, and delivery.

 So, the moral of the story is this - Write of things when you have researched it well and/or know the topic well, especially if you are not also very good in writing. Avoid sweeping statements and generalizations. Write the basic ideas and expand on them. And be prepared to answer questions and respond to your article with good nature and if possible with a sharper mind and repartee.  

 

--- Caterpillar ---

Offline caterpillar

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2007
  • Posts: 1269
  • Liked: 36
  • Gender: Male
    • none
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #55 on: November 15, 2011, 11:06:37 PM »
Thanks for the idea :-)

I have written an introduction to the Indian vs Pana argument: http://dtmateojr.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/its-the-photographer-not-the-camera-is-actually-an-insult/


 And this is where you get your pants get all knotted for nothing.

  You assume too much.

  Why do you say that people mean that their photography "suck."  If at all, it is the opposite of what your article points out. AFAIK, what the statement means is that the photographer matters most, not the gear. That for good photographs to come out from our efforts, the room for improvement is more in the person, than the camera he wields.

  Mind you, I am not 100% in agreement with the original statement of I vs P, hence I don't use it. But I am almost sure, people don't drop the line to insult other people. It is more a reminder to focus the attention to the man, rather than the machine if anything needs to be upgraded or changed. To me that's a positive statement, not a negative one. I wonder, how you could see it as negative? Or even maliciously thinking it is an insult?

  I'd like to hear others chime in on this as I am sure that many interpret the I vs P statement in the positive note, not as you have posted it in your blog.

  By your writing style and your penchant for generalizations and innuendos, maybe you should consider writing for a tabloid? Your penchant for controversy when there is none seems to be your forte.

« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 11:17:29 PM by caterpillar »
--- Caterpillar ---

Offline Thor Lidasan

  • Beyond Visible Photography
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 1102
  • Liked: 227
  • newbie
  • Camera: Bayer & Foveon sensors
  • Field: Travel
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #56 on: November 15, 2011, 11:38:53 PM »

Indian vs Pana ba? eh argumentong walang katapusan yan, paikot-ikot kasi ang daling baliktarin yung mga rason. ;D

I have to add, we all have good motivations to say or write what is on our minds on the intent of helping others. The problem is how to express those ideas in a manner that is inclusive and not exclusive.

Let me expound more on the 2nd paragraph: For transparency sake, I am on the faculty of one of the top 20 medical schools here in US and one of the top 3 here in NYC. Our medical students and medical residents population ranges from geniuses (Ivy league Summas) to a hardened Iraqi War vet who went to Harvard also. Ako eh abang college gradweyt lamang sa pamantasan sa may Diliman at isang kolehiyo sa medisina din dito sa NY sa tulong ni Uncle Sam.

Now, paano ko itinuturo ang konsepto nang Neurophysiology and Brain protection sa mga geniuses tapos eh lalabas ako sa Operating Room kakausapin ang pamilya nang pasyente na wala silang ka-alam alam sa medisina at ang mahalaga sa kanila eh lalabas yung mahal nila sa buhay na 100% ok kahit na inoperahan sa utak?

The answer is "calibrated response". I try to calibrate how I explain things in a manner that a genius can comprehend and then I'll turn around and explain it to someone who has no idea about medicine and they both will have the same understanding of a concept. I never condescend nor exclude people on the basis that they might not understand what you are trying to say or what they are capable of.

In photographic terms eh, we use the "Exposure Compensation" button.  :)

Now, back to the cliche Indian vs Pana. Eto kontribusyon ko sa debate:

Nikon D40x + kit lens Nikkor 18-70:



E-P1 + Nikkor pre-AI 85mm 1.8:








Offline retina

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 6464
  • Liked: 1046
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Fujifilm
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: Nikon D750
  • Nickname: Doc A
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #57 on: November 15, 2011, 11:57:20 PM »
May I remind you guys!! We are not starting a new thread about I vs P . That was inserted way back but it is not the issue here. Let us go back to the original topic.

TS if you want you can start a new thread for that.

Offline knifebox

  • Buraot sa Buhay
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 1141
  • Liked: 153
  • Gender: Male
  • Idem Sum Qui Semper Fi
    • Images by James Enriquez
  • Camera: Lumix LX5, Canon S95
  • Field: Landscape
  • Model: Dory
  • Nickname: JC
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #58 on: November 16, 2011, 11:46:09 AM »
By your writing style and your penchant for generalizations and innuendos, maybe you should consider writing for a tabloid? Your penchant for controversy when there is none seems to be your forte

A tad harsh but fair.

And I agree with Mel. Too sweeping, too generalized . . . . . . .


And waaaaaaaaaaaaaay OT 

Lets return to the program gents  ;)
Creating Value From Experience  Digital Light Photography Lifestyle
Lens.ph

Offline caterpillar

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2007
  • Posts: 1269
  • Liked: 36
  • Gender: Male
    • none
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #59 on: November 19, 2011, 07:44:38 AM »
A tad harsh but fair.

And I agree with Mel. Too sweeping, too generalized . . . . . . .


And waaaaaaaaaaaaaay OT  

Lets return to the program gents  ;)


  There is no program really from the start. Of course, there was a request for us to read the blog/article and I suppose that warranted some comments. We know how that went. If that was the program, then all gave their bits. Unfortunately, the OP or TS didn't seem to like what was written.

  As others who've seen my posts here, and some of those are sticky's, I do get a lot of questions and responses. That's the natural state of affairs. You state something, especially if controversial, be prepared to defend it. You better be armed with facts, data, and be a good writer to responds because many in these fora are smart and have deeper experience in these matters. Some may even be members of their school debating team before.

  As for me, since high school till finishing grad school, this is standard fodder for me. Even in corporate work, we present ideas, plans, programs, etc and we do have to present them well and defend them. They get shot up from all sides. You can't take that personally otherwise you'd go crazy or become bitter all the time or you will bail out of this world completely. The OP/TS doesn't seem to have that background, because if he did, the years of being exposed to that will sharpen you and make your careful before you write a word or speak your mind.

  As another poster said, "calibrated response." Same with me. If I am talking to gear heads, I'd use the proper words and jargon to get the point across. If I am talking to a layman, I'd drop the high tech words and use analogies even. Not any different than Jesus did, hence you have those parables and analogies when he talks about the kingdom of heaven, God, etc. But regardless of the methodology, the writer does have to adopt to his audience.

 Writers like Mark Twain are considered great writers because they make something so complex so simple and simple just as is. They have a penchant for using the right words, sentences and pace to tell their stuff. Of course that is literature. But it won't be any different in other types of writing. I used to like the late Anding Roces' writing.  He has mastery of facts, and his info spans disciplines  not just one ( wide reader and one with depth of experience), and he writes very well that you will laugh, think, feel (get angry, nostalgic, whatever) all the same time. I will miss Anding Roces. :(

  But it is not just the writing style or method. One has to have something substantial to say. If it is just a weakness in delivery, that can be remedied. But if one is shallow, not even the knowledge of heavy handed words or having a Phd in Harvard is going to save the writer.

  The TS/OP will need to address both. That much is clear. And it is not an impossible task. I was a terrible writer in HS. So, I worked on it. And kept working on it after HS. Now I am a bit better. Thanks to my teachers. And of course, I had practice. The Diliman experience in writing and talking will sharpen you, especially if it is about 10 years worth of it in college exposure.

  It is never hopeless. All can start. But the beginnings of learning is humility. It is, to accept that in the first place, you still don't know a lot about a certain thing or things. That simple recognition and acceptance, is the first step to becoming a good writer, or speaker, or for that matter, anything else. Even becoming a great photographer! :)

  
« Last Edit: November 19, 2011, 07:54:51 AM by caterpillar »
--- Caterpillar ---

Tags:
 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4146 Replies
765899 Views
Last post January 05, 2010, 09:30:06 AM
by tekgik
2638 Replies
375296 Views
Last post April 08, 2019, 05:04:37 PM
by ken2
26 Replies
3529 Views
Last post July 03, 2010, 02:58:15 AM
by ArtS
29 Replies
5906 Views
Last post August 18, 2011, 07:20:23 PM
by AFTRMTH


Get this spot now imagesmith photography Two Stops Over