That was a truly stonking rainbow, though, which I have actually toned down a little: one of the guys on the path pulled out his mobile to photograph it himself shortly thereafter. I would have liked to have isolated the Nuffield and the sculpture-with-no-name with the rainbow, but that's the price of not having a zoom (or not carrying two cameras).
A good thing about the X100 is that, having a less prominent "snout" than most cameras with an APS-C sensor (never mind one fitted with an f/2 lens), it slips neatly and safely away beneath your coat during rain showers, without snagging on inner pockets and linings. I can imagine it would be a good, discreet camera to have on holiday walkabouts. Its retro looks give it a usefully harmless, touristy appearance, too, quite different from putting a bulbous, stealth-bomber-black DSLR up to your eye.
Mind you, I suppose from now on anyone not using their phone to take a picture is going to be pretty conspicuous, anyway. Though not as conspicuous as those twits who use their iPad as a camera. How unreflectingly, un-selfconsciously idiotic do you have to be, to do that in a public place? It's kind of magnificent, in an annoying sort of way.
9 comments:
price of not having a zoom
I don't know if I'm missing something, but I'm reminded of the money-saving tip published in Viz once, viz: save £££s on expensive binoculars by simply standing closer to the thing you're looking at! I can't see any tape or or orange netting or anything. Is there a barricade so mysterious it's invisible?
Zouk,
Hmm, your bafflement is noted. Now pay attention.
As Father Ted said to Father Dougal: "No, Dougal, those cows there look small because they are far away"!
It's all about angles of view. If you stand close to a Big Thing, you have a different view of it from the one you get from further away. Obvious, surely?
More importantly, the things that look like they're next to the Big Thing from far away -- usually other Big Things -- become invisible from close up. The view is blocked by the main Big Thing. Or some of the other Big Things may even be behind you now, as you get closer!
The advantage of a telephoto lens is that, by narrowing the angle of view, you can compose the view of the Big Thing from far away as if you were standing much nearer, and even as if you were standing in mid-air! And all the other Big Things stay in the frame! It's genius!
By contrast, a camera equipped with a fixed, moderate wide-angle lens is a one-trick pony, when it comes to angles of view. Especially if you're restricted to standing on the ground, as most of us are.
Mike
Mike
In keeping with the theme of the blog and this post, here's a truly idiotic hat: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/06/ipad-hat-2011-06-15-2.jpg
Huw
I like the way you bracketed your comment to allow for the possibilty that I was genuinely baffled or merely sarcastic (though I see you've now given me the benefit of the doubt).
I have heard photographers (possibly including yourself?) say it's better to stand closer than use a zoom if possible - probably because of the flattening effect of a long lens. As for the possible necessity for a place to stand in mid-air, maybe you need to carry a ladder with the X100?
Zouk,
I am the soul of tact, where guests are concerned.
You're probably thinking of Robert Capa: "If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough". Personally, I like the compressed perspective of a telephoto. If I was a war photographer, like Capa, I'd like it even more...
In fact, quite a few landscape photographers do carry a ladder (insane as that is) precisely to open up the ground level perspective. Needless to say, I am not that mad.
Mike
Mike, I can't help agreeing that folks using iPads for photography look pretty daft, although I've done it myself from time to time. I spent almost my entire working life under a cloth behind a 10x8 Sinar, so I've got a huge soft spot for the *view* through the iPad; I just think that, in order not to look too stupid, you need to go the whole hog, with a tripod and a dark-cloth… now if only it had a 20 Megapixel sensor in there!
Paul,
I have actually never used a view camera, but it's clearly a compelling experience to those whose approach to photography it suits. I'm much too much of "snapper" even to carry a tripod...
Someone (may have been Ctein on T.O.P.) once suggested that an array of multiple phone-size sensors attached to a device like an iPad, integrated using suitable software, could produce a genuinely portable digital view camera -- no doubt someone somewhere is working on that!
As an iPad user myself, I would rapidly change my view if the size and quality of the images were to be enhanced significantly -- the obvious obstacle is the shallow physical depth of the thing. Maybe some kind of multiple sensor overlay/attachment (hey, with bellows?!).
Where they are really a problem is idiotic audience members holding them up to photograph/film performances, blocking the view of those behind...
Mike
P.S. Paul, no offense if you're a ladder-user! My sort-of friend Jem Southam uses one all the time...
Mike
Hi Mike; no, never been a ladder user :-)
My Sinar days ended ten or more years ago and I'm now a micro 4/3 snapper and loving it. I've used the iPad to take snaps for reference, to show a builder what I want done to the house, and that's about it, but I've been struck, on those occasions, what a beautiful big picture it presents, and how flexible it can be, in that it seems to have limitless close focus/depth of field. I might just take it out in the field on of these days...
Post a Comment