On putting money into 4:3 gear ...

Started May 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
CharlesB58 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,648
Re: On putting money into 4:3 gear ...

WhyNot wrote:


I must be getting old.. I usually don't respond to these lectures...but honestly, I'm tired of being told how poor a photographer I am and that I don't deserve to use the cameras I've got or those I might want... So maybe I'll just leave this forum to your 25% and return to my A620 and take snapshots... Sorry if I and the others of the 75% have bored and upset you to the point of having to continue to tell us how bad we really are.... I'll leave now or maybe I'll just ignore your tirades in the future..

Maybe you should, if you are going to engage in selective, twisting of what is posted in order to support your own defensive response: a response which indicates you would rather be offended by what you don't like than actually assess what I said.

There is far too much presumption on these forums-and in photography in general-by people thinking that because they can get results they like subjectively that they have equal credibility when discussing results that should be gauged objectively.

I'm not saying people can only post opinions if they can present photos which adequately support both their personal claim of expertise (which is inherent in saying that one camera is better than another because of X factors) and their ability to use said gear effectively. I'm am  saying that people who post their "best shots" which are "snapshots" that give no indication of sufficient skill to make the best of the camera used don't have the credibility in their opinions as someone who displays photos which demonstrate expertise that can optimize whatever camera they are using.

Nor am I saying a person doesn't "deserve" the camera they are using (in fact I said they have every right to use whatever they want to spend their money on. Which leaves me wondering why you think I said otherwise). However, spending money on a top of the line gear means only one thing to me: that person had the money, and desire, to purchase a top of the line gear. It does not, in any way, give them increased credibility with me when it comes to telling me my gear is inferior and therefore, by implication, that their photos are superior to my by dint of having better gear.

Or, to put it another way: I for one am not impressed by someone who posts nothing but average looking birthday party and cat photos with their D800 (as I have scene on the Nikon forum) telling me of the superiority of his camera over my E520 or the E5.

It cuts both ways. I don't put much stock in the opinion of an Olympus user who talks about how superior his SHG glass is to Canon or Nikon lenses, yet I don't see any photos in his gallery that show me two things. First, photos that do objectively demonstrate the claimed superiority. Second, photos which demonstrate expertise on the part of the photographer that makes that superiority apparent in his own photographs. Both of these are inter-related of course. You can't prove the superiority of your preferred gear if you don't have the expertise to get maximum results from it.

All this is my point in agreeing with the OP: "obsolete" Olympus cameras (as well as Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax etc) can and are used to good effect every day. From what I have seen here, most of the people claiming otherwise have never gotten the most out of the gear they own anyway. It's kind of like 2 people sitting in the Sahara talking about who has the best rain coat. They each may have a valid point, and certainly have the right to speak, but the folks from monsoon territory are right if they don't take them too seriously.

-- hide signature --

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow