OP
Kisaha
•
Senior Member
•
Posts: 2,300
Re: a6500 weights 453 g...
1
markyboy81 wrote:
Kisaha wrote:
flip 21 wrote:
Ok, so what is your alternative? Now that Samsung is dead, or isn't it?
Well, I tell you:
GH5 or the A6500... those are your best alternatives... a great camera but more expensive and with a smaller sensor against a cheap camera with a larger sensor, but that overheats...
Max Yuryev use to shoot with Samsung NX1, and now he uses the Sony A6300. Was he great when used the NX1, and now stupid, because he uses the A6300? I really don't understand you people
From Ken Rockwell,
"Online Expert: Level 0 top
(these guys don't take pictures so they aren't a level of photographer.)
This level never existed before the Internet, because cameras were never as exciting as sports cars or missiles for men to research.
This became terrifyingly apparent one day when I got an email from someone who didn't think an example I posted of a sharp lens was sharp. I was confused, since it was exceptionally sharp, which is why I posted it. When I asked this reader "not sharp compared to what?," he replied that it "wasn't as sharp as a different example of a different lens" he saw posted on some other website.
Holy Cow! This was a guy who doesn't even own a camera! He spends his time researching them and spreading his irrelevant opinions all over the Internet!
The Internet is ablaze with these guys. Forums and chat rooms are loaded with them. Photographers don't have the time for forums. We have more photography to do than time to do it. See The Two Kinds of Photographers.
Photography was never cool enough before digital to attract men's attention for no particular reason. Personally, the muzzle velocity of a Barrett 50-calibre sniper rifle is far more interesting to me than the MTF of a digital camera I'll never use. If I worked in an office and could waste my employer's time researching personal hobbies on the Internet, I'd rather look at pornography than research other people's cameras.
This level has existed in the automotive marketspace forever, with young boys learning every possible performance specification of Corvettes and Ferraris. We boys start this more than 10 years before we can get a driver's license, much less be able to buy our own Ferraris.
Boys love to learn about cars, guns, motorcycles and anything technical. I know I sure do. We men never grow out of wanting to know everything about everything, and telling you so.
Just because any car nut can tell you every possible performance specification of a Ferrari doesn't mean he can drive, much less compete, much less in Formula One, and much less win at it. Most of these people live in places where they've never even seen a Ferrari, much less ever owned one themselves.
Today with digital photography, we now have the same lookie-loos researching digital camera specs just for the bizarre fun of it. Ignore them. They love to talk and research, but aren't photographers."
Haha interesting article about two types of photographer. I do find it ironic that Ken is writing about this as opposed to taking photos, which I guess was his point, but he does accept this and apparently has a lot to show for it.
I can happily accept that the equipment I have is far more advanced than I can make use of. That's to say that (hopefully) my photography can improve a lot more before I can honestly say that I would be able to benefit from something more advanced. Although.. On the other hand is the argument that the more advanced the equipment, the less skill you need to get good results..
My experience and my education is making me pretty confident to declare that equipment has little to do with how good an artist, or a maker is.
It always is best to have the best tools, but if you don't, it isn't the end of the world.
When we had dictatorship, a lot of artists (the artists are always dangerous..) were exiled in tiny labor camps in abandoned islands with little, to no, food and brake rocks and been tortured every day. The art they produced from whatever they could find (small pieces of wood, rocks, a pencil, their prison's walls) it is just stunning.
I know young people here, that rent Red cameras to cover beach parties. The whole situation is laughable. Once I saw a very successful video group that covers events (mainly djs, parties, and the such, mostly mainstream stuff) that had Ronin, one C300 and 2 C100 cameras, GoPros, whatever, everything, and I saw a very well educated and talented guy, more my age, that I know he is doing documentaries and the such, and he was covering the event alone for another sponsor, and he had a GH4 and 2 lenses with him, and I am pretty sure he did a better work.
