Interesting article posted by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

Started Mar 4, 2014 | Discussions
Chas2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,577
Re: Great article. Thanks!

I know he is a big Sony fan, and surprised he bought the EM1!

 Chas2's gear list:Chas2's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +12 more
rickreyn
rickreyn Senior Member • Posts: 1,537
Re: Interesting article posted by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

I like the observation that most upgrade their cameras before even learning what all the buttons will do. That's me, until the E-M1. This camera has forced me to learn how it's operated, an as such, I am now using general digital camera--any camera for that matter--basic functions, except white balance. Since they went to the trouble of creating settings with pictures, I prefer them. Anyway, great justification to be happy with what you've got in your hand, and tranferring the G.A.S. energy into taking good crisp well-composed shots, like this one, that I don't plan to print...Facebook here we come!:-D

-- hide signature --
 rickreyn's gear list:rickreyn's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Olympus E-M1 II Olympus 12-100mm F4.0 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +2 more
Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell Forum Pro • Posts: 11,090
Re: It's not true
2

sigala1 wrote:

DaveLemi wrote:

This is well thought out and delves into what is sufficient-

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

Kirk's site-

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/03/important-announcement-from-ceo-of.html

He makes fun of the supposed need or desire to be able to shoot available light photographs, but photographers were doing that with f/1.4 lenses and fast (albeit grainy) film decades before the introduction of digital cameras.

Yet when I first got an E-PM1 withi the kit lens, it was NOT good enough to take an available light photo in regular incandescent lighting. Uprgrading to an E-M5 and the Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 lens opened up a whole new world of photography.

I think you've misread his comments about available light shooting. He's noting that the new ability to shoot at ISO 3200 and higher has led some photographers to accept ugly available light rather than do the extra work of providing attractive light.

As a conference & meetings shooter, I do enjoy the ability to shoot without flash sometimes, in rooms where the light is diffuse and not directly overhead. But, at other times, I go back to using flash. Not because there isn't enough light, but because it's just godawful ugly.

-- hide signature --

jacquescornell.com

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +39 more
jhinkey
jhinkey Senior Member • Posts: 2,813
Re: His attitude sucks.....
2

Cheezr wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

DaveLemi wrote:

This is well thought out and delves into what is sufficient-

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

Kirk's site-

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/03/important-announcement-from-ceo-of.html

Quote (re M4/3) " And while the adaptation rate in the U.S. (lower education standards than most of the rest of the world) has been slow many parts of the world are snapping them up and eroding market share of the conventional mirrored digital cameras."

I'm an Aussie (most intelligent species in the world!) and even I'm offended by his attitude.

Regards.... Guy

I am an American, and regrettably he is correct, IMO.

Though his statement about the sub-par education standards in this country is indeed true, it has no correlation with or relation to the lack of adoption of m43 cameras.  Stupid statement indeed.

 jhinkey's gear list:jhinkey's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Panasonic LX100 Nikon D800 Sony a7R II Sony a7R III +27 more
maljo@inreach.com Veteran Member • Posts: 7,663
Good enough is good enough.

I can agree with that.

maljo

 maljo@inreach.com's gear list:maljo@inreach.com's gear list
Nikon D850 Olympus E-M1 Nikon D500
Bob Tullis
Bob Tullis Forum Pro • Posts: 37,262
In other words. . .
4

Ask NOT what your camera can do for you.   Rather ask what YOU can do with your camera!

No?    

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-T2
Bluephotons Veteran Member • Posts: 6,720
Kirk Tuck, Ken Rockwell, Kiko Sotello...
2

I Don't know who they are and don't care to Goggle, some time ago there were rumors about shills among the posters here, now we also have groupies? 

-- hide signature --

Bluephotons
Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

 Bluephotons's gear list:Bluephotons's gear list
Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +5 more
Jack Hass Regular Member • Posts: 392
Re: f2.8 zooms

Bhima78 wrote:

Jacques Cornell wrote:

One of the big attractions of m43 for me was the availability of f2.8 zooms for about 1/3 the cost of FF equivalents. In my book, that's better value for money.

Hrmm... I'm not seeing that. My DSLR 2.8 Sigma standard zoom (17-50) with OIS was only $500. There is nothing in the m43 line that has those specs for anywhere near that price. Well, unless you plan to buy a fuji x-e1 (only $800 WITH that stellar 2.8-4 lens).

I'm personally waiting for companies like sigma to start shaking things up in this space to get more lens competition going. Though with my luck they'll probably make an APS-C sized Foveon mirrorless interchangeable camera.

I think you overestimate sigma, even fuji, and underestimate MFT. I think it was also in reference to lenses like the Canon 70-200 F2.8LII, which runs about $2500. The Panasonic 35-100 has the same F stop, same FL, and believe it or not is very close in IQ. PZ tested both of these lenses, and the figures are as follows: The peak for the Canon was 3469/3147/3183 @F5.6, while the Panny was 2909/2572/2569 @F4. This is pretty close considering the Canon zoom was tested on a camera with 5mp more resolution.

When you look at this comparison, then you consider the price is $2500 vs $1275 (literally half), i have to agree with Jacques about the value.

-- hide signature --

May Satan forever guide you.

Jack Hass Regular Member • Posts: 392
Re: Kirk Tuck, Ken Rockwell, Kiko Sotello...

Bluephotons wrote:

I Don't know who they are and don't care to Goggle, some time ago there were rumors about shills among the posters here, now we also have groupies?

I keep hearing about shills too, in fact i have been one several dozen times. Apparently...

-- hide signature --

May Satan forever guide you.

nkbj
nkbj Regular Member • Posts: 254
Re: In other words. . .

Bob Tullis wrote:

Ask NOT what your camera can do for you. Rather ask what YOU can do with your camera!

Hi Bob. You also read the latest blog posting by Robin Wong?

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Niels Kristian Bech Jensen

 nkbj's gear list:nkbj's gear list
Sony RX10 III Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Nikon D300 Nikon D7500 +7 more
Bluephotons Veteran Member • Posts: 6,720
Re: Kirk Tuck, Ken Rockwell, Kiko Sotello...

Don't feel bad about it, in any fan-boy there is a shill waiting to be hired, the immoral thing is to do it for free 

-- hide signature --

Bluephotons
Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

 Bluephotons's gear list:Bluephotons's gear list
Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +5 more
coolcatdaddy Regular Member • Posts: 165
Re: Interesting article linked by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

NCV wrote:

Thanks for an interesting read.

agree. 1. thanks. 2. interesting.

Corkcampbell
Corkcampbell Forum Pro • Posts: 18,528
Really nice, contemplative critter. Good shot. (nt)

no text

-- hide signature --

"Knowledge is good." Emil Faber

 Corkcampbell's gear list:Corkcampbell's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony RX100 III Leica C-Lux Sony RX10 III +8 more
amalric
amalric Forum Pro • Posts: 10,839
Sucks?..... Who sucks really? :)
2

jhinkey wrote:

Cheezr wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

DaveLemi wrote:

This is well thought out and delves into what is sufficient-

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

Kirk's site-

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/03/important-announcement-from-ceo-of.html

Quote (re M4/3) " And while the adaptation rate in the U.S. (lower education standards than most of the rest of the world) has been slow many parts of the world are snapping them up and eroding market share of the conventional mirrored digital cameras."

I'm an Aussie (most intelligent species in the world!) and even I'm offended by his attitude.

Regards.... Guy

I am an American, and regrettably he is correct, IMO.

Though his statement about the sub-par education standards in this country is indeed true, it has no correlation with or relation to the lack of adoption of m43 cameras. Stupid statement indeed.

It might be an oversimplification in the sense that you only need to read this forum to understand how low the education standards and the cultural interest in photography are.

This is nothing new and is true of other countries. In Asia they were quicker to grasp the true advantages of mirrorless, which are WYSIWYG for composition AND small size.

How many in this forum understand the advantage for composition in their grabbing frenzy?

Do they even have any notion of composition and perspective left in their bokeh blindness? (Stuff which became oudated even a century ago)

Many enlightened bloggers share Kirk's opinion because the gear inflation is killing photography learning, simpler gear being better to experiment with the basics.

This is so evident that aspiring Pros in 2012, according to Petapixel, for the first time spent more money on courses than in gear.

Commercial photography has devoured all nonetheless, and Photoshop run wild, ruining many if not all genres.

Isn't it the effect of v. low education standards and unchecked consumerism?

So it is down to a few individuals to try to keep the standards high. And to do this you must use the leash sometimes.

Am.

Eric Nepean
Eric Nepean Veteran Member • Posts: 4,176
Re: Interesting article posted by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

Going through my old slide collection -  noticeable how much better my digital photographs are.

Focussing generally was worse - some sharp but many just a little off -  manual focus!  And slides do bend and warp.

Found a few photos which I considered dark and unrecoverable at that time -  with digital techniques I recovered amazing pictures of my mother.  The number of dark blurred images was not surprising -  my favorite film was Kodachrome 64. One ISO. Take it or decide to laod your camera with a ROLL of something faster and lower IQ.

ISO 1000 in color -  how do you do that!? Special order some high speed film, or push Ektachrome - results weren't that great.

-- hide signature --

Eric

TN Args
TN Args Veteran Member • Posts: 7,866
Re: Pretty sure that's just Kirk's sense of humor ;)

Jack Hass wrote:

As long as you are calling me smart i agree

Given your username, I wouldn't dream of calling you smart, jackhass.

-- hide signature --

call me Arg

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Sigma dp0 Quattro Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +7 more
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 42,852
In other words...
2

yanisha wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

Quote (re M4/3) " And while the adaptation rate in the U.S. (lower education standards than most of the rest of the world) has been slow many parts of the world are snapping them up and eroding market share of the conventional mirrored digital cameras."

I'm an Aussie (most intelligent species in the world!) and even I'm offended by his attitude.

Guy, I am Canadian and I am also offended by his attitude. He has a right to his opinion and it does seem to be fashionable in the U.S. these days for those who want to appear hip to make deprecating comments about their country. This article gives a different take on it though:

http://techcrunch.com/2013/12/03/why-its-never-mattered-that-americas-schools-lag-behind-other-countries-2013-edition/

The United States has never ranked at the top of international education tests, since we began comparing countries in 1964, yet has been the dominant economic and innovative force in the world the entire time. Despite this fact, a popular annual education report has once again stoked fears of America's impending economic mediocrity with fresh stats on how far the U.S. “lags” behind the world in college attainment, pre-school enrollment, and high school graduation.

The reason for the apparent disconnect is because schools don't prepare students for the real world, so broad educational attainment will have a weak correlation with economic power. Research has consistently shown that on nearly every measure of education (instructional hours, class-size, enrollment, college preparation), what students learn in school does not translate into later life success. The United States has an abundance of the factors that likely do matter: access to the best immigrants, economic opportunity, and the best research facilities.

...it's the hard working immigrants seeking economic opportunity, many of whom dominate the best research facilities, that make America the economic powerhouse that it is.  Seems like the natives are just holding the immigrants back.

javayoda Regular Member • Posts: 371
Re: In other words...
2

Great Bustard wrote:

...it's the hard working immigrants seeking economic opportunity, many of whom dominate the best research facilities, that make America the economic powerhouse that it is. Seems like the natives are just holding the immigrants back.

I take it by "natives" you actually mean the descendants of other immigrants.

-- hide signature --
TN Args
TN Args Veteran Member • Posts: 7,866
Re: No idea what it is

jhinkey wrote:

I have a D800 and a GX7, GH2 and G5 . . . and they live happily next to each other  . .

I see many like me that have both systems and know their respective strengths and weaknesses and don't get wrapped up in sensor size-based dogma.

If you weren't wrapped up in sensor size dogma, you would ditch the D800! 

-- hide signature --

call me Arg

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Sigma dp0 Quattro Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +7 more
Chrisada Regular Member • Posts: 210
Re: Interesting article posted by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

This is well thought out and delves into what is sufficient-

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

Kirk's site-

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/03/important-announcement-from-ceo-of.html

We don't need new cameras.

Lenses, on the other hand...

 Chrisada's gear list:Chrisada's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads