Erez Marom

DPReview Contributor
Lives in Israel Israel
Has a website at www.erezmarom.com
Joined on Sep 5, 2010

Comments

Total: 295, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Ray12666: What ever happened to having a camera (film or digital) that did nothing but allow us to set aperature, speed and ISO, in other words why do we need so many bells and whistles on our digital cameras? I like to shoot mostly Aperature preferred, set my own ISO, my own focus area and just shoot, I don't even own adobe photoshop or lightroom, who needs it? Is it me or are we just forgetting that the job and pleasure is to compose the photo and get the right exposure without all the bells and post processing? BTW, I did like the new canon wide angle and the pictures were marvelous. OK, don't hit me too hard and I know I cannot spell aperature. I am using an Olympus OMD EM-1 with a 12-40 pro lens, am considering if I need a prime, albeit most of my shoots are during travel.

'LOL' - I guess that sums it up nicely.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2017 at 13:25 UTC
In reply to:

stratplaya: This is more a study of good post production work, rather than the lens.

What makes you think I'm worried? I just dislike it when people respond like robots without thinking.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2017 at 11:04 UTC
In reply to:

Ray12666: What ever happened to having a camera (film or digital) that did nothing but allow us to set aperature, speed and ISO, in other words why do we need so many bells and whistles on our digital cameras? I like to shoot mostly Aperature preferred, set my own ISO, my own focus area and just shoot, I don't even own adobe photoshop or lightroom, who needs it? Is it me or are we just forgetting that the job and pleasure is to compose the photo and get the right exposure without all the bells and post processing? BTW, I did like the new canon wide angle and the pictures were marvelous. OK, don't hit me too hard and I know I cannot spell aperature. I am using an Olympus OMD EM-1 with a 12-40 pro lens, am considering if I need a prime, albeit most of my shoots are during travel.

I find it quite offensive both that you'd say I'm working to a commercial agenda, and that these are 'generic' landscapes. I don't find them generic at all, and for me, the story of the landscape portrayed in my work is every bit as important as 'documenting a particular aspect of a place'. There is so much more to this representation of nature than you'd like to see.
I do make money from photography but it doesn't make it less artistic- I only do what I consider worthwhile. If it does, I don't wish to associate myself with this 'art' world.
I shoot because I enjoy the landscapes and find them exciting. I have other occupational options (I'm a published scientist with a masters, Magna Cum Laude in engineering). I chose photography because it enables me to pursue my passion, travel and make art, not $.
Equipment is a tool to create beautiful imagery and so it makes sense to write an article about a piece of equipment that allowed me to expand the representation of my artistic abilities.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 15:43 UTC
In reply to:

Ray12666: What ever happened to having a camera (film or digital) that did nothing but allow us to set aperature, speed and ISO, in other words why do we need so many bells and whistles on our digital cameras? I like to shoot mostly Aperature preferred, set my own ISO, my own focus area and just shoot, I don't even own adobe photoshop or lightroom, who needs it? Is it me or are we just forgetting that the job and pleasure is to compose the photo and get the right exposure without all the bells and post processing? BTW, I did like the new canon wide angle and the pictures were marvelous. OK, don't hit me too hard and I know I cannot spell aperature. I am using an Olympus OMD EM-1 with a 12-40 pro lens, am considering if I need a prime, albeit most of my shoots are during travel.

How is technology the end in these images? That doesn't even make sense.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 11:13 UTC
In reply to:

stratplaya: This is more a study of good post production work, rather than the lens.

Do you really think these images are all about post production? Composition doesn't count? How processed do you think the images are?

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 11:12 UTC
In reply to:

ithehappy: If someone provides me full res link to them aurora images I would ask God to flourish him/her with happiness.

If you need to use them commercially I'd be happy to license them to you. God will then shine his light upon you, guaranteed ;)

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 08:58 UTC
In reply to:

uzman1243: Erez, in that sand patterns image, why "Stacked from 4 images at 11mm?" NR?

Focus stacking.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 12:12 UTC
In reply to:

NicoPPC: @Erez Marom.
Great article.
Considering the Sigma equivalent (12-24) is really cheaper. Would the missing 1mm being an issue for you work?

Indeed, with the 1300€ difference, one could travel ☺.

Regards

Hi Nico,
I thought about the Sigma but both the 1mm difference (a lot in this range) and the quality issue convinced me to get the Canon.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 08:57 UTC
In reply to:

digilux: Hmmm, how about stitching a 24 or even 35mm?

I discuss this in the article. Sometimes possible, sometimes not. Mostly less comfortable.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 14:13 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel L: Great Stuff! Thanks for putting your thoughts and reviews on the monster wide zoom.

Questions on the filters.
Do you have experiences in using Fotodiox WonderPana 186mm and free arc system for 11-24? The system has option for setup down rings so one could use the same filter set for 24-70 or 16-35 if needed. It's always a good option not to carry two set of filter system while traveling right?

Would you consider doing a Nisi vs the Fotodiox for 11-24? I think the filters option for 11-24 a hot topic and there's not many reviews out there.

Thanks Daniel.
I don't have any experience with the WonderPana. In fact, I had no idea it existed until you mentioned it. I wasn't planning on using filters with the 11-24mm until Nisi contacted me with the endorsement offer just in time for my Arctic trip. In retrospect, I'm very lucky to have accepted and used the filters, they helped me a lot.
In any case, I'm not sure I'm the right person to do a comparison. As I've written above, I'm not a gear head and there are more qualified people to do it. I hope they do!

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 14:11 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: Nice article. Good to know some actual and practical use of this monster lens in the field, as well as the problem with filters.
I use my 16-35mm L quite a bit, and it has always come to the rescue in tight places. The ability to use 77mm filters on it is very convenient.

A question on the 1st image. It looks blue on my monitor (which is a 24", hi-res Samsung).
Is this the actual color of the cave, or is it "toned" to your liking?

Andy answered perfectly.
BTW, this ice cave was a further one - we had to hike for about 45 minutes, some of them on a glacier, but we had the cave to ourselves for about 6 hours :)

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 14:08 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: This is a tremendous and beautiful lens that I rented for some expeditions, and my conclusion is that while it captures a huge vista marvelously with very straight lines, it cannot convey "size." A huge cave that extends beyond a 24mm lens' edges suddenly can fit within the entire frame, and then some. That means the grand cavern appeared smaller than it was. The best I can describe this condition is that looking at a picture of the Eiffel Tower doesn't prepare you for the sheer scale of it in person. To demonstrate size, I actually prefer slightly longer lenses.

The point in the article is that this lens can do things that would be impossible with, for example, a 24mm. It doesn't replace it, just supplements it.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 10:58 UTC
In reply to:

biza43: Thanks for the article, liked the photos very much. I just wonder how you will feel in a few months about the lens, once the novelty wears off:)

That remains to be seen, but I predict I'll still use it a lot for the same exact reasons.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 10:54 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: This article seems very contrived to me. It may sometimes make sense that the artist has a concept in mind when he creates a work but to expect the viewer to appreciate or even look out for it is ridiculous.

For example, that picture of the sun, reflected on the walls of this ice cave above. This image does not tell the story of the glacial melting, and if the inclusion of the cause and its effect influences the picture's visual appeal, it does so because of the visual effect, no more no less.

What arrant nonsense. There is no story, it is just a picture of ice melting.

@Cerebral Knievel how do you know I took hundreds of shots of the same subject? Do you know me or my methods? Did you shoot with me there? I struggle to understand why you'd assume so much (and wrongly so) without any knowledge.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 13:44 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: His compositions are interesting but the photos have more processing than supermarket cheese.

@quietrich: since when is combining several exposures for higher dynamic range and realism considered over-processing? Do you think the image looks unnatural? Is it over saturated? too contrasty? unrealistic in any way?

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 13:40 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: His compositions are interesting but the photos have more processing than supermarket cheese.

@snapperista yes it is. You can see how I took and processed the shot here:
https://www.erezmarom.com/index.php/blog/view/article-behind-the-shot-nautilus

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 11:30 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): You see "imagined causality" used in street photography a lot.

Indeed. Same ideas can be implemented in many fields - and that's a beautiful thing.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 11:08 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom K.: "The quiver trees are thereby humanized, and the anthropomorphism makes the viewer identify and feel a deeper emotional connection to the trees...."

You shouldn't anthropomorphize inanimate objects - they don't like it.

:)))

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 11:02 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: His compositions are interesting but the photos have more processing than supermarket cheese.

@Iloveaircraftnoise do you honestly think my images are over processed? I don't process that much at all, and the processing I do is usually in order to make the image look more natural. Have you had a chance to look at other landscape photographers today and their post processing? I think you'll suffer a stroke if you think my images are over processed.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 11:01 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

SigmaChrome: I have so much trouble reading the explanatory text in this article because the pictures tell their own story, using their own language. Providing a deconstruction for each photo is like trying to explain language itself - kinda futile. But, hey, thanks for trying.

"The quiver trees are thereby humanized, and the anthropomorphism makes the viewer identify and feel a deeper emotional connection to the trees and to the image as a whole, which is turn achieves our goal as photographers: having the viewer look at the image a bit more carefully, and take meaning from it."

The quiver trees will NEVER be "humanized" for me. My brain simply doesn't work that way. I already see myself as a part of nature. Imposing your rules for interpreting an image on me just makes me want to fight back.

No one is trying to impose their rules on you. I only explained my way of interpreting my own images. If you want to see them in another way, be my guest. I hope you enjoy them none the less.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 13:20 UTC
Total: 295, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »