[alt-photo] Re: new digital sensor

[Diana Bloomfield]

Hi Ryuji,

If you read my post in its entirety, you would see I stated that I  
don't actually use my Canon 5D much, except for "paid jobs" (ie,  
commercial).  And for that purpose, along with an excellent lens, it  
works perfectly well for me.  So, yes, I do realize that (some) 5D  
owners are commercial photographers-- though, admittedly I don't know  
many "hobbyists" who own one.  Most "hobbyists" I know seem to own one  
of the Canon Rebels, which I think are also perfectly fine cameras.    
Perhaps your definitions of "hobbyist"  and "commercial" differ from  
mine.

As stated before-- I mostly don't use a digital camera for my own work  
(fine art)-- not because it isn't a good camera, but I just don't like  
the (similar to) 35mm format.  I never have. I also don't like what I  
see in the comparatively "flat" look of a straight digital print--  
though that can be avoided by making an alt process print from the  
scans, I think.  Instead,  I typically use homemade pinhole cameras,  
the Mamiya 6 (agree with you about that), and I'm also very fond of a  
few other cameras I own, too, none of which is digital.

If I was a full-time commercial photographer (emphasis on full-time),  
making truly serious big bucks, I would certainly own a digital  
camera-- no doubt about it-- but it most likely would not be a Canon.   
In the commercial world I like to envision for myself, I would hope to  
make enough money to be able to afford a much more top-of-the-line/ 
state-of-the-art digital camera.  I'm thinking most big-time  
commercial photographers (that I know) would agree.  The few I do know  
who make that kind of money certainly do not own the Canon 5D-- nor  
even the upgrade at an extra $100/month.   And, yep, $100/month is  
more than I would spend for that.  I can think of a lot of other  
things to do with $100/month than do that, so-- yeah-- it's too much  
for me.

Diana
On Mar 24, 2010, at 3:34 AM, Ryuji Suzuki wrote:

> From: Diana Bloomfield <dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net>
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: new digital sensor
> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:35:58 -0400
>
>> My Canon 5D works perfectly well for me, but they keep
>> coming out with something newer and better, with more pixels
>> and more bells and whistles-- and so-- we're either
>> convinced we have to buy it (whatever it is), through clever
>> marketing, or we really do have to move on, because it will
>> be made difficult for us to continue with what works
>> perfectly well for us, that we may already own.
>
> If you are talking abotu 5D mkII, that isn't much better than
> 5D. Still poor AF performance in dim lighting. MkII has a
> better sensor and LCD, but not that important for fine art
> work. I think you might want to realize that majority of 5D
> owners are commercial photogs and hobbists... who would
> benefit from that kind of improvements. A $2400 camera with 2
> year lifespan = $100/mo. Is such improvements worth $100/mo?
> This is a no brainer to most commercial photogs.
>
> But if I were to shoot street photography, or some art
> project, I much prefer rangefinder of Mamiya 6 over AF of 5D
> or 5DmkII.
>
> In terms of technological advancement, the new metering sensor
> in 7D is noteworthy. This camera uses a matrix of light meter
> sensors that recognize color, and coupled with the AF
> points. If you try that camera, you know, the exposure is
> accurate enough (if used for negative films) to forget about
> spot metering and manual exposure compensation! I want someone
> to make a 6x6 rangefinder with that metering system!
> (But of course, that won't happen.)
>
> Let me make one prediction, after seeing a bit about
> silver-based photo industry from inside. If silver based
> photographic supplies become unavailable for some reason, the
> main problem is the distribution system that can work
> effectively for the niche market. Most big players are set up
> for the market when it was big, and they are reluctant to
> spend any more effort. They are just letting the inertia to
> work and watching it to wear out. Small players, who started
> with enthusiasm but without solid business plans nor creative
> marketing ideas (how can they get smart people to work for
> them if they don't generate enough profit??), aren't going to
> survive much longer, because they are not generating enough
> profit to survive. Familiar brands may go away, but some film
> will continue to be manufacturable somewhere for a price. The
> question is whether there will be a good distribution to
> consolidate small markets to a sizable unit to make the
> production feasible. I think one important point is whether
> used equipment dealers will handle film products (doubtful),
> or whether there will be a user community based mechanism to
> replace existing ineffective distribution-retail
> mechanisms. Let's see how it goes in the next few years.
>
> --
> Ryuji Suzuki
> "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis)
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo