Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Photography General Interest

Photography General Interest Neat Photo stuff NOT particularly about Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

you don't need a big sensor
Old 11-30-2016   #1
marcr1230
Registered User
 
marcr1230's Avatar
 
marcr1230 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,369
you don't need a big sensor

here's a nice image that made the finals of a natgeo contest

I like the image and how it is flipped to make it dream-like

http://petapixel.com/2016/11/30/stud...o-competition/
__________________
Too many cameras, too little time
Gallery: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg....php?uid=25736
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #2
Fjäll
Registered User
 
Fjäll's Avatar
 
Fjäll is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Age: 29
Posts: 264
Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography. There are a lot of photographers that only shoot with their smartphones. There are no settings nor choices of focal lengths, all in absence of optical formulas and fancy features. Just image making. No distractions and only focus on the photograph.

Smartphones are not comparable to what high end digital cameras are capable of doing today, but they are more than good enough for most situations. We all know we can overcome the limitations of image capturing devices. (Any vintage rangefinder shooters?)

I doubt this kid would improve given he would have better gear.

Dan Tom knows his equipments limitations (iPhone). A moment ago on Instagram:
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #3
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjäll View Post
Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography.
Total nonsense, sorry.

That's not to say pretty pictures cannot be taken with a iPhone. But it's like a harmonica: plays just one key.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #4
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,333
That's what she said
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #5
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,511
As always the important specification is the skill behind the camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #6
Axel
Registered User
 
Axel's Avatar
 
Axel is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Germany, north
Posts: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjäll View Post
Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography...
+1

I totally agree and would like to add that the artistic impression in photography doesn´t depend from any kind of camera the picture is taken with.
__________________
my photos here
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #7
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
Total nonsense, sorry.

That's not to say pretty pictures cannot be taken with a iPhone. But it's like a harmonica: plays just one key.
But it's how you coax the notes out that makes it wonderful to listen to.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #8
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 62
Posts: 19,391
It's not the machine, it's the operator.

A talented photographer can make better images with modest gear, than a hack can with the best, most expensive gear. Gear only affects the technical quality, not the aesthetic quality. I thought we all knew that.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #9
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,649
Unless you're deliberately trying to work with depth of field without having to involve software manipulation.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #10
CK Dexter Haven
Registered User
 
CK Dexter Haven is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,444
This only shows you don't need a large sensor to take THIS particular picture.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #11
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is online now
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,586
IPhone is great for shots like this, HDR mode. Or was this NG contest sponsored by HUAWEI?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #12
Lss
Registered User
 
Lss is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,801
No, I need a big sensor.
__________________
Lasse
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #13
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS View Post
It's not the machine, it's the operator.
Tell that to a solider. It's both. As it has been since the dawn of technology.

Please list the great photographers of the film era who shot exclusively with cheap sub-standard gear?

It's such a line of BS which HCB and many others would take: oh, it is not important, the camera the lens. Then you learn they were in fact quite picky and used excellent gear. More keepers LOL

Oh, you know if your eye is good, you are a true artist, you need nothing past a instamatic, or a pencil and paper. In fact just your finger and some sand. Might be hard to make a living , though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lss View Post
No, I need a big sensor.
I'm sure you have a huge one
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #14
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
Total nonsense, sorry.

That's not to say pretty pictures cannot be taken with a iPhone. But it's like a harmonica: plays just one key.
I suspect many great photographers have made their way with one key... well maybe two.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-H1; X-Pro1; XF10; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #15
DanskDynamit
Registered User
 
DanskDynamit's Avatar
 
DanskDynamit is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjäll View Post
Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography.
+1
The day that changes, I quit.
__________________
DanskDynamit
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #16
rfaspen
Registered User
 
rfaspen's Avatar
 
rfaspen is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 1,690
This again? Need adequate tool to make the image the photographer "sees". Period. Sometimes that means rather nice stuff, sometimes not. Then there's the need to make more than one image. Sometimes that means rather nice (reliable, robust) stuff, sometimes not. Then, sometimes there's the demands of the "client" that sometimes means rather nice stuff, sometimes not. Get the picture?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #17
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcr1230 View Post
here's a nice image that made the finals of a natgeo contest

I like the image and how it is flipped to make it dream-like

http://petapixel.com/2016/11/30/stud...o-competition/
That is such a sweet picture.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #18
LukasB
Registered User
 
LukasB is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 50
I do understand both sides of the argument, and on a forum we do enjoy a good argument...

On one hand, yes - any good Photographer will be able to make great, compelling or evocative images with anything. But on the other, a Great Photographer will have more available to them with a Camera overflowing with Bells & Whistles. Though perhaps they may be nothing but a distraction.

There is no 'correct' answer, only good Photography. Which is then subjective.

Can you spell 'a-r-g-u-m-e-n-t'?
__________________
M2, what else?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #19
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by CK Dexter Haven View Post
This only shows you don't need a large sensor to take THIS particular picture.
Exactly. For that matter, "need" is generally a worthless concept in photography. I do however like the full-frame 16 megapixel sensor on my Nikon Df because the low pixel density (by modern standards) allows silly-high ISO with good image quality. Do I "need" it? Of course not. Do I find it useful? Very much so.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #20
silverbullet
Registered User
 
silverbullet's Avatar
 
silverbullet is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 248
In the beginning of the 35mm photography, Oskar Barnack got the same arguments from large-format shooters against his 'small-negative-format' Leica. No wood body, no huge brass lens and no ground plate - it must be a toy..... ;-)It's nearly the same with today's discussion of m4/3 versus full format.

Last edited by silverbullet : 12-01-2016 at 03:49. Reason: xxxxx
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #21
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,558
Does the camera make the photograph or do your eyes?
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #22
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Clark View Post
Does the camera make the photograph or do your eyes?
Dear Bill,

Well, it's a bugger trying to make a photograph with only your eyes and no camera. The answer, therefore, has to be "both".

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #23
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,558
Hi Roger,

But I can form images in my head without a camera.

And I can even, when I want to, bring them up and view again.

Perhaps, someday, be able to view them on an electronic device.
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #24
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Clark View Post
Hi Roger,

But I can form images in my head without a camera.

And I can even, when I want to, bring them up and view again.

Perhaps, someday, be able to view them on an electronic device.
Dear Bill,

True, but you did say "photograph", not "memory". Also, rather than wait for "someday", I prefer to rely on my camera.

Makes it a lot easier to illustrate books and articles, too.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #25
daveleo
what?
 
daveleo's Avatar
 
daveleo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: People's Republic of Mass.
Posts: 3,686
"need" .... the start of so many convoluted discussions.
__________________
Dave

  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #26
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,534
Making good pictures doesn't require most of the crap we use. We just like "stuff" and we're good at justification.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #27
Fjäll
Registered User
 
Fjäll's Avatar
 
Fjäll is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Age: 29
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
Total nonsense, sorry.

That's not to say pretty pictures cannot be taken with a iPhone. But it's like a harmonica: plays just one key.
It's all about the possibilities in the limitations.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E8H-67ILaqc
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #28
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,533
I need a reliable camera that takes sharp pics. Generally that means a major brand.

The bells & whistles are seldom used and a Leica M suits me fine. Nikons are used in M mode almost always, in fact I can not remember turning it off M.

But to stay on topic, sheet film is better than 35 mm, but harder to carry. 36 mp Nikon with adapted Leica lenses is is digital perfection for me. For better I would need to sell assets.

Can you just imagine a wedding photog showing up with a cell phone ?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #29
LukasB
Registered User
 
LukasB is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleo View Post
"need" .... the start of so many convoluted discussions.
Plus one.

+1
__________________
M2, what else?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #30
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjäll View Post
Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography. There are a lot of photographers that only shoot with their smartphones. There are no settings nor choices of focal lengths, all in absence of optical formulas and fancy features. Just image making. No distractions and only focus on the photograph.

Agree 100%
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #31
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,058
Personal preferences passed off as fact... can you make a great photo with low end gear? Sure. Is there something wrong with wanting more? No.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #32
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjäll View Post
It's all about the possibilities in the limitations.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E8H-67ILaqc

On one of his master classes Gueorgui Pinkhassov said "the less means I have the more creative I get".
For those, knowing all the variations of summicron's bokeh but not familiar with who Pinkhassov is- here is the link.
https://pavelkosenko.wordpress.com/2...ui-pinkhassov/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #33
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,238
If you like image quality then a big sensor is an asset. Most people do not print, and their images are just posted and viewed on computer screens, cell phones or IPADS.

Even if you print, unless you are printing big/large the technology is so good that a larger sensor might not be exploited.

Interesting to note that by judging the responses that IQ is not highly rated or regarded. Not important to many...

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #34
Axel
Registered User
 
Axel's Avatar
 
Axel is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Germany, north
Posts: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
If you like image quality then a big sensor is an asset. Most people do not print...
What means image quality and where is the connection to printing or not ?
__________________
my photos here
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #35
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 10,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axel100 View Post
What means image quality and where is the connection to printing or not ?
Viewing photos on a computer, cell phone or IPAD does not display good image quality when compared to a print. Even on my 27 EIZO, a calibrated monitor, I can print more information than I can see.

Anyways it seems that the prevailing culture is that IQ is not that important today, and in the past IQ it seems it was more important.

Anyways I find all of this very interesting. In the end has technology made people lazy? Has the proliferation of cameras actually lowered photographic standards? Is I.Q. important?

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #36
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,558
My wife and I will be with our family soon.

I'm thinking of getting this and using my iPad mini for my digital photos.

Example:

https://www.amazon.com/Adapter-Unive...ipod+ipad+mini

Pretty small sensor on iPad but works like a champ for me!

Of course, I will take an M4 as it will identify me as an old fart photographer from the 1960s!
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #37
nikonhswebmaster
reluctant moderator
 
nikonhswebmaster's Avatar
 
nikonhswebmaster is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post

Can you just imagine a wedding photog showing up with a cell phone ?
Who knows, it might take some of the "sappy" out of most of what I see.

I think my iPhone is the best camera I have ever owned for personal use, by a wide margin.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #38
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post

It's such a line of BS which HCB and many others would take: oh, it is not important, the camera the lens. Then you learn they were in fact quite picky and used excellent gear.
This is funny because it is true. So many famous photogs say that, but do not practice it! They instead use top end big $$ gear.

Anyway, I still like the pic in the original link.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #39
Axel
Registered User
 
Axel's Avatar
 
Axel is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Germany, north
Posts: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
... Is I.Q. important?

Cal
First we should have to define what "I.Q." ("Image Quality"?) means and how it can be measured.
There may be a lot of technical descriptions but without clear parameters this term is very senseless I think.
__________________
my photos here
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2016   #40
BLKRCAT
99% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,771
no replacement for displacement.
__________________
TumblrYoutube
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:31.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.