When I was young, we had "unleaded" and regular gasoline. At sometime "regular" just disappears and we had unleaded. Now, "regular" IS "unleaded" and leaded gas doesn't exist -- and if it did, it was be called "leaded", not "regular". As times have changed, our names have changed, too.
Digital SLRs became dSLRs and SLRs remained the same. Meanwhile, digital P&Ss just became P&Ss, not dP&Ss, without any troubled or problem distiguishing the cameras.
Now the dSLRs are the primary type of SLRs, I wonder when/if they will become SLRs and the "d" will be dropped. When that happens, do we called the old film cameras fSLRs?
So when/if do you think the name change will occur and dSLRs will just be SLRs? Or, do you think the mirror will disappear and they will become something like SLCs (single lens cameras)?
> When I was young, we had "unleaded" and regular gasoline. At sometime > "regular" just disappears and we had unleaded. Now, "regular" IS > "unleaded" and leaded gas doesn't exist -- and if it did, it was be > called "leaded", not "regular". As times have changed, our names have > changed, too.
> Digital SLRs became dSLRs and SLRs remained the same. Meanwhile, > digital P&Ss just became P&Ss, not dP&Ss, without any troubled or > problem distiguishing the cameras.
> Now the dSLRs are the primary type of SLRs, I wonder when/if they will > become SLRs and the "d" will be dropped. When that happens, do we > called the old film cameras fSLRs?
> So when/if do you think the name change will occur and dSLRs will just > be SLRs? Or, do you think the mirror will disappear and they will > become something like SLCs (single lens cameras)?
Good question. Dunno, but that "d" thing is a bit like cars and the stupid Ford Escort 1.6GLXi Ghia nonsense they spread all over the back. People, especially men, pay stupid money so they wank in peoples faces with a badge that costs a pound and puts 3000 on the price. Dumb, but there you go.
> When I was young, we had "unleaded" and regular gasoline. At sometime > "regular" just disappears and we had unleaded. Now, "regular" IS > "unleaded" and leaded gas doesn't exist -- and if it did, it was be > called "leaded", not "regular". As times have changed, our names have > changed, too.
When I was young, I worked at Sunoco gas station and we offered 5 blends. I kind of thought it was dumb, but many customers did not.
> Digital SLRs became dSLRs and SLRs remained the same. Meanwhile, > digital P&Ss just became P&Ss, not dP&Ss, without any troubled or > problem distiguishing the cameras.
> Now the dSLRs are the primary type of SLRs, I wonder when/if they will > become SLRs and the "d" will be dropped. When that happens, do we > called the old film cameras fSLRs?
To me, SLR already means the same thing as dSLR since I no longer see folks carrying and using 35mm film cameras. Also, the VAST majority of the discussions on the Internet about SLR cameras are about digital cameras. When I see someone carrying a medium or large format camera, I wonder if it might be digital? I often check out the art shows here and visit the booths of those who are selling their large print photos. They are mostly still using film and then scanning to convert to digital. How long will that last?
Film is not dead, but has been relegated to the background and is rapidly becoming history.
To be absolutely sure that one is communicating accurately, use dSLR when appropriate and use film SLR when that fits.
> When I was young, we had "unleaded" and regular gasoline. At sometime > "regular" just disappears and we had unleaded. Now, "regular" IS > "unleaded" and leaded gas doesn't exist -- and if it did, it was be > called "leaded", not "regular". As times have changed, our names have > changed, too.
> Digital SLRs became dSLRs and SLRs remained the same. Meanwhile, > digital P&Ss just became P&Ss, not dP&Ss, without any troubled or > problem distiguishing the cameras.
> Now the dSLRs are the primary type of SLRs, I wonder when/if they will > become SLRs and the "d" will be dropped. When that happens, do we > called the old film cameras fSLRs?
> So when/if do you think the name change will occur and dSLRs will just > be SLRs? Or, do you think the mirror will disappear and they will > become something like SLCs (single lens cameras)?
Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it "the point and shoot"
So for me “camera” defaults to the DSLR.
If I am talking about my film SLR I always state that it is a "film SLR" never just an SLR.
> Good question. Dunno, but that "d" thing is a bit like cars and the stupid > Ford Escort 1.6GLXi Ghia nonsense they spread all over the back. People, > especially men, pay stupid money so they wank in peoples faces with a > badge > that costs a pound and puts 3000 on the price. Dumb, but there you go.
Not long ago I drove my wife's Lexus into a gas station and proceeded to fill the tank at a self service pump. Some kid at the full service aisle, driving an old beat up Mercury, shouted "you drive a car like that and pump your own gas." I couldn't resist saying, "That's why I drive this car and you have that clunker." The kid just turned red and walked away.
>> Good question. Dunno, but that "d" thing is a bit like cars and the stupid >> Ford Escort 1.6GLXi Ghia nonsense they spread all over the back. People, >> especially men, pay stupid money so they wank in peoples faces with a >> badge >> that costs a pound and puts 3000 on the price. Dumb, but there you go.
>Not long ago I drove my wife's Lexus into a gas station and proceeded to >fill the tank at a self service pump. Some kid at the full service aisle, >driving an old beat up Mercury, shouted "you drive a car like that and pump >your own gas." I couldn't resist saying, "That's why I drive this car and >you have that clunker." The kid just turned red and walked away.
I'm guessing he actually just laughed.
-- Best regards, John
Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
Charles wrote: > "Pat" <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message > news:ebd8ae92-760f-4b16-9547-b7078638d597@18g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... >> When I was young, we had "unleaded" and regular gasoline. At sometime >> "regular" just disappears and we had unleaded. Now, "regular" IS >> "unleaded" and leaded gas doesn't exist -- and if it did, it was be >> called "leaded", not "regular". As times have changed, our names have >> changed, too.
> When I was young, I worked at Sunoco gas station and we offered 5 blends. I > kind of thought it was dumb, but many customers did not.
I remember more than 5, "back in my day" in the 1960's and 1970's. They had "Economy 190" all the way up to "Premium 260" witn 200, 210, 220, 230, 240, and 250 in the middle, all blending different proportions of regular and premium. It was a marketing gimmick, but I guess in a sense if you wanted to buy the gas just high octane enough to prevent pinging, which is all you needed, then it saved money versus always buying premium. This was in the days before computerized pumps, so it must have really been complex to meter and price eight different gasolines.
> On Jul 8, 8:08 am, Pat <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote: >> When I was young, we had "unleaded" and regular gasoline. At sometime >> "regular" just disappears and we had unleaded. Now, "regular" IS >> "unleaded" and leaded gas doesn't exist -- and if it did, it was be >> called "leaded", not "regular". As times have changed, our names have >> changed, too.
>> Digital SLRs became dSLRs and SLRs remained the same. Meanwhile, >> digital P&Ss just became P&Ss, not dP&Ss, without any troubled or >> problem distiguishing the cameras.
>> Now the dSLRs are the primary type of SLRs, I wonder when/if they will >> become SLRs and the "d" will be dropped. When that happens, do we >> called the old film cameras fSLRs?
>> So when/if do you think the name change will occur and dSLRs will just >> be SLRs? Or, do you think the mirror will disappear and they will >> become something like SLCs (single lens cameras)?
> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it > "the point and shoot"
> So for me “camera” defaults to the DSLR.
> If I am talking about my film SLR I always state that it is a "film > SLR" never just an SLR.
> Scott
I call my film SLR "the Nikon F" and my MF Pentax 6x7 "the big Pentax." I call my digital SLR "the camera I may get someday." -- Michael
On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >"the point and shoot"
Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot. Proved daily by what they find to be the most important features about their cameras in newsgroups. Faster auto-focus, high ISOs because they can't hold a camera steady and their auto-exposure point and shoot dSLR might choose a shutter speed too slow, etc. (all of their highly revealing snapshooters' traits have been disclosed before, many times)
Yet many P&S owners often use theirs in full manual mode, as professionals do. Learning real photography techniques that allow them to get better images under more conditions than all point and shoot dSLR owners.
The Irony wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> > wrote:
>> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >> "the point and shoot"
> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot.
Well, I guess many of the people who have graduated to DSLR from P&S (because the price difference has become very small) may do that but it's a bit of a stretch to say ALL do. I for one seldom take my D40 - arguably the closest Nikon get to a P&S DSLR - out of manual mode. When I do it's usually set to aperture priority.
SteveG wrote: > The Irony wrote: >> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >>> "the point and shoot"
>> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot.
> Well, I guess many of the people who have graduated to DSLR from P&S > (because the price difference has become very small) may do that but > it's a bit of a stretch to say ALL do. I for one seldom take my D40 - > arguably the closest Nikon get to a P&S DSLR - out of manual mode. When > I do it's usually set to aperture priority.
Talk to professional photographers, and even they shoot in automatic mode most of the time. It's rare that they'd use full manual mode. They may set the aperture value and let the camera choose the shutter speed depending on what they're shooting, or change the ISO setting, but full manual is very rare these days.
I play with manual modes on my Canon P&S models using ChDk, and it's an interesting exercise, but really pointless, as there's only so much you can do with such a small sensor. Since I helped write the ChDk documentation I feel at least compelled to use the program!
In article <uct5m.344$Ad2...@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote: > Talk to professional photographers, and even they shoot in automatic > mode most of the time. It's rare that they'd use full manual mode. They > may set the aperture value and let the camera choose the shutter speed > depending on what they're shooting, or change the ISO setting, but full > manual is very rare these days.
that depends on a *lot* of things. many pro photographers do use manual settings, for example, studio work.
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:23:25 -0700, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote: >SteveG wrote: >> The Irony wrote: >>> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >>>> "the point and shoot"
>>> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot.
>> Well, I guess many of the people who have graduated to DSLR from P&S >> (because the price difference has become very small) may do that but >> it's a bit of a stretch to say ALL do. I for one seldom take my D40 - >> arguably the closest Nikon get to a P&S DSLR - out of manual mode. When >> I do it's usually set to aperture priority.
>Talk to professional photographers, and even they shoot in automatic >mode most of the time.
If only you would talk AND listen to them.
You've been conversing with them for a long while now. Many of them telling you that many many P&S cameras, in a real pro's hands, are every bit as good. In many cases even much better than all dSLRs ever made. Some of us won't even bother with clunky, cumbersome, noisy, and dirt-filled dSLR cameras anymore. A total waste of time, shots, and money.
You just refuse to listen those professional photographers that you suggest all others should to talk to.
Now go climb back under your pretend-photographer's rock, as you should.
That's a good troll.
<pat on head, lifting rock to make it easier for it to crawl back under>
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:52:20 GMT, SteveG <_@_._> wrote in <8Ms5m.53907$OO7.32...@text.news.virginmedia.com>:
>The Irony wrote: >> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >>> "the point and shoot"
>> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot.
>Well, I guess many of the people who have graduated to DSLR from P&S >(because the price difference has become very small) may do that but >it's a bit of a stretch to say ALL do. ...
It's likewise a bit of a stretch to sway "the price difference has become very small" -- the total cost of dSLR kit comparable to a compact super-zoom is many times the cost even at a lower performance level.
-- Best regards, John
Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
>> Talk to professional photographers, and even they shoot in automatic >> mode most of the time. It's rare that they'd use full manual mode. They >> may set the aperture value and let the camera choose the shutter speed >> depending on what they're shooting, or change the ISO setting, but full >> manual is very rare these days.
> that depends on a *lot* of things. many pro photographers do use manual > settings, for example, studio work.
Using "auto" modes in a controlled studio environment is *NOT* professional, since pros using film have always manually set aperture, and shutter speed according to what the light meter indicates and manual focus is critical for the set. Film, in medium and large format are expensive, so Polariods are used for proofing before final film was exposed. Not for the snapper, either dSLRs or dP&Ss who 'auto' everything...
SMS wrote: > SteveG wrote: >> The Irony wrote: >>> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >>>> "the point and shoot"
>>> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot.
>> Well, I guess many of the people who have graduated to DSLR from P&S >> (because the price difference has become very small) may do that but >> it's a bit of a stretch to say ALL do. I for one seldom take my D40 - >> arguably the closest Nikon get to a P&S DSLR - out of manual mode. >> When I do it's usually set to aperture priority.
> Talk to professional photographers, and even they shoot in automatic > mode most of the time. It's rare that they'd use full manual mode. They > may set the aperture value and let the camera choose the shutter speed > depending on what they're shooting, or change the ISO setting, but full > manual is very rare these days.
"professional photographers" covers an awful lot of ground, so you've generalized a little hard there.
Those on the go, esp. PJ's will use semi-auto modes (A or S) a lot of the time, but still have to contend with exp comp to some degree. Sports shooters will often opt for "S" as the magazines prefer the frozen action shot.
Portrait photographers, esp. using studio strobe don't need anything other than manual - letting the camera choose aperture is anathema to the process and any reasonable shutter speed will do.
> > Good question. Dunno, but that "d" thing is a bit like cars and the stupid > > Ford Escort 1.6GLXi Ghia nonsense they spread all over the back. People, > > especially men, pay stupid money so they wank in peoples faces with a > > badge > > that costs a pound and puts 3000 on the price. Dumb, but there you go.
> Not long ago I drove my wife's Lexus into a gas station and proceeded to > fill the tank at a self service pump. Some kid at the full service aisle, > driving an old beat up Mercury, shouted "you drive a car like that and pump > your own gas." I couldn't resist saying, "That's why I drive this car and > you have that clunker." The kid just turned red and walked away.
> -- > Peter
A friend of mine has a daughter named Alexis. She tells her kid that she named her "Alexis" to remind her of what she would be driving if she didn't have a kid.
> Talk to professional photographers, and even they shoot in automatic > mode most of the time. It's rare that they'd use full manual mode. They > may set the aperture value and let the camera choose the shutter speed > depending on what they're shooting, or change the ISO setting, but full > manual is very rare these days.
We obviously live in different worlds my friend ;-)
John Navas wrote: > On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:52:20 GMT, SteveG <_@_._> wrote in > <8Ms5m.53907$OO7.32...@text.news.virginmedia.com>:
>> The Irony wrote: >>> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >>>> "the point and shoot" >>> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot. >> Well, I guess many of the people who have graduated to DSLR from P&S >> (because the price difference has become very small) may do that but >> it's a bit of a stretch to say ALL do. ...
> It's likewise a bit of a stretch to sway "the price difference has > become very small" -- the total cost of dSLR kit comparable to a compact > super-zoom is many times the cost even at a lower performance level.
Take a look around you my friend. An example: Nikon D40 with kit lens is £280 from Amazon where the Nikon Coolpix P90 is just shy of £300. There are dozens of P&S cameras - not even "super-zooms" - in the same price range as the D40.
I'm not arguing that the P&S and low-end DSLR are technically comparable but for most P&S users any DSLR is perceived as a "better" camera and therefore desirable.
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:04:43 -0500, The Irony wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> > wrote:
>>Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it "the >>point and shoot"
> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot. > Proved daily by what they find to be the most important features about > their cameras in newsgroups. Faster auto-focus, high ISOs because they > can't hold a camera steady and their auto-exposure point and shoot dSLR > might choose a shutter speed too slow, etc. (all of their highly > revealing snapshooters' traits have been disclosed before, many times)
> Yet many P&S owners often use theirs in full manual mode, as > professionals do. Learning real photography techniques that allow them > to get better images under more conditions than all point and shoot dSLR > owners.
> Funny that.
The irony is that you without a brain pretends to have one.
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:23:54 GMT, SteveG <_@_._> wrote: >John Navas wrote: >> On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:52:20 GMT, SteveG <_@_._> wrote in >> <8Ms5m.53907$OO7.32...@text.news.virginmedia.com>:
>>> The Irony wrote: >>>> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:02:36 -0700 (PDT), Scott W <biph...@hotmail.com> >>>> wrote:
>>>>> Normally I call my DSLR "my camera" if I am using my P&S I call it >>>>> "the point and shoot" >>>> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot. >>> Well, I guess many of the people who have graduated to DSLR from P&S >>> (because the price difference has become very small) may do that but >>> it's a bit of a stretch to say ALL do. ...
>> It's likewise a bit of a stretch to sway "the price difference has >> become very small" -- the total cost of dSLR kit comparable to a compact >> super-zoom is many times the cost even at a lower performance level.
>Take a look around you my friend. An example: Nikon D40 with kit lens is >£280 from Amazon where the Nikon Coolpix P90 is just shy of £300. There >are dozens of P&S cameras - not even "super-zooms" - in the same price >range as the D40.
>I'm not arguing that the P&S and low-end DSLR are technically comparable >but for most P&S users any DSLR is perceived as a "better" camera and >therefore desirable.
"Perceived" being the operative word. When in reality many of the P&S cameras far surpass dSLRs in performance, functionality, features, portability, etc. etc. etc.
Here's a fun link, where a P&S camera doesn't just surpass a DSLR but matches the performance of a Medium-Format Hasselblad too.
[Catch up DSLR-Trolls! P&S cameras aren't just beating DSLRs now, they're also matching the performance of cameras that yours can't and never will come close to in quality.]
This erroneous perception is all due to these DSLR-Trolls, arm-chair photographers, and pro-wannabees who know no better and never will. The weekend photographers that buy a $1500 kit of body and 2 lenses and then think that that's going to make them into some kind of a photographer one day. As that same fool happily hands out his idiotic advice to people he knows, in the hopes that if those fools follow in his footsteps then that means he must have made the right decision too. No different than those religious zealots who try to justify their own stupidity by being the most vocal, purely driven by doubting their beliefs the most. If a DSLR-Troll can convince others that it's the right decision, then maybe, just maybe someday, they too can believe what they were told to believe. When in their heart of hearts they knew they were wrong all along.
In *this* case "Irony" is something like coppery or silvery, only that it's very rusty by now.
> Even though all dSLR owners use their cameras as a point and shoot.
Yes, many do that sometimes --- because point&shoot cameras won't hack it. We know --- we own both DSLR cameras and compact cameras, and also phone cameras, TLRs, film cameras, medium format cameras with digital and analog backs and also large format cameras,
> Proved daily by what they find to be the most important features about > their cameras in newsgroups.
They take pictures, even in averse conditions.
> Faster auto-focus,
because toddlers are too fast for point&shoots,
> high ISOs because they can't hold a camera steady
for the half second the P&S would need,
> and their auto-exposure point and shoot dSLR might choose a > shutter speed too slow
if there's not enough light to even see the P&S camera, much less to frame with it.
> (all of their highly revealing snapshooters' traits have been > disclosed before, many times)
by someone who doesn't own a camera and has no photographs at all, not even snapshots.
> Yet many
... one, two, three, many, very many, very very many ...
> P&S owners often use theirs in full manual mode
as the P&S very often guesses wrong. Many more wish they could influence their P&S in such a way, but all they get is an exposure compensation. All of them wish they had access right now to a real DSLR whenever they (try to) go to manual mode. Or even a medium or large format camera.
> as professionals do.
when they are back in 1910.
> Learning real photography techniques that allow them to get better > images under more conditions than all point and shoot dSLR owners
is something they accomplish with DSLRs, tripods, external flash units, wireless flash, manual focus, proper viewfinder, low noise, usable high ISO, low depth of field if wanted, high resolution, ... most of which any given point&shoot won't even have heard of, much less be compatible with.
> I play with manual modes on my Canon P&S models using ChDk, and it's an > interesting exercise, but really pointless, as there's only so much you > can do with such a small sensor.
I find CHDK has been very helpful in the realms of "technical" image acquisition, including HDR (cue rants), where it supports super-flexible bracketing, and long multiple-exposure in raw mode for stacking (I captured the Orion nebula without a telescope, and without a super zoom).
I haven't done time lapse "film" yet.
CHDK has been powerful enough that I've yet to attach my laptop to my camera as a controller.
> I play with manual modes on my Canon P&S models using ChDk, and it's an > interesting exercise, but really pointless, as there's only so much you > can do with such a small sensor.
I'm working my way through adding a second colour matrix (tungsten) to DNG files, and second curtain flash to CHDK but got stuck because the compiled code doesn't seem to reflect the code changes.
The A590 has an over-pumped sensor so isn't great but CHDK can help sidestep the built in compression and noise reduction, and blown highlights, and produce slightly better images in later processing.
|
