appear to agree about tripods being dead. Popular Photography's October issue says that with the new lenses you can "...toss the 'pod and keep the camera in your hand." Check out the TOC page.
A quick look at Rockwell's photography versus those many who DO use tripods will tell you a lot. He doesn't really do the kind of photography that benefits from a tripod, but many of us do.
Ken Rockwell is a questionable source at best and has been so for years. When he gets it right it is sort of by accident. A lot of his writing is really whacky (kind of like this one).
Of course, the whole thing is a misleading debate..........
Why in the world would you even want to waste money on a "real" camera that you have to lug around and remember to use when your cell phone takes really great pictures and automatically uploads them to all your friends, like, right now, man?
Just another couple cases of writers not understanding there is more to photography than "snapshots."
Easier to ignore them than to let them upset you and waste your emotional energy.
I try not to let Rockwell bother me operating under the premise that even people I like to ignore occasionally come up with a gem but I cannot imagine how much further he can insert his foot in his mouth. How does he come up with these things.
runamuck wrote:
appear to agree about tripods being dead. Popular Photography's October issue says that with the new lenses you can "...toss the 'pod and keep the camera in your hand." Check out the TOC page.
If you are redering to your Dynatran, then I probably agree
Lars Johnsson wrote:
If you are redering to your Dynatran, then I probably agree
I'm not giving those beast up. THey work far too well. And yes, I have done low-light and night photography with them. SOmetimes it's just amazing what you can get for under 100 bucks.
Actually, Popular Photography was referring to ALL tripods, not a single brand in particular.
Lest anyone get any strange ideas, I disagree with both Ken and PP. However, a valid point is that IS/VR do make it easier to shoot in darker conditions than without them.
My Dynatrans still see considerable use, regardless of some snooty hecklers in the peanut gallery. I found something that works well without spending a grand for it.
davenfl wrote:
I try not to let Rockwell bother me operating under the premise that even people I like to ignore occasionally come up with a gem but I cannot imagine how much further he can insert his foot in his mouth. How does he come up with these things.
It's a case of "you can't fix stupid." He never ceases to amaze me with is prattle. Wasn't it Lincoln that said something like "better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and erase all doubt?"
runamuck wrote:
appear to agree about tripods being dead. Popular Photography's October issue says that with the new lenses you can "...toss the 'pod and keep the camera in your hand." Check out the TOC page.
Amazing to me that a magazine dedicated to photography could spread that kind of nonsense.
Or shooting with those super-teles at low shutter-speed