millsart Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
carstenw wrote:
While I theoretically agree with the general sentiment of the "best camera" expression, in practice I don't, in that the real result is not "best", but merely "the best you could do at the time".
In this particular case I don't agree at all. Everything is at hand, and the single-minute difference really should not be a deciding factor here, unless image quality is not a factor at all, in which case I have nothing further to say
I guess there should be a caveat that the "best" photo would represent the ideal output that a photographer with reasonable planning and anticipation (and a little luck) could hope to achieve.
If I'm hoping to get a game winning touch down catch in the corner of the end zone, the "best" photo I could hope to achieve would be one where I'm positioned in what statistically should be the corner most likely to be thrown to, with the latest industry standard equipment, in this case a D4s with 70-200.
That would probably represent the "best" I could hope to do in terms of being ready and waiting for anticipated action, having the ideal gear at the ready, and then lucking out that the play happened as I hoped.
If I broke my second body because I got knocked over when a kick returner hit me after getting knocked out of bounds in the 3rd quarter, and I only had my iPhone out, as my 400 would be too long, I could maybe time it right and get a pretty cool iPhone shot of the play. Heck, iPhone even has a bit of motor drive these days lol.
Such a shot, which could still be cool shared of FB, would represent "the best" I could of done with what I had at the time, BUT, it would not be the best shot I could realistically expect if everything went to play.
Back to your regularly scheduled discussion....
|