RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #15 · Hasselblad XCD 20mm-35mm f/3.2-4.5 E Lens | |
flash wrote:
Agreed. I actually have both and the Fuji is in every way at least as good as the HB, for less money.
Haven’t used the Fuji since the HB arrived. I prefer the X2D over the GFX100ii and 100S, mostly, except for the 250 and 500, where the extra size in the body is a benefit.
In any comparison the Fujifilm GFX system is going to make more sense. Still I prefer the Hasselblad and would always choose that over the Fuji. Same with Leica over Sony. Logic and common sense be damned.
Gordon
Form Follows Function
In many cases this is meant to infer that consideration to how something works takes priority over how it is "shaped", appearance, aesthetic, etc.
But, in the case of where similar (or close enough) functionality is already in place, then the attention to Form is of veritable consideration.
And, yet OTOH ... the FORM of the body does impact the function of of hand holding, fatigue, storage space required, etc. Different folks will have different perspectives regarding the FORM of a body and its significance (i.e. I CAN shoot with pretty much any form, but whether or not I WANT to shoot with a given FORM, may be a different matter).
So, "Logic and Common Sense" may not be quite as damned after all. 
If one evaluates the function vs. $$$ ratio .. the Fuji / Sony can come out with better ratio's in that regard. But, in the Function + Form = Fulfillment ... that one can calculate out a bit differently for folks. In the vein of "Don't fight with your tools." ... the less you fight with 'em, the more productive they can be for you. Thus, the less you fight (with the form), the more they function and fulfill.
You pay for your tools once ... you work with them every day. Logic and common sense says to get the hammer that is right for the job (Function), but when you have choices regarding which (of those functional requirements met) hammer to swing, get the one that you enjoy (Form) swinging ... there's a lot of nails to pound in the days / years to come.
I mean, look at a baseball bat ... they all pretty much function the same. But, every hitter will pick a bat (or made to their spec) that is formed (length, weight, shape) in a way that they prefer to swing. Do you really think, they are worried about the Form vs. $$$ ratio in order to do their best.
I get that we mere mortals have to live / decide with choices on how to spend our $$$, and the truth is that the Function / $$$ ratio is a rationalization / justification to those decisions / choices, in certain instances. Tony Gwynn probably didn't go around telling Hank Aaron that Tony's bat cost less on a $$$ / base hit or $$$ / ounce of wood. He likely didn't ask Hank what the cost of his bats were per Home Run produced. Neither did he try and tell Hank that his bat was too heavy or too light or too long or too short. Oh, they may have discussed the physics of design relative to swinging speed, mass, momentum, etc. ... but, in the end, each one chose what they did for one fundamental reason ... it worked for them.
Use what you like ... knock it out of the park. 
Seems pretty logical, to me. Might even be common sense ... at least around grandpa's, baseball players and carpenters.
Not so sure about photographers, sometimes, though.
Probably goes along with "Gotta ask the right question, to get the right answer?" Seems pretty logical, to me.
Which camera has the better function to $$$ ratio? Is that the right question?
Which camera do I enjoy using more? Is that the right question?
Which camera do I produce my best work from? Is that the right question?
Might be other questions to consider ... but, we owe it to ourselves to be asking ourselves the right questions, to get the right answers.
Sometimes we have different reasons for asking different questions ... but, sometimes we don't even realize that we've been asking the wrong questions, all along.
|
