Originally Posted by Tony Printezis
I try to imagine how large the image stabilization system must be to control for such shuttertimes [:P] I guess a tripod would be 10 times lighter and more usable in that matter hihi []
I try to imagine how large the image stabilization system must be to control for such shuttertimes [:P] I guess a tripod would be 10 times lighter and more usable in that matter hihi [
I think there is many factors to consider here: personal preferrence, steadiness of your grip, amount of gear you can or want totake, type of photography you're up to, and so forth...
I've taken atripod with me on over 30000 miles worth of trips and plan on usingit in the future.
Hmm... just went to ken's homepage: http://www.kenrockwell.com
He has a picture of him with a camera. Take a look at it for 1 second. Does it look strange to you?
He's holding the camera with his left hand (the grip is on the left side).
As far as I know, no one makes such cameras... [*-)]
I must say I can sort of see his point, but I must disagree. Tri/monopods will always remain an essential part of photography until we can get ISO figures that have no noise and are through the roof. (hey, look how far digital sensors have come in the last 15 years, its possible) even then, there will be shots that absolutely require stabilization.
I don't necessarily agree but I'm on board.
I think he is kind of taking a less techie more whimsical approach here. That usually doesn't go over well on this forum. I think he is more trying to challenge the old school folks, that are married to tripods, go out and be creative. I agree with him that a tripod tend to take some creativeness out of the process. There will always be a place for tripods, but I think he also states that.
KR is a wingnut. He makes sweeping, sometimes self-contradictory statements, and people eat it up. He is popular because novices like simple, boiled-down comments about what to buy. Photography is technical and good photography very much so. But many beginners just want to dive in and the technology and selection can be overwhelming.
Thus KR has developed quite a following for making overly broad claims, and he ingratiates himself with the various retailers who get business from him. But if you've ever seen him talk (there are videos of him floating around online), he is all over the place. It's incredibly irritating to watch and doubly so to listen. Why should any of this be surprising? He tried to justify the use of a racially and historically insensitive term ("Oriental") to distinguish Canon and Nikon from Leica, and implied that "Orientals" can't make better cameras than "the Germans."
Anybody who actually cares to develop an understanding of photography knows that KR is a joke.
FWIW, I'd like to see him shoot self-portraits without a tripod. I'd like to see him use an 800mm lens without a tripod. I'd like to see how well IS works for him when he's doing an exposure longer than 1 second. I'd like to see him shoot macro of a dimly lit aquarium without a tripod. There are a zillion situations where a tripod is necessary, not just for sharp photos, but just to get a photo at all.
Not long after I made my first post on this thread, I got to thinking about KR and realized he's sort of the Howard Stern/Rush Limbaugh of <span style="text-decoration: line-through;"]photography camera equipment. He talks alot of garbage, lots of which he probably doesn't even believe, but knows that people will get excited about it one way or the other,and lots of them will come back for more, even if they disagree! (Sorry about the run-on)
EXACTLY!
Well put, well put.
Let's not sully the good name of Howard Stern :-) Rush may be full of it but anyone who listens to Stern on a regular basis knows that he says what he means and means what he says...as far as tripods go...they will always be a part of photography. It's great that we don't rely on them the way we used to but several posts leading up to this one pointed out the many situations that require them.
No. I disagree with it on many levels:
- I disagree with the very idea of anyone reading KR voluntarily. (I do support it as a form of torture for terrorists).
- I disagree with making a post to talk about ideas stated by KR.
- I disagree with linking to KR's web site.
- I disagree with most of the fiction spouted by KR.
As for why I disagree with it:
- Ken Rockwell misleads, misinforms, and misdirects.
- The KR site has pages on aliens and anal probes
- Every KR web page has at least one misleading or incorrect statement.
- Most of the time, KR mixes fact with fiction in equal parts.
- KR is a numpty divot.
- Ken's writing is so bad that it makes me want to claw my eyes out.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote