Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Pro/Am(was Nikon 300 2.8 vs Leica SLR lens)
From: "Robert G. Stevens" <robsteve@hfx.andara.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 22:12:19 -0300

Alex:

I shoot from twenty to fourty rolls a month.  For a sporting event like a
football game I may shoot three and at some two day events I can shoot ten
or more.  On top of this I probably shoot a roll or two a month with
general scenic and misc. shots.  All of this is on slide film.  I develop
my own and mount only the keepers.  I can shoot and develop five rolls of
bulk loaded slide film cheaper than you can buy a roll of print film and
get it developed.

As for keepers, I am very particular and in the sports like football there
may be only one or two stunning images per roll, the rest being boring or
out of focus. As you said, the boring shots would probably seem great to
the players pictured, but they will not win me any prizes. 

I just saw the results of an international slide competition and some of
the sports shots that were accepted were not even in focus and would be
some that I just throw away.  It looked like a lot of the shots were the
result of autofocus not focusing on the important part of the scene.
Another thing I noticed  on a lot of the sports images, you could not see
the participants eyes, or their eyes were closed.  These types of shots
make it into my waste basket.  Below is an example of me using a 400 2.8 to
manually focus.  With this composition, an EOS 1n would have focused on the
horse's chest or somewhere along its side as this is where the five sensors
would have lined up.  In my case I focused on the rider as he left the
chute and came towards me, rather than on the horse.

http://home.iSTAR.ca/~robsteve/photography/images/Misc/Calf-Rope.jpg


Regards,

Robert




At 11:30 PM 9/22/99 +0100, Alex Hurst wrote:
>This raises an interesting point. As a reasonably serious amateur, I shoot
>about three rolls a week - in the meantime I work for a living to support
>my addiction.
>
>That's roughly 5000 shots a year, of which I would regard no more than 300
>shots as 'keepers' - in other words, prints I would keep for _myself_. Many
>more than that do the rounds to family and friends, and they're more than
>happy with them. But that's because the general standard of P&S photography
>is so appalling, and anything taken in a reasonably competent fashion can't
>help but look better.
>
>Now come clean, LUGnuts. Apart from pros like Ted et al., are you really
>shifting enough film through those very expensive gizmos? And is your real
>'Keeper' strike rate any better than mine?
>
>I'd hate to learn that most of you are happy with those miserable,
>maladjusted prints you get back from the lab.
>
>Slan
>
>Alex
>
>
>
>
>
>Alex Hurst
>Waterfall
>Nr. Cork
>Ireland
>
>Tel: +353 21 543 328 (H)
>       +353 21 270 907 (W)
>
>Fax: +353 21 271 248
>email: corkflor@iol.ie
>Also: corkflor.1@virgin.net (when in the UK, which isn't often)
>Home website: http://homepages.iol.ie/~corkflor/
>Business website: http://www.flowerlink.com/corkflorists
>
>
>