Re: Hasselblad had numerous examples of Lunar at show

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 22, 2012.

  1. Eric Stevens <> writes:

    > On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 22:59:40 -0500, Rich <> wrote:
    >
    >>I have to admit, the build quality and materials are impressive. Titanium
    >>dials, machined-from-billet aluminum body. The only other company that
    >>does machined aluminum is Leica on the M9.

    >
    > The only quality that matters is that which can be seen in the
    > photographs.


    Perhaps in Plato-land, or somewhere.

    Most of us have to take into account cost, weight, flexibility,
    durability, ease of use, and a lot of other things when choosing our
    tools. We rarely or never have the luxury of going after the most
    perfect conceivable, narrowly-focused, tool for one kind of photography
    ignoring all other considerations.

    --
    Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 22, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Eric Stevens <> writes:

    > On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 05:59:55 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Eric Stevens <> writes:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 22:59:40 -0500, Rich <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>I have to admit, the build quality and materials are impressive. Titanium
    >>>>dials, machined-from-billet aluminum body. The only other company that
    >>>>does machined aluminum is Leica on the M9.
    >>>
    >>> The only quality that matters is that which can be seen in the
    >>> photographs.

    >>
    >>Perhaps in Plato-land, or somewhere.
    >>
    >>Most of us have to take into account cost, weight, flexibility,
    >>durability, ease of use, and a lot of other things when choosing our
    >>tools. We rarely or never have the luxury of going after the most
    >>perfect conceivable, narrowly-focused, tool for one kind of photography
    >>ignoring all other considerations.

    >
    > Agreed - but I wouldn't class those things as quality. And I'm sure
    > that even when you take all these things into account you would not
    > ignore image quality.


    I do indeed value image quality! You have guessed correctly :).

    Technical image quality is a small part of the quality of a photograph.
    35mm cameras generally produced LESS "image quality" than the Graphic
    press cameras they replaced (well, that's *one* thing they replaced).
    The ability to have longer and wider lenses got more interesting
    pictures, the ability to work faster got more interesting pictures, the
    ability to risk more frames on chancy outcomes got more interesting
    pictures. So the 35mm cameras produced "better" pictures even though
    the image quality (in the strictly technical sense) was lower.
    --
    Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 22, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Dyer-Bennet <> wrote:
    > Eric Stevens <> writes:
    >> On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 05:59:55 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Eric Stevens <> writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 22:59:40 -0500, Rich <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>I have to admit, the build quality and materials are impressive. Titanium
    >>>>>dials, machined-from-billet aluminum body. The only other company that
    >>>>>does machined aluminum is Leica on the M9.
    >>>>
    >>>> The only quality that matters is that which can be seen in the
    >>>> photographs.
    >>>
    >>>Perhaps in Plato-land, or somewhere.
    >>>
    >>>Most of us have to take into account cost, weight, flexibility,
    >>>durability, ease of use, and a lot of other things when choosing our
    >>>tools. We rarely or never have the luxury of going after the most
    >>>perfect conceivable, narrowly-focused, tool for one kind of photography
    >>>ignoring all other considerations.

    >>
    >> Agreed - but I wouldn't class those things as quality. And I'm sure
    >> that even when you take all these things into account you would not
    >> ignore image quality.


    > I do indeed value image quality! You have guessed correctly :).


    > Technical image quality is a small part of the quality of a photograph.
    > 35mm cameras generally produced LESS "image quality" than the Graphic
    > press cameras they replaced (well, that's *one* thing they replaced).
    > The ability to have longer and wider lenses got more interesting
    > pictures, the ability to work faster got more interesting pictures, the
    > ability to risk more frames on chancy outcomes got more interesting
    > pictures. So the 35mm cameras produced "better" pictures even though
    > the image quality (in the strictly technical sense) was lower.


    For some kinds of photography what the camera looks like and sounds
    like to the general public is very important, e.g. candid portraits,
    street photography, etc.. A big black camera plastered with knobs and
    buttons and which shoots with a loud clockwork clatter of mirror flap
    and shutter snap is much more noticeable and intimidating than a small
    unobtrusive silent camera with expensive fashionable decoration. Makes
    a really big difference to where and how easily you can shoot
    unobserved, and how easily you can gain the co-operation of strangers
    for your shot.

    Of course that's comparing the FrankenHass to a DSLR. Whether the
    FrankenHass would be significantly more usable anywhere than a Nex-7
    is dubious. Perhaps at a party of celebrities, where the FrankenHass
    would look more like a rich girl's toy than a papperazzo trying to be
    unobstrusive. I think Hasselbald missed a trick in not setting
    gemstones in the top of the knobs.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Sep 26, 2012
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. rawebadvert3

    COVER LETTERS RESUME EXAMPLES AND CV EXAMPLES AVAILABLE

    rawebadvert3, May 25, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    913
    rawebadvert3
    May 25, 2007
  2. rawebadvert3
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,065
    rawebadvert3
    Aug 21, 2007
  3. otter
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    290
    otter
    Sep 21, 2012
  4. Paul Ciszek

    Re: Hasselblad had numerous examples of Lunar at show

    Paul Ciszek, Sep 21, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    288
    Paul Ciszek
    Sep 21, 2012
  5. Paul Ciszek

    This is one Hasselblad "Lunar" I would like to own

    Paul Ciszek, Mar 24, 2014, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    92
    RichA
    Mar 24, 2014
Loading...

Share This Page