Re: Built-in flash in P&S digital and DSLR cameras

"-hh" <recscuba_google@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:1194978388.361161.171480@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Bill Again" <s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> I guess that by "control" I don't actually mean how many knobs the
camera
>> has.
>
> There's a trade-off between the degree of control and the ease of
> use.  Having "too many" options results in a longer/steeper learning
> curve as well as can be a source of frustration.  However, that
> doesn't necessarily mean that some manufacturers will stop the
> 'feature creep list', nor a USENET debate which assumes that  more
> always equals better.
>
>
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?isbn=0060005696
>
>
>
>> Perhaps you would like it to make coffee as well?
>
>
>> You suggest putting a higher quality lower noise sensor into a high 
>> quality
>> super zoom P&S. If it was this simple then why isn't it done.
>>
>> Frankly it reduces to one thing. Show me a professional photographer
>> that is using a point and shoot.
>
>
> IIRC, there have been some Pro's who have had projects that were
> completed with just a P&S.  However, your point is well taken:  the
> key question to ask is what are the names of successful Pro's who have
> utterly abandoned all SLRs for all still image* applications.
>
>
>
> (* - as opposed to changing to the moving image)
>
>
> -hh

You remind me with that comment of an article I read recently by Jane
Bown, 
a renowned British photographer who worked for many years with the
Observer 
newspaper. A few lines from her article confirm that "digi " is a very 
recent phenomena. I quote:

<quote>
I'm not very particular about equipment: I use Olympus OM1s and have about
a 
dozen, all purchased second-hand more than 40 years ago, and while I have 
many lenses, I really only use either an 85mm or 50mm one now. In the same

way, I'm not all that particular about film or paper. My early work was 
taken with a Rolleiflex - there is absolutely nothing like the Rollei for 
texture and detail.

I work quickly using available light, have never had an assistant and 
usually expose no more than two rolls of film - any more than that is 
usually a sign that things aren't going well. Rather than use a light
meter, 
I have a setting I like - l/6o sec at f/2.8 - and usually make the picture

work around this. I normally gauge the light level by the way it falls on 
the back of my hand.
<unquote>

Try putting that on a function menu!

That's all

Bill