43 RumorsLog in

This Amos Chapple takes amazing pictures with a fresh style and also talks very interestingly. Thoroughly enjoyed pics and words. Chapeau!

Yes, i would like to see more hints to photographers here on m43Rumors too. IMO you shouldn’t write at length about them, just provide a link to some introduction (like here, where the interview was excellent).

Of course you could provide links to their books on Amazon, if they have any.

I see that Canonrumors does long profiles about photographers, but maybe it’s not necessary, if they have been portrayed somewhere before (and it’s a different crowd, let’s face that).

thec, your work is really impressive! Love how you play with composition and out of focus areas. Thanks for sharing!

Olympus has a dedicated site for Pro Photographers’ galleries. they shoot both 4/3 and m4/3

http://olympusprogallery.com/prophotos/en/

this is what really convinced me to choose Oly in the first place.

With the right PP every camera can take exceptional photos. Its all about the moment, the exposure and the Photoshopping.
So, in the end, buy the camera that you´ll will carry with you all the time. My guess is that it will not be a Nikon D3

They’re beautiful photos. I always wonder why people think they can’t use 4/3 cameras to get professional results like yours. Yes, as long as it’s not a P&S size sensor camera, it’s possible to get good result with proper skill (and know how to use lighting to your advantage, which you did a good job).

Go visit a museum that has his photo and you’ll be amazed how sharp they are, even by today’s standard.

“Okay. And what about resolution, dynamic range and film speed of large format … say in 1942 – when Adams took his famous picture “The Tetons and the Snake River”? Was it really better than a todays camera? And what about lens quality?”

Yes. Large format, even in the early 20th century, is still streets ahead of any small sensor digital camera today.

Darwis Triadi Full-on facebook
He did a lot of model/ fashion shoot with oly -Pen..
You guy better check it

It matters, because it is the ultimate antidote to the user who blames the pixels for their own mediocre skills. I love exhibitions shot on the GRDIII or better, the iPhone, because Spartan equipment really separates the genius from the mundane. There’s also Peter Lindberg, GF1.

“You can’t get background blur with a small sensor point&shoot.” – Excuse me for nitpicking, but that’s not entirely true. For small objects, it’s perfectly possible to have nice blur even with a 1/2.3 inch sensor.

The rule of thumb here is that you can have a nice blur behind an object with the size equal to ten times the focal length divided by the aperture. So, if the object is small enough (flower, bug …), you can have nice blur…

I agree – maybe he could buy it even in Utah

Or did you want me to be specific:

Let’s see:

But I’m fairly sure he could get the same result with just about every current camera in production (production date no earlier than Feb 2, 2011 at 4:30 PM PST) that has a sensor of 43rd or larger, with similar aspect ratio, either CMOS or CCD or Fovean, that costs more than $450.94 US Dollar, bought in the state of California, with no sales tax, and shipped UPS ground.

Okay. And what about resolution, dynamic range and film speed of large format … say in 1942 – when Adams took his famous picture “The Tetons and the Snake River”? Was it really better than a todays camera? And what about lens quality?

Nice pics. But I’m fairly sure he could get the same result with just about every current camera in production.

@Oliver:
Wait, what? Ansel Adams shot large-format. You give me the name of any digital camera that can produce something even close to the image quality a large format film camera. No scanning backs or multishot systems please, Ansel Adams isn’t exactly famous for his studio photography.
I agree that the photographers are the ones who takes pictures, but concerning IQ, not much happened in the last 80 years. Lenses got better, sure, but I’ll choose a 1939 Leitz Summitar anyday over any P&S-lens.

Just goes to show, the tech-whores should be worried about operator error, not specs. I checked the meta data. Pany L-1, L-10, GH1, GH2. DxO-Yeah, right.

I´m convinced, not the cameras took the pictures – but the photographers did!

And having the technical standards and features of todays cameras (even the cheapest) – a talented photographer should be able to outperform every picture taken within the last 100 years! Remember: Amsel Adams & Co. didn´t have the quality delivered by every simple point-and-shoot-cam of today.