ftllens wrote:
The 40g is best for travel and if you attach a close up achromat to the weird tiny hood, then it makes for a very fast semi-macro setup that gets closer magnification than the Batis. I do like the Batis 40 CF the best due to overall rendering and lack of distortion. If you're going to Tokyo, you can pick up a mint copy there for under $500.
Ok thanks. Here at The Six (Toronto's nickname) a couple of used Batis are both priced at CAD $ 900. I briefly considered it and I know the rendering because I have the Batis 85. But I've seen enough 40G images to make it my pick plus the lens is fully compatible with my A7V re: high speed bursts. Oh it was on sale too.
gdanmitchell wrote:
The images that poster shares to illustrate his posts about “pop” really make me wonder what he is seeing. To put it delicately, if we put those in a stack of prints of all sorts of similar photographs from other sources and asked observers to pick out those best exhibiting “pop,” I don’t think they would top the list.
I also cannot help feeling that these portraits make me uncomfortable.
Street people photography constitutes an invasion of privacy, and must be done responsibly.
In the simplest sense, at the very least, there must be a reason for taking street pictures with people in the frame.
Particularly when taking large and detailed close-up portraits - these are very intimate, in a way, and that intimacy is inappropriate when it is forced on the subject, when it is not enthusiastically consensual.
The portraits from "that poster", particularly the female portraits, look to me like the individuals were randomly approached in the streets, and nearly harassed into being photographed, because those young shy females in a third-world Asian country might possibly not be accustomed to say "f--k off" when being approached by a foreign male.
The series of portraits that I have seen from "that poster" almost all look like random shots taken for no obvious reason and taken out of the cultural/geographic context. These portraits don't look like professional portraits either. Thus, my impression is that the photographer is interested in portrait photography but has no access to models and, thus, is practicing on the innocent strangers.
ruthenium wrote:
I also cannot help feeling that these portraits make me uncomfortable.
Street people photography constitutes an invasion of privacy, and must be done responsibly.
In the simplest sense, at the very least, there must be a reason for taking street pictures with people in the frame.
Particularly when taking large and detailed close-up portraits - these are very intimate, in a way, and that intimacy is inappropriate when it is forced on the subject, when it is not enthusiastically consensual.
The portraits from "that poster", particularly the female portraits, look to me like the individuals were randomly approached in the streets, and nearly harassed into being photographed, because those young shy females in a third-world Asian country might possibly not be accustomed to say "f--k off" when being approached by a foreign male.
The series of portraits that I have seen from "that poster" almost all look like random shots taken for no obvious reason and taken out of the cultural/geographic context. These portraits don't look like professional portraits either. Thus, my impression is that the photographer is interested in portrait photography but has no access to models and, thus, is practicing on the innocent strangers. ...Show more →
Did you read the post? The poster says he’s approached the subjects and had a conversation with them before asking if he could take their photos. I basically do the same, I engage with the subjects(s) make sure they are comfortable then proceed to photograph their daily life.
I think you are totally out of line insinuating Philip is shoving a camera into a strangers face and snapping a photo. I have followed Philip’s photos over the years and he is one accomplished travel photographer.
I don’t want to derate this thread but this is simply rude. Is this post really necessary?
Nifty Fifty wrote:
What I have seen in this and several other image threads within the past year is enough for me to come to the exact opposite opinion.😄
I don't think it's necessarily wrong to occasionally confront someone who sells his viewpoint as the only truth, persistently imposes it on others, constantly praises his own work, publishes it as a prime example of outstanding representation, and ignores any dissenting opinions, with reality.
darwinphoto wrote:
Street photog is NOT an invasion of privacy. The people are in public.
I agree, but it can be done in a way that feels invasive and in many countries taking pictures of people in public spaces without their consent can put you in legal jepardy.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
What I have seen in this and several other image threads within the past year is enough for me to come to the exact opposite opinion.😄
You sure have a hard one on for Philip. I’ve followed your nasty attacks on his posts and I feel you are totally out of line. Maybe just ignore him and let others enjoy his knowledgeable posts without your childish constant trash.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
I don't think it's necessarily wrong to occasionally confront someone who sells his viewpoint as the only truth, persistently imposes it on others, constantly praises his own work, publishes it as a prime example of outstanding representation, and ignores any dissenting opinions, with reality.
Whose reality…yours? I don’t see anything coming close to reality from you.
bwcolor wrote:
I agree, but it can be done in a way that feels invasive and in many countries taking pictures of people in public spaces without their consent can put you in legal jepardy.
Sure, but I believe Philip mentioned he discussed taking their images prior to photographing them. Somehow someone here turned this into taking images in the street with a camera in their face without consent,which it was not. It seems some have a vendetta out n certain individuals.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
I don't think it's necessarily wrong to occasionally confront someone who sells his viewpoint as the only truth, persistently imposes it on others, constantly praises his own work, publishes it as a prime example of outstanding representation, and ignores any dissenting opinions, with reality.
Add all the factual errors and shady language in many of his posts (or if it is promotion material).
I support Nifty Fifty a little here. Philip has for quite some time been very tiresome promoting his favorite lenses, sometimes wrong and always absent when called out. (What happened?)
Jonas B wrote:
Add all the factual errors and shady language in many of his posts (or if it is promotion material).
I support Nifty Fifty a little here. Philip has for quite some time been very tiresome promoting his favorite lenses, sometimes wrong and always absent when called out. (What happened?)
Maybe if he was called out civilly he would answer the questions, but I think Philip just lays down his view for others to decide.
chez wrote:
Sure, but I believe Philip mentioned he discussed taking their images prior to photographing them. Somehow someone here turned this into taking images in the street with a camera in their face without consent,which it was not. It seems some have a vendetta out n certain individuals.
Ah, I wasn’t referring to Philip, where he made it clear that he establishes some degree of rapport and permission. It was in reference to a general assertion.
chez wrote:
Maybe if he was called out civilly he would answer the questions, but I think Philip just lays down his view for others to decide.
So you are saying my questions/replies to him trying, for example, to discuss the Arri cine lens test he posted were uncivilized? There was a period when Philip posted several comparisons that all failed to demonstrate what he wrote they proved - I asked him about that and never heard from him.
I probably got irritated after a while but I certainly didn't start out in any rude manner.
Jonas B wrote:
So you are saying my questions/replies to him trying, for example, to discuss the Arri cine lens test he posted were uncivilized? There was a period when Philip posted several comparisons that all failed to demonstrate what he wrote they proved - I asked him about that and never heard from him.
I probably got irritated after a while but I certainly didn't start out in any rude manner.
No, not you…others that don’t really want a civil conversation. I actually enjoy your challenges…seems like you know what your talking about.
