Tag Archives: olympus

Walkabout Moves to Evenings, Plans Ahead

This week’s walkabout will take place Wednesday evening. Yup, you read correctly, Wednesday evening. We’re moving walkabouts to the schedule-friendlier time of 6pm, now that the evning light lasts long enough and is better than the morning light (well, for what we do, anyway). Meet us at 6pm at Rock Bottom, downotown Indy, for an hour of photography followed by an open invitation to join the two lead dudes of Grimey Studios for 2 buck pints at downotwn’s best brew pub.

Also, tentaively penciled for May 30th, but subject to change, we’re working on our first of a couple big Saturday photo shoots, where we want to bring lighting equipment and various camera reps out so everyone can play with equipment that might normally be above their pay grade. We have Nikon and olympus in the chute for this, and I’m talking with a lovely local model gal for one of them, and I’m going to contact this very ripped gentleman for the other, so it’ll be a good portfolio building exercise if you can make it out.

(Me, personally, I need to talk Oly into bringing a 35-100mm for me and Mr Henry to use, but boy is that a sweet friggin lens. F2! Zoom!)

Pro vs Expert vs Flagship

In photography right now there are three basic ways to descrbie the top offerings from any given manufacturer: pro, expert, or flagship. My problem with the current market is how the term “pro” has come to be used.

Generally speaking, a “pro” camera, if you believe the market definition, has the company’s best imaging hardware and a full metal body with dual integrated grips (vertical and horizontal). I think this is a very commercially skewed take on what makes something a pro body.

Going to the root of “pro” we of course reach “professional.” It’s worth remembering that a professional is a person who makes their living from their photography. To that end, professional equipment really implies durability. Professionals generally are interested in durable equipment, because to them equipment is a tool and part of a cost and return equation. Well built equipment with acceptable performance for their specific needs is a good investment in the long run because the less often equipment has to be replaced the better the expense.


What Makes a Pro?

OK, so here’s a topic that’s been bugging me for a while, and one I’m going to think about the next couple days and try to come up with some sort of concrete statement, but it really bothers me the way the current photo equipment market handles the idea of what makes something “professional.” As is no secret, I’m a pretty loyal Olympus shooter for a number of reasons, and part of being an Oly shooter and working in camera retail is this sorta disparagement towards small sensor systems. It’s a very strange phenomenon that, I think, over-emphasizes certain aspects of technological development and complete slights the idea of photography as an artistic medium and not just a journalistic tool. (Photography vs photojournalism and The New Realism as I’ve come to think of it is a related topic I’m definitely going to tackle soon as well.)

I’ll be back with more.