geddert Posted July 6, 2002 Share Posted July 6, 2002 I don't know if you have already seen it, but there is an article on Bald Eagles in this months National Geographic with photo's by Robert Norton. The photos are spectatcular, and I went to the website to look at some photo's taken for this article and it looks like they were all taken with an R8 and almost exclusiviely with a 180/2 and modular 400/2.8 and 800/5.6 leica lenses. I can't necessarily say these photo's couldn't have been done with another camera, but it is very possible. This guy was in Northern Alaska during winter shooting these majestic birds, and the tempetature would have made using a battery powered camera very difficult (i.e. he sat in blinds for weeks on end). - there is a photo of the photographer in the back of hte magazine, and if his clothes say anything, they say that this camera and lens combo (as well as the photographer) dealt with extreme colds pretty well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el_fang Posted July 6, 2002 Share Posted July 6, 2002 I would hardly say spectacular. A couple of the pictures were good (I particularly liked the one that's available as a poster, if only one of the wings wasn't cut off). But for the most part they were pretty repetitive. IMHO they should have sent Frans Lanting or Jim Brandenburg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geddert Posted July 6, 2002 Author Share Posted July 6, 2002 I agree that Frans Lanting would have been better (as a matter of fact i would say he would almost always be better if it is a wildlife project) - but there is only one of him and i'm sure he is working on something spectucular. I think some of the photo's aren't that great as well, but really like the spread on 38-39, the sunest in the trees shot, and the one you mentioned as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_franklin Posted July 6, 2002 Share Posted July 6, 2002 <i>�� photo's by Robert Norton��</i> <br> <br>Shurely shome mishtake here. The NG site says Norbert Rosen. :o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_franklin Posted July 6, 2002 Share Posted July 6, 2002 Make that Norbert <b>Rosing</b> D'OH!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markci Posted July 6, 2002 Share Posted July 6, 2002 <i>This guy was in Northern Alaska during winter shooting these majestic birds, and the tempetature would have made using a battery powered camera very difficult </i><p>Apparently not, since the R8 is an electronic, battery-powered camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geddert Posted July 6, 2002 Author Share Posted July 6, 2002 I need to get more sleep... this thread should be deleted. I'll ask Tony to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msitaraman Posted July 7, 2002 Share Posted July 7, 2002 I respectfully disagree. I think the photographs are spectacular too. Just a different, older style or approach to the subject matter perhaps. But technically? I think they are quite something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fran__ois_p._weill Posted July 7, 2002 Share Posted July 7, 2002 Dear Matthew, Don't be too confused about your mistake on the very nature of the R8. And please, don't delete this thread... I think your mistake reveals what many of us have tried to make understood by part of others here: The all mechanical superiority is nowadays a myth! Even in very cold climate (sometimes with a well known to other makes users external battery pack to be stocked in a warm pocket) a "battery dependent" camera is perfectly reliable... And battery dependence a total non-issue!... To me, your post is significant of the bias toward the alleged superiority of old technology which is pervasive - it seems - in this group. It should be kept in the archives as a demonstration this attitude is a totally unfounded bias. It conforts me into my opinion, Leica is still the king when it goes to the lenses but - particularly with M bodies - deliberately lagging behind in technology and only maintains this suicidal policy with the help of such biased opinions... It demonstrates some of our friends here should revise their judgements and try to assess things on a tad more objective base. Friendly François P. WEILL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_jones4 Posted July 7, 2002 Share Posted July 7, 2002 Norbert Rosing always uses leica r8's in extreme environments. I actually think that the bald eagle work is not his best. A piece in nat. geo. on walruses (?!) was incredible and produced some of the best wildlife images I've ever seen in the magazine. (I can't find the date but imagine it was in the last 12 months) In any case, Matthew's point is well made - R8s get a load of bad press on reliability and yet Mr Rosing seems to manage (maybe he's got 95 of them from leica in his rucksack) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fran__ois_p._weill Posted July 8, 2002 Share Posted July 8, 2002 Stephen, As far as I know the R8 MOTOR DRIVE (a separate accessory) got a lot of criticism about its reliability (especially the first ones issues if I correctly remember) but I never heard such commentaries about the body itself. Friendly. François P. WEILL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now