kickniko

Very nice shots, John! "Sam raphael valley" demonstrates the really excellent light metering of the T90 and its small dependence on filters for good photography. With such metering system, almost anything is possible. The photo "Mario's" is one of those situations, when a tiny domain of the exposure values is the best. And you can really find that using the multispot metering feature - great!

Indeed it is an excellent camera. I use it heavily myself, and up to now there were no lighting problems for me that were unsolvable with my T90. For any given situation there is a solution that you can work out using its incomparable light metering possibilities. And if we also consider the manual corrections in 1/3-steps then we have such a balanced yet incredibly versatile metering system. But may I add some things more, that make this camera so special to me:

1) The nice possibility to see through the lense in working apperture mode. One can exactly see the effects of narrowing/widening the apperture - less light, more DoF, or more light less DoF. This is a great and easy way to choose exactly the DoF one wants to have. In combination with metering and a huge range of exposition times (From 1/4000s up to bulb), this gives us all the possibilities we need.

2) The camera is built virtually like a tank. Robust, trusty, very very resistant body, always ready to shoot. I have mine for years now, and I bought it second hand. And still it works perfectly!

3) The good old T90 is such an enery preserving wonder! You really forget when the camera had its last battery change. Out on the field you just take a spare battery pack just in case, and that's all you have to care. Simple common AA you can find anywhere.

Cheers and best wishes,

Nick

Nice you agree. Or else I would give you only 2s and 3s ;-)

No, seriously now, even schools start wondering about ratings - how much more difficult it has to be in arts to find "an adequate rating system", since there are no "measurable standards" that can be applied. So we stick to the currently used rating system and to our own work.

Cheers,

Nick

I am also new and already have the impression that many guys here with really very individual style unfortunately give ratings much too much weight. Art doesn't know any "objective formula" to be rated. And things like "nice", "awful", or "bad", "not interesting" are always subjective. Everybody has his or her own "rules" and many times we ourselves can't explain why we like or dislike something. Accepting that art cannot be quantified and that anybody applies the own rules of perception, one has also to accept that those people who rate low have their own ideas about what is nice or not. So perhaps it could do good to consider ratings as a kind of diffuse measure about what *others* think about a photo and continue doing the own thing just as if nothing happened. The suggestions that come along with the ratings can't be thought as guaranty for making "good photos" because all photos cease to be good for the photographer if they don't obey his/her own gusto. Suggestions are for me that part of the discussion that occures in arts in general. And this discussion also contains destructive elements of arguing.

Another thing is of course not to argue at all, that is to rate low and don't explain why. Perhaps it is because the photo-catalog is full and life is short?

Perhaps also, there are indeed guys that enjoy giving low rating just for the fun of it. So let them be. This can do no harm if you are really convinced that you did a good job, even if the rest of the world doesn't share your opinion. The own imagination and creativity is the important thing here.

Remember, when Bach was composing, the rest of the musicians of his time had the opinion that he "coupled disharmonious tones". Thanks heavens he was not influenced by their ratings.

So just shoot *your* photos, even if nobody finds them good.