leslie_cheung

I appreciate the info, Jim. It seems like the route I'm going, with an addition of Qom and Yazd, but we'll see. My itinerary is very loose...

tips or experiences welcome, thanks!

If you still reading this...try to avoid the highway between Barstow and Bakersfield, a large portion of it was a pain in the butt to drive thru. I15 is fine to LV. High 62 north of Joshua Tree through yucca valley and 29 palmS is good. 95 highway between i10 and i40 is fine also...from my recollection.

infrastructure and large, fast CSR team with deep knowledge and numerous rental locales do take a long time to develop. Louis +1

For me, 85mm 1.4f Zeiss and Nikon. I still tend to shoot portraitures with 35/28mm, my usual street lenses. I find shooting informal (unposed) portraiture at f2 - f1.4 tough...the shallow dof is great, but my success rate is, say, 1 in 4 or 5 (in focused and good all around). And the lens is big and heavy (relative to me). Have not bought gears in, maybe 2.5 years? I bought the LX7 new, whenever that came out... I did use the 85mm more than a dozen times though. My 12-24mm FF sigma? Used it maybe 4 times to shoot interior/house pics

Does a photograph reproduction of a painting count? Three weeks ago, I looked at a photo of a painting of a beautifully drawn Muslim Obama with long beard, large ears and them little cap. It was wonderfully done, only with slight embellishments, very realistic unlike some badly drawn cartoon characters. I looked at it three nights in a row, each maybe 15-20 seconds, debating whether to purchase it or not...

<p>1. As mentioned already, the 7800 isn't FF.<br> 2. DSLRs are large and bulky compared to compacts and mirrorless, so they are kinda never low key.<br> 3. However, street photography is almost always more about the photographer than the camera(s).</p> <p>I'd just use the d700, then if you are still wanting a smaller camera after, say, after two or three months. Look into mirrorless cameras. </p>

Yup, first world problem; too damn many options. Well...let us narrow it down. Are you interested in nature or more urban, say, street photography type shooter? Or, is shooting secondary to your fun, music and explorations? I'd, as mentioned, avoid LAX still....And remember "you can't always get what you want". And take the lesser known roads if possible. For instance, I5 is damn dull between LA and SF, to say the least...

I suggest you prioritize your wants and needs first, how much driving yall want, and what (and how much) y'all want to see? Your question is very open ended...with that time frame, you could drive to yellow stone or Seattle... I'd think about how much driving y'all want to be involved in, your trip's general vicinity and what you like to see, explore and photograph.

JDM, interchangeable lens and electronic vf aren't evil. I was referring to truths and lies, and with context. Great art is but a lie telling a truth...truth begins in lies. Evil, less or more are the loudmouthed big ego idiotic buffoon, and the slyly smiling lying warhawk, for example. You know Dick got impeached today 42 years ago, and truth was told -it was by photographs and recordings- and lead to Dicks admission...

As Matt used to say, guns don't kill people, people do. With regards to truths and lies, it's both...like the grey scale. One is more evil while the other less evil...isn't it?

Do the math, are they worth it? If so, buy...if not, don't. Digital cams lose their value too fast imo. My kit probably is worth less than half of their cost when new...

<p>>>>She is looking for something that will fit in her purse...<<<<br> Big purse, small purse? They come in various sizes, as do cameras. I personally find Sony and Panasonic cameras are easier, with regards to flash/menus organization, to use than the rest. I use Olympus, Nikon, Sony, and Panasonic mostly these days. </p>

<p>I use flash drives to separate originals between cameras before portable hds and LR. I use a combination of camera/date/country/city/name/event etc...</p>

<p>Carry on, didn't mean to stop Lannie's inquiry...</p> <p><br /> If I were to shoot action sports (where I can't be in the way), I would bring a dslr with a traditional OVF, along with a 70-200mm...pretty standard gear. Probably machine gun more and hope for the best.</p> <p><br /> If it were just kids playing on the street, I'd use my regular gears (non dslr stuff). And semi get into action, using my go to FL 24-50mm equivalent. Always be aware of the surrounding, be level headed...</p>

<p><br /> >>>I absolutely disagree with Leslie -- when carried preset for light and at hyperfocal, nothing is faster than a film Leica or Nikon. Simply raise and snap the shutter, faster than the quickest autofocus, no delay at all.<<<</p> <p>That was your statement, Sandy, no? You brought it (speed) up first...I could careless how you shoot, but your statement is false...the M9 has a 0.125 lag and shoots an amazing 1.7 (rounded up) fps second! Quick for a what, a $8k camera? I got no idea how much a Nikon DF cost, never mind how much a leica these days...</p> <p>And I don't even have to raise my sony or olympus to my eyes to shoot and they cost much less:)</p> <p> </p>

<p>>>>You can pick whatever exceptions that you care to name to try and prove your point.<<<</p> <p>Sandy, it is you with the exception, specifically with hyper focusing and preset metering. FWIW data from IR site.</p> <p>Nikon d750: AF single focus 0.206 || AF multi 51points 0.228 || MF 0.055 || Prefocused 0.054<br /> NIkon DF: AF single focus 0.274 || AF multi 39points 0.493 || MF 0.079 || Prefocused 0.054 <br /> Pana LX100: AF single focus 0.177 || AF multi 49points 0.211 || MF 0.054 || Prefocused 0.019 <br /> Sony RX100 I: AF single wide 0.153 || AF single tele 0.266 || MF 0.032 || Prefocused 0.013<br /> Olympus EPL5: AF single focus 0.221 || AF multi area 0.255 || MF 0.100 || Prefocused 0.064 <br /> <br /> <strong>Again, it's not the camera that matter most, but the interaction between you with the subject(s)</strong><br /><br /></p>

<p>>>>No way to prove which is faster. <<<<br> Sandy--<br> Obviously, you have never been to shutter lag measurement sites. </p>

<p>>>>when carried preset for light and at hyperfocal, nothing is faster than a film Leica or Nikon.<<<<br /> <br /> How does one preset for light at night, guy? Are you saying you hyper focus f16/11/8 every time, even 10 at night? And you never selective focus with a summilux, or even a 'cron, what...don't like leica glass bokeh? Gimme a break, the reality is either my d700, epl5, and sony rx100 can beat a manual M 80-90% of the time. I shot leica M for almost a decade, and they are great cameras. But speed isn't their forte. Shutter lag is super fast, but that's it...metering, focusing, shot to shot time is slow. Reflex are slow...for single shots, my compacts out quick all mirror cameras, dare I say. <br /> <br /> Well, perhaps you only shoot in bright light, and never selective focus... </p>

<p>I think you think an awful lot about thinking on how to shoot. <br /> <br /> It depends on the situation, and also they are not so black and white. Often I don't talk to people, not a word. When it's called for, I shoot a couple frames and strike up a lengthy conversation, and shoot some more if the situation is good. Other times, I say one or couple lines, and thanks her/him/them. Still other times, I just nod and smile. Other more complex situations call for hand communication, like when shooting abroad, not knowing the language (when a nod, smile isn't enough). It sounds difficult, but it's all very fluid, feeling the vibe of the subjects, the mood, demeanors etc...</p> <p>And what you shoot with matters, but just a little. I used to shoot with Leica M's (and other manual cams). They are somewhat slower working (which isn't necessarily bad). Now, my cameras autofocus, meter and shoot like 4 or 5fps. But the gist of it all is still --<em>the interaction between you and the subject(s)</em>--.</p> <p>And what's with the all caps?</p>

<ol> <li><strong>Is photography hard or easy? </strong></li> </ol> <p>It's about a 7 imo. You didn't say great photography, and what about taste/preferences. Is McCurry great? I never thought so, though many did/ still do.</p> <p><strong> 2.How does either of these characterizations influence the way beginners approach photography?</strong></p> <p>People often approach photography (cooking, or whatever) with their associates, peers, then it becomes a groupthink kinda deal, especially with social media these days...they can compete against each other, or quit together, just as easy. Plus, beginners usually know jack. Once, they stick with it, they often do change their minds (about photography)</p> <p><strong> 3. Should practitioners take offence if photography was said to be easy</strong><br> <br />People will be offended to almost anything, I personally wouldn't<br> <br /> <strong> 4. Should we lean more toward "Photography is easy"?</strong></p> <p>I can really careless, but i lean toward easy, because I'm more less a street photog, so it helps me if cameras are ubiquitous:) </p> <p> </p>

<p>People aren't thick skin here (people get offended very, very easily)...so they censored it out all together instead, maybe two years ago, as JDM said.</p>

<p>Some I think would fit the bill: Alec Soth, Elliott Erwitt, Diane Arbus, Martin Parr, Trent Parke<br> Some I particularly like that could fit the bill: Eugene Richards, Antoine d'Agata, Daido Moriyama, Jacob Aue Sobol, Mary Ellen Mark</p>

<p>Robert Frank in my book. Steve McCurry probably to many others (at least until recently;) </p>

<p>Fur isn't very good, to say the least.</p>