Austin:
No problem with me. That is what makes the Internet a great place.
There are plenty of other places to get information on products and
see hands on reviews. One should only place credibility where it is
due.
FWIW: I have been shooting professionally since 1989 when I
graduated from Brooks out in Santa Barbara. I have been shooting
digitally since 1995 and was one of the first studios in southern
California to go digital (Sinar Bron then Phase One). My film/lab
bill in 1999 was about $65,000, my film/lab bill for 2002 was
approximately $3500 (mostly large format). I am billing about
$400,000 more in 2003/2004 than I was in 1999. I can count the
number of jobs I shoot on film in one year on two hands. Clients
just don't ask for a film deliverable any more.
Regards,
Duncan
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Austin
Franklin" <darkroom@i...> wrote:
> Duncan,
>
> > I know Michael and can state without a doubt that he has no agenda
> > and is not biased in any way by any of the equipment
manufacturers or
> > other outside factors.
>
> My experience has been entirely different. My opinion of what I've
read of
> his, is he is very biased (and specifically towards Canon, and they
can do
> no wrong). He proclaims, every time that a new Canon Digicam comes
out,
> that it is far better than any film camera etc. etc....and the
demise of
> film is at hand...when it simply was not true. Eventually, it will
be
> true...but he's been proclaiming the death of film, and trying to
> rationalize and justify his simply erroneous claims, for years now.
>
> The first reviews I read of his were his touting of the D-30, and
it was
> completely biased...I'd say no one but a paid PR person could have
written
> the review I read, as it was completely at odds with just about
every other
> review out there as to the realistic capabilities of the camera.
IMO, his
> film/digital tests were flawed, as was his understanding of how the
digital
> process worked. He also wrote a highly biased (almost sycophantic,
IMO)
> Hasselblad V-1 review...which, when challenged, pouted and took his
marbles
> and went home. That's why he writes a one sided web site, instead
of
> allowing himself to be challenged in public.
>
> > Granted you are reading his opinions, but his
> > opinions are experienced and educated and he will not hesitate to
say
> > something is a piece of crap if it is.
>
> I have not seen that in the reviews of his I've read.
>
> > He will also correct himself
> > if he catches an error or omission of his or anyone else's doing.
>
> My experience is that is true only if he agrees with it...
>
> > He will give you his honest opinions and back them up with field
> > data...
>
> Yes, and when shown his data *might* be wrong, especially if it
challenges
> his (IMO at times erroneous) "understanding", he simply ignores it.
>
> > You have to decide yourself
> > what emphasis to place on information coming from any
publication...
>
> Of course...
>
> > but
> > I place a high degree of respect in Michael's opinions...
>
> I am not the only one who has publicly said that he needs to be
taken with a
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> large grain of salt...it's been said many a time, by many very
> respected/knowledgeable people.
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin