Judge Joe Brown Knows His Photography LOL

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Nomen Nescio, Mar 5, 2010.

  1. I know that. But it's a jargon term without a precise technical
    meaning. You won't find it used in a lens specification. It could be
    argued that of two lenses with equal maximum apertures one is faster
    than the other because it has higher transmissivity. That can be as
    much as a stop difference in a complex zoom. And it could be argued
    that a lens which vignettes more is slower when the whole image field
    is considered. And with today's lenses with in-lens focus motors there
    are important differences in autofocus speed between lenses. That
    matters a lot if you're trying to grab fleeting expressive moments in
    a wedding.

    So I can imagine one wedding photographer saying to another, "Your
    lens does have a bigger max aperture, but mine is faster in all
    respects because of the hypersonic motor, the lack of vignetting, and
    the better transmissivity of the coatings."

    The judge wasn't being technical. He was playing to the gallery of
    holiday and family photographers who were taught their camera
    technicalities by camera salesmen.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Mar 12, 2010
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Nomen Nescio

    Robert Coe Guest

    : > On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:32:19 -0500, Alan Browne
    : > : On 10-03-05 6:32 , Chris Malcolm wrote:
    : > : >> Here's a portion of the Judge Joe Brown episode that aired Monday in the US.
    : > : >> The case involved a woman who felt cheated when the wedding photographer she
    : > : >> hired delivered poor results after using a Canon Rebel XTi, 18-55mm kit
    : > : >> lens, and a 70-300mm. What's interesting is how Judge Joe Brown actually
    : > : >> seems to know a thing or two about photography.
    : > : >
    : > : >> It's funny how the defendant shot "hundreds of weddings" without knowing
    : > : >> what the speed of her 70-300mm lens is.
    : > : >
    : > : >> http://www.petapixel.com/2010/03/03/judge-joe-brown-knows-his-photography
    : > : >
    : > : > I couldn't understand the question. Lenses don't have speed! Speed of
    : > : > focusing? But I googled it and discovered that some people call
    : > : > aperture speed, I suppose by analogy from such phrases as "fast
    : > : > glass".
    : > :
    : > : Always been called 'fast glass' or 'high speed lens' in my experience
    : > : (since the 80's).
    :
    : > My experience goes back to the 50s, and it was the same then.
    :
    : I know that. But it's a jargon term without a precise technical
    : meaning.

    No, it's a jargon term with a very precise technical meaning.

    : You won't find it used in a lens specification.

    But you'll find it widely used in articles written about photography, for both
    amateurs and professionals.

    : It could be argued that of two lenses with equal maximum apertures
    : one is faster than the other because it has higher transmissivity.
    : That can be as much as a stop difference in a complex zoom. And it
    : could be argued that a lens which vignettes more is slower when the
    : whole image field is considered. And with today's lenses with in-lens
    : focus motors there are important differences in autofocus speed
    : between lenses. That matters a lot if you're trying to grab fleeting
    : expressive moments in a wedding.

    And you could argue that a lens is slower if it doesn't roll away as fast when
    you drop it on a sloping sidewalk. So what? The terms "faster" and "slower" in
    the context of lenses already have meanings that everyone understands. And
    your arguments aren't likely to change that anytime soon. ;^)

    : So I can imagine one wedding photographer saying to another, "Your
    : lens does have a bigger max aperture, but mine is faster in all
    : respects because of the hypersonic motor, the lack of vignetting,
    : and the better transmissivity of the coatings."

    I guess you've got a more active imagination than I have.

    : The judge wasn't being technical. He was playing to the gallery
    : of holiday and family photographers who were taught their camera
    : technicalities by camera salesmen.

    I dunno. Some of his quips ("Where's your '1 series'?") were a bit subtle for
    the gallery.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Mar 12, 2010
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Of course. Just as the word "gun" is widely used in articles about
    firearms, by and for professionals. But in a court case hinging on
    technical details of the firearm used I'd expect rather more precise
    terminology.
    But unlike all the examples I gave that wouldn't affect wedding
    photographs in ways directly related to the speed of taking
    photographs.
    I have no desire to change that. I was just pointing out that there
    already exist better more precise terms which everybody already
    understands. Such as aperture.
    That's the point about the words used in a law court. That's why when
    it matters people employ imnaginative lawyers who can establish
    ambiguities that would never have occurred to you.
    Supposing that a wedding photographer operating at the cheap end of
    the wedding photography market ought to be using a "1 series" camera
    isn't subtle. It's wrong. But to a gallery who don't know what a "1
    series" but are getting the idea that the stupid photographer was
    using the wrong kit it sounds like another point scored to the judge
    and another humiliation for the photographer. That's playing to the
    gallery.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Mar 14, 2010
    #23
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.