rileyuk.co.uk

Now we both have digital SLRs (Pentax *istDS) and Sue has a tiny 5MP compact (Pentax S5i) I thought it might be nice to get a compact for business trips, so I opted for the Pentax 750Z (7 MP).

Very impressed so far, very sharp lens, good noise control although not as good as the SLRs (much smaller chip) and not so tiny that it can't be held steadily.

First result will be on ePHOTOzine shortly after midnight on my portfolio page under johnriley1uk. If you have time to have a look, let me know what you think?

JR

I had a quick look and the image looked very nice indeed. Are you pleased with your new toy then?

Yes I am pleased, and toy it might be in one way, but it certainlt delivers the goods in terms of image quality.

These cameras are now so good and so easy to use lots of non-photographers are producing pictures that can be better than those from people who think they really are photographers.

The standard is going up and up all the time.

How do you define a non-photographer, john?

What does that even mean? Non-photographer? Surely a photographer is anyone who owns a camera, with an interest in taking pictures?

As you know, there are a lot of technical aspects to photography, such as shutter speeds, apertures, hyperfocal distance, and so on, in fact hundreds of techniques.

So in this context I am defining a "non-photographer" as someone who is unaware of the technicalities, but of course some will be very, very good at recognising a good composition and very capable of taking great pictures with automatic cameras.

The ultimate example is Arwensgrace, who is an artist with limited photographic knowledge but a good grasp of photoshop and a terrific ability to make photographs that reveal her vision of the world.

It is entirely possible to have a "photographer" who is technically brilliant, but totally unable to make a good photograph.