Lives in Japan Chiba, Japan
Works as a Writer, Audio Critic
Has a website at
Joined on Sep 14, 2010
About me:

utterly impressionable


Total: 300, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On Pentax 645Z added to studio comparison database article (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

Felix E Klee: In a professional context, for example for fashion photography in a studio, what is the advantage of a medium format camera today?

Today's full frame sensors and optics provide more than enough resolution for even very large printed ads, and dynamic range there is plenty as well. Furthermore, in a studio environment, I expect lighting to be perfect and the pro photographer to frame close to the final result.

For landscape photography medium format is interesting, but that's not my question.

MF in a body like this... I see little to no point. The Leica S2 is at least sleek and easy to use. This is 100% a brick and nothing else.

MF backs, on the other hand, are completely different. They allow wide angle lenses with extremely close sensor relations to work on bellows and focal plane shift cameras, and are absolutely necessary for extreme architecture photography and still life where a single image is better suited than a composit.

MF backs with the right camera make 100% sense if you use them for their strengths. They make no sense at all if you use them exactly as you would your D800.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 17, 2014 at 13:30 UTC
In reply to:

JoEick: Oh snap! Talk about something out of left field.

Sony should be out with theirs soon enough. :)

One thing to keep in mind: the MF cameras rumoured about in various press sites are all complete bodies, not separate, enclosed, open-frame sensors. Open frame sensors are the most adaptable capture equipment on the planet. If you put it inside a body, you then contend with longer flange distance, greater fragility, the possibility to break both the sensor and camera, or failing that, suffer a hardware failure of one and lose both.

This is a medium format back on a focal plane adapter. It is not, like the Pentax 645 or Leica S2, a medium format camera body.

The two are incredibly different. Sony, if they bring a MF thing out, it won't be open like this; it will be trapped inside a body and unable, therefore, to work with wide angle LF lenses and because of flange distances and body sizes, not properly be adaptable to 4x5 cameras without further extending that same distance.

A back is not the same thing as a camera body. I'm surprised that still people compare camera backs and body

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2014 at 12:53 UTC
In reply to:

DanK7: This just shows what engineers left alone without production, marketing, accounting and other unnecessary hangers-on can come up with, haha. Interesting to see what sector of the industry will find a useful application for this package. Any ideas? I think I'd put my money toward a Pentax 645 not knowing any better.

A focal-plane shutter for a digital back is an incredible asset: you can use wide-ange LF lenses without the necessity of lens shutters, adapt bellows, pin holes, and much more. Not to mention, most important camera movements can only be done with lenses of longer than 80mm focal length.

Large sensors are vital. And currently the only way to get all the stuff I mentioned above plus a LOT more, is with a shallow flange back. Even your Sony E mount is too deep. This is vital and will continue to be vital for photographers like me, who shoot products for a living.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2014 at 12:47 UTC
In reply to:

DavidsfotosDotCom: Whats the dynamic range & bit depth? Should be waterproof for that price.

I assume your comment is sarcasm intended to beat the whiners at their own game. 'Miright?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2014 at 09:26 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II: A professional's opinion article (502 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: Thanks DPR,

This forum could use more user insight from professional photographers who actually choose and use equipment based on its ability to help them earn a living. Ms. Hansen's critique of the 7D Mk II clearly shows how Canon chose to improve on and address real issues that affect serious photographers who were looking for a low cost pro-grade camera to add to their kits. To hell with WiFi, hope Canon adds the voice recorder function to the Mark III version. :)

You might be surprised how many professionals there are in this forum that DO choose small 35mm or APS-C cameras to do their work. They chime in here and there. But largely, they are overlooked.

This is a gear forum and I'm not sure the opinion of professionals is that important to the general reader.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2014 at 22:54 UTC
In reply to:

dtssound: Forget about small format. I want a full frame mirrorless medium format with 645 size sensor camera. Fujifilm should make a medium format version of all the X series cameras. They will be game changers!

And sell like hotcakes.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 13:15 UTC
In reply to:

hexxthalion: I like the S, not much bigger than your CaNikon pro body yet it's so much nicer in the hand and doesn't have billion buttons

@hexxthalion: thank you for the link. I use 4x5 backs with both A7r and with Phase One backs (rented). The big difference is the flange difference. Even the A7r, with its shallow flange, misses infinity on wide angle lenses even with wide angle bellows. The S, with its deep flange distance, wouldn't be able to hit infinity with great 45mm Rodagon APO digital, which doesn't work very well with long flanges.

But for non-bellows work, the S looks great.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 12:01 UTC
In reply to:

hexxthalion: I like the S, not much bigger than your CaNikon pro body yet it's so much nicer in the hand and doesn't have billion buttons

It is an awesome design. If I didn't rely on bellows and extension with wide angle lenses, I'd love to grab one. It's just that it's nice to exchange backs, and that can't be done with the S. But wonderful, easy-to-use, design that looks and performs well.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 22:55 UTC

You can tell a collector's camera by how fugly it is. I'd love for the M60 to become a reality for regular M owners and Leica fans, but at normal Leica prices, and in a normal M package. That thing looks like a cylon.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 22:51 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

ThatCamFan: I will NEVER understand why people buy a film camera for 3800$ nor why they will buy a full frame camera for 8000$ when they can get far better camera's for far less a price, let us not kid our self's, you are paying ONLY for the name, not the image quality that comes third, second place being build quality.
(guess Leica doesn't care so much about image quality huh?)

"There is scarcely anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse, and sell a little more cheaply. The person who buys on price alone is this man's lawful prey."

John Ruskin

The idea that 'better' means 'more features' is subjective. Leica is the only digital camera company that has a brand to sell. Every other company has pandered to the worst of the quote above so that you buy knowing full well that what you have in your hand could be another camera, from another brand. If only the price is right.

What happens when your corporate modus operandi is best-price-for-features is that you shed things that matter in the long run. Canon customers are not in it for the long run. Ditto Nikon. Ditto Sony. Ditto everyone else.

Only Leica have lifelong customers (of course not everyone fits this mould), and have a brand, and image, and expectation.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 22:50 UTC
In reply to:

Akos Kozari: I'm thinking on what Oskar Barnack would say about creating a machine that not aiming to make the photography as easy as possible. I think it does not fit to the original philosophy... It is my 2 cents. On the other hand: i can confirm: Leica has a feeling and i would be happy to own one. Now if i would have money i would rather choose Fuji X-T1 instead. That follows the philosophy i meant...

To which camera are you referring? The M-A is pretty much as it ever was in mechanical cameras, the M60 is the same as an electronic film camera, but with a digital sensor. All controls in the right spot, and no frills. What's not 'as easy as possible' about that?

Even today's simplest digital cameras (okay, not today's simplest as they are all Leica cameras, so let's say today's somewhat simple cameras like the X100) require you to know function buttons, to know how to change focus points, require you to know how to switch between EVF and OVF and how to trust an AF system.

The X-T1 is a far more complicated camera to operate than even the most complicated Leica is. I agree with the poster below me: a smartphone would probably be close to Barnack's vision.

And barring that, any Leica, which, though heavy, are far simpler to use than ANY digital camera today.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 22:44 UTC
In reply to:

webber15: Actually,,I'm partly right coz I was referring to the MA which is purely mechanical...I will take that beach front property for part ex on my Fuji x10 :-)

@BJN: every Leica camera I've seen, including fully mechanical cameras, have had shoes. They are not for flashes, but for accessory viewfinders, etc., and later built to take signal to transfer to a flash.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 22:39 UTC
In reply to:

spontaneousservices: "raw [...] so you don't need to worry about white balance" (picture 5)


Don't know how other people do this but in my experience noise can make it very difficult to lift shadow parts when WB was recorded badly at the moment of capture.

Anyway. The M60 must have started as a practical joke.

I'm sure that a number of us would love to own a screen-less M (if not a lighter M), but probably most of us _here_ that would like that camera are not in the market for the M60. Why? It's a collector's item. It is styled and built like one. It is priced like one.

Denigrating it on photographic merits is like denigrating a trophy of a golfer on its merits on the green. When a real screen-less M comes out for regular M users/fans, feel free to chime in, as that camera will be made for photographers.

But the idea is very much like colour film. You can go through procedures to match colour profiles to the film, or you can trust the sensing electronics.

That's it.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 22:36 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (650 comments in total)
In reply to:

burnin: Fujifilm is on it, making a great camera even better - and not screwing it up in the process.

If only they kept the same hardware interface. Now switching between an X100/s and an X100t will be difficult due to numerous interface incompatibilities.

Reliability isn't a Fujifilm maxim.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 06:03 UTC
On Fujifilm offers silver X-T1 and firmware update article (137 comments in total)
In reply to:

cjyphoto: I think I'm done with Fuji. Will continue to add to my Canon system.

The temptation is huge. Constantly changing interfaces, few, if any guidelines for user interaction... it gets very tiring. I understand the fanboi reasons for sticking with it, but this system is fracturing at a rapid pace.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 05:59 UTC
In reply to:

JackM: Shamless copy of a Leica III

@Holger: this isn't a good spot for this debate. But I agree, innovators stand on the backs of other innovators.

Unfortunately, innovation and wholesale stealing are different. Japan inherited free patents, designs, and plans not to mention were dumped a whole bunch of German technology after WWII.

Prior to that they still copied down to the screws the Zeiss and Leicas not to mention certain war boats. Until very very recently, Japan has been a copycat culture where it comes to foreign technology.

I live here by the way.

I also lived in South Korea. I had no idea what Samsung were.

Samsung started as a sugar importer, then a grocery chain. Eventually they started copying TVs from other manufacturers and then making their own and then parts. But Samsung did not wholly copy the inner tech quite like Canon and Nikon did. They got to be the world's largest conglomerate through other means. Then they copied the iPhone. Canon, Nikon go to where they are BEAUSE they copied.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2014 at 01:12 UTC
On Samsung introduces Galaxy Note 4 phablet with OIS post (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: I see a lot of women with Notes.. mostly because they are easy to tote around in purses/handbags. For men, its far too large unless you are using a man-purse or have extra large pockets.

I wonder at some people's 'slim jeans'. I can barely fit my iPhone 5 in my jeans. How in the hell can you fit a NOTE in your 'slim jeans'?

Either they are not slim, or for some people, 'slim' is a loose term.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2014 at 06:31 UTC
In reply to:

JackM: Shamless copy of a Leica III

@Holger Drallmeyer

I think every one of us can appreciate a company that transforms a market into a consumer, not a luxury market. But that maker doesn't have to copy. That isn't necessary.

Yet, every one of today's successful Japanese camera companies got where they are today by copying, not by building something original and establishing markets that they invented.

Leica may never have understood the consumer market. But they understood invention and creating something their own. Canon and Nikon egregiously copied and stole markets that they never had to lift a finger to create.

Neither should be praised for reaching their current positions.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2014 at 04:20 UTC
In reply to:

JackM: Shamless copy of a Leica III

@Andreas: certain Japanese companies have contributed to one area far more than companies of other nations: making reliable electronic platforms. No one comes close. Quality has gotten worse over the years, but the basic tenet is the same.

But Japanese companies were able to reduce costs through many means:

1. getting free patents
2. copying
3. reducing complexity

The third one is laudable, but it came only after completing step 1 and 2. And they got away with it. Today, much of the population below 30 has no idea to what extent Japanese companies went to copy their competitors. Even today, you can come to Japan and see Toyota cars that look like they rolled straight out of Jaguar factories, or BMW factors, and especially Benz factories.

But those cars are sold only in Japan. And Japanese companies, again, get away with it.

I owned several old Canon cameras, two of which looked just like the Leica IIIs. I bought them because they were cheap by way of comparison.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2014 at 09:47 UTC
In reply to:

JackM: Shamless copy of a Leica III

Vignes: stating the truth: that Japanese companies copied (for decades, and even today, slavishly) isn't racist. If you've forgotten those facts, that is a problem.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2014 at 09:26 UTC
Total: 300, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »