fmian

fmian

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Photographer/Re-toucher/Consultant
Has a website at www.primephotography.com.au
Joined on Mar 28, 2010

Comments

Total: 236, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' article (554 comments in total)

Knowing Nikon's output as of late it will:

1. Feature a long and convoluted menu system where one has to jump through hoops to enable mirror lock up.
2. Include at least 3 unlabelled buttons, including another one hidden inside a rotating switch.
3. Have a focusing screen suitable for AF and not MF.
4. Spell another change in their lens design so these new lenses are not fully compatible with certain bodies.
5. Create a furor among the public because of price/performance aspect. Will become best selling camera of the year when it goes on fire sale at a loss.
6. Come with some simple design fault that causes major problems. This will be swept under the rug when a year later the model is replaced with the same thing slightly redesigned.

Honestly, if you want pure simplicity with photography then just shoot film with an old camera.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2013 at 10:06 UTC as 65th comment | 4 replies
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2381 comments in total)

Hope it does not suffer from shutter shock.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 22:32 UTC as 453rd comment
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2143 comments in total)

This is the camera that the EP1 should have been to launch the m43 system over 4 years ago.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2013 at 13:23 UTC as 442nd comment | 6 replies

The film is a beautiful emulsion. Colours are accurate and do not fade.
The camera is a true medium format. Would be really nice if they applied a standard f/2.8 lens, manual focus and manual control.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2013 at 06:58 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

fmian: I don't think think the photographer is dissing film. He has done a remarkable job of representing the tv show in its mood and colour palette. If I wore a hat it would go off to him.
It's more like DPreview had taken the photographers line out of context and is using it to create a title to provoke anti film discussion.
Lets see some 25iso film on medium or large format and see how sharp that is.
And to take it a step further, lets look at 2-4 ISO tin or glass plates (I know, it's technically not film). I have a modern 3 ISO image captured on 8x10 tin that is sharper than anything digital can produce.

Well that's a benchmark that needs to be tested then :)
I've used some leaf and phase one backs and have not been impressed thus far. Even at ISO100 the shadows kinda look murky.
I wonder if 200mp will help at all to stop digital looking flat and lifeless, regardless of what you do with curves to try and remedy.
My opinion is we need to move away from the Bayer filter,

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2013 at 12:37 UTC

I don't think think the photographer is dissing film. He has done a remarkable job of representing the tv show in its mood and colour palette. If I wore a hat it would go off to him.
It's more like DPreview had taken the photographers line out of context and is using it to create a title to provoke anti film discussion.
Lets see some 25iso film on medium or large format and see how sharp that is.
And to take it a step further, lets look at 2-4 ISO tin or glass plates (I know, it's technically not film). I have a modern 3 ISO image captured on 8x10 tin that is sharper than anything digital can produce.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2013 at 01:32 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Provia_fan: Film was never this sharp because it was more faithful than digital is. It's almost like the old vynil vs CD debate. Are CDs really better because it cuts off unwanted frequencies?

Rallyfan, calling out people who think one looks better than the other as delusional is also insulting.
To simply boil it down to a matter of grain vs detail shows that you have limited visuals in seeing the difference, ie. impaired vision, ie. blindness.
Is that logical enough for you?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 23:27 UTC
In reply to:

Provia_fan: Film was never this sharp because it was more faithful than digital is. It's almost like the old vynil vs CD debate. Are CDs really better because it cuts off unwanted frequencies?

Wow, Rallyfan. Kinda disturbing to know that some camera users out there are blind. There is a clear difference between film and digital. If you can't see it then more power to those who can I guess.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 22:06 UTC
On Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR hints at mid-range DSLR article (191 comments in total)

Why wouldn't someone who wants this kind of versatility just buy a Tamron 18-270 instead. If you were picky about optical quality you wouldn't buy this anyway.
Also, anyone know if this has a plastic or metal mount? Have seen several 18-105 lenses break their plastic mounts and it really is a poor quality choice for such a big lens.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2013 at 23:32 UTC as 32nd comment

Technically, this is not a scanner, as there is no scan head passing over the film. It's a copier, and anyone can make one out of a shoebox.
Also, there are similar cheap devices already available that use a 5mp digital camera built in, and save directly to sd card.
This product is not to be taken seriously, just like most lomo products.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2013 at 00:09 UTC as 11th comment
On Olympus to axe V-series point-and-shoot cameras article (133 comments in total)
In reply to:

fmian: Lets face it, serious camera users and knowledgeable professionals don't buy Olympus anymore. They used to, with the four thirds lineup, and Olympus all but ditched that to start making inferior toy cameras with the pen range. It took years of minor updates and cameras made for the dumb masses that just look 'cute' next to an SLR, before they got to the OMD stage. And even the OMD is only half the camera that the top end four thirds body ever was, and they still can't design it to fit and control in the hand properly.
Now Olympus has to pay professionals to go around telling people to buy their gear to generate false word of mouth.
They used to be well regarded with their compact cameras that felt good in the hand, but now, save for a few models, most of their point and shoots seem cheap and plasticky.
Olympus has put themselves in this position by alienating their users.
Lumix is a higher regarded and more asked for name than Olympus, and Lumix isn't even the name of the company.

Mr Fidler,
Tell that to the scores of people who had to sell off their high end FT lenses because Olympus stopped being serious about making bodies.
Also tell it to those that held on to their lenses with hope, bought the OMD, then had Olympus turn around a few months after launch and announce that it couldn't AF those high end lenses as well as the older E-5. Even though Olympus claim the OMD is the pinnacle of their AF technology.
If being aware of a company doing this is what you call ignorance and biased, then you need a dictionary.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2013 at 04:52 UTC
On Olympus to axe V-series point-and-shoot cameras article (133 comments in total)

Lets face it, serious camera users and knowledgeable professionals don't buy Olympus anymore. They used to, with the four thirds lineup, and Olympus all but ditched that to start making inferior toy cameras with the pen range. It took years of minor updates and cameras made for the dumb masses that just look 'cute' next to an SLR, before they got to the OMD stage. And even the OMD is only half the camera that the top end four thirds body ever was, and they still can't design it to fit and control in the hand properly.
Now Olympus has to pay professionals to go around telling people to buy their gear to generate false word of mouth.
They used to be well regarded with their compact cameras that felt good in the hand, but now, save for a few models, most of their point and shoots seem cheap and plasticky.
Olympus has put themselves in this position by alienating their users.
Lumix is a higher regarded and more asked for name than Olympus, and Lumix isn't even the name of the company.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 22:52 UTC as 26th comment | 7 replies

The question is, will this lens perform well wide open, or will it have to be stopped down?
Most good fast prime lenses benefit greatly from being stopped down.
For example, a 1.4 prime will perform much better stopped down to 2.8, and will still give you a decent shallow dof when required. A 2 stop sacrifice for sharpness.
Will this lens need to be stopped down as well? Cause if it needs to be by say, 2 stops, then you are left with a dof equivalent of >5.6, which is not very shallow.

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 15:41 UTC as 26th comment | 5 replies
On Resurrecting a WWII optic with scraps and a 3D printer article (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

fmian: To the guy who made this... thing.
You could have bought a 6x6 film camera for a couple hundred dollars, adapted this lens to mount on it, and then gone through the process of developing your own black and white film. Then you might have learnt something from the process.
As such, you have spent a lot of time and effort to make something that only produces a result like a waterlogged toy camera. With no flexibility.
I shudder to think how the designers of this lens would feel if they could see what you have done.

Wait, I got inches mixed up with cm.
Stick a 5x4 or 8x10 sheet film where that focusing screen is instead.

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2013 at 04:26 UTC
On Resurrecting a WWII optic with scraps and a 3D printer article (59 comments in total)

To the guy who made this... thing.
You could have bought a 6x6 film camera for a couple hundred dollars, adapted this lens to mount on it, and then gone through the process of developing your own black and white film. Then you might have learnt something from the process.
As such, you have spent a lot of time and effort to make something that only produces a result like a waterlogged toy camera. With no flexibility.
I shudder to think how the designers of this lens would feel if they could see what you have done.

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2013 at 01:22 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply

Perhaps dpreview should create a 'low brow' news section, and allow readers to filter out this stuff, and the article about the guy who adapted a large lens to take photos with his mft camera.

The premise of this article is a total non issue. Should we reconsider modifying images when sending them to pre-press, should a colour image never be displayed in black and white?

Blah!

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2013 at 01:04 UTC as 67th comment | 3 replies
On Just posted: Pentax MX-1 Preview Samples article (55 comments in total)
In reply to:

fmian: In regards to this cameras handling, I think it feels like a dog made out of bricks.
The camera is weighted horribly towards the opposite side to the grip, seemingly beyond the placement of the lens. While having no protruding grip, there is also an annoying strap lug placed where the fingers would sit, along with a mash of tiny buttons and nothing for my thumb to grip except the back dial.
On top of all that, the outer section of the lens is deceptively designed to make you think that it can be rotated to change settings. But it can't.
The only saving grace seems to be the lens, and the way the camera looks from certain angles. I was also quite unimpressed by the fact that the top flash plate, where it says 'BRASS' actually seems to be made of plastic.
Too little, too late. Pentax, please see Canon & Olympus for how to design a compact camera.

The top and bottom plates of the camera are cold to the touch.
The top plate of the pop up flash is not cold to the touch. It is a different material to the rest of the plate.
Please hold the camera in your hand before you denounce my statements.
Design wise, it's down to personal taste. Although cameras well designed for the serious user tend to have at least 2 dials for easily changing shutter and aperture.
That is one of the reasons enthusiasts prefer and recommend the D7000 and 60D instead of lower end models.
I wrote 'I think it feels like a dog made out of bricks.'
That's what I THINK.
You are also free to think what you wish.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2013 at 11:56 UTC
On Just posted: Pentax MX-1 Preview Samples article (55 comments in total)

In regards to this cameras handling, I think it feels like a dog made out of bricks.
The camera is weighted horribly towards the opposite side to the grip, seemingly beyond the placement of the lens. While having no protruding grip, there is also an annoying strap lug placed where the fingers would sit, along with a mash of tiny buttons and nothing for my thumb to grip except the back dial.
On top of all that, the outer section of the lens is deceptively designed to make you think that it can be rotated to change settings. But it can't.
The only saving grace seems to be the lens, and the way the camera looks from certain angles. I was also quite unimpressed by the fact that the top flash plate, where it says 'BRASS' actually seems to be made of plastic.
Too little, too late. Pentax, please see Canon & Olympus for how to design a compact camera.

Direct link | Posted on May 5, 2013 at 02:37 UTC as 15th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

fmian: Malyons, camera movements and lens design are first year photography subjects. For a high school photography teacher to consider such a trivial article a learning option is quite a frightening prospect. It's like a high school computer teacher getting excited hearing about command line parameters for the first time, or an auto mechanic instructor just figuring out the benefits of a manual shift.

Malyons, I would suggest you give your students a heads up on books such as The Camera, The Print, and The Negative, by Ansell Adams. The first one in particular giving one much more grounded and accurate information than most articles online.
Regardless of what you or I feel, the fact that so many people here are dissing this article should be a cause for concern for you as far as using it as a resource.
With photography involving so much exacting science, it should be no surprise that many people are picky about the correct information, terminology and impression being given on precise tools and procedures.
Yesterday, I had one of my class peers (who is a working journalist at the moment) confidently tell me that an ISO800 shot out of a 5D mk3 would produce a result way brighter than an ISO3200 shot from a 5D mk2, because the newer model has better ISO performance. What a scary thought.
Studying Diploma of Photoimaging in Australia by the way, and apologies if I caused you offence.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2013 at 23:32 UTC

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1832778312/photos/2471208/scan810-custom

Here is a scan from a glass plate negative that was shot in Yorkshire England circa 1910.
Personally I think it's a very good example of movements in portraiture.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2013 at 04:44 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
Total: 236, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »