Ivan Lietaert

Lives in Belgium Geluwe, Belgium
Works as a English teacher
Joined on May 3, 2009

Comments

Total: 91, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

My inner budget-aware self tells me that the 'plastic fantastic' €100 Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II is a much better choice (AF!) compared to this over-priced manual focus lens.
I also own an analog Auto Chinon 55mm f1.7 lens that has a crazy bokeh and a natural soft look, valued on eBay at about €35. My inner calculator tells me that is 14 times cheaper compared to this gear of the year Lensbaby...

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2015 at 13:37 UTC as 51st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Ivan Lietaert: I'm a great fan of Instax film. I have the Instax Wide 210 model and the Instax Mini 90 model. I regret that Fujifilm refuses to bring a high end model to the market with manual controls and good quality glas/lenses. The alternative is Lomography.com, but their glas is even worse.
I modded a 1926 (!) ICA Dresden Reflex camera myself, mounting a lomography instant back (takes Instax wide film) on it. The camera has a Carl Zeiss lens. This setup makes Instax film shine and reveals its true potential.
Here is a small collection of my shots: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ivanlietaert/sets/72157650037545493

The Fujifilm Instax 300 is very similar to the 210 model.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2015 at 10:57 UTC
In reply to:

Ivan Lietaert: I'm a great fan of Instax film. I have the Instax Wide 210 model and the Instax Mini 90 model. I regret that Fujifilm refuses to bring a high end model to the market with manual controls and good quality glas/lenses. The alternative is Lomography.com, but their glas is even worse.
I modded a 1926 (!) ICA Dresden Reflex camera myself, mounting a lomography instant back (takes Instax wide film) on it. The camera has a Carl Zeiss lens. This setup makes Instax film shine and reveals its true potential.
Here is a small collection of my shots: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ivanlietaert/sets/72157650037545493

The dresden camera has a large viewfinder (which I needed to lift too in order to get the focus right) with a ground glas.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2015 at 10:56 UTC

In this review, I try to explain the charm of shooting Instax film.
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/06/29/instax-fun-fun-fun-in-memory-of-my-father-andre-lietaert-by-ivan-lietaert/

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2015 at 07:11 UTC as 9th comment

I'm a great fan of Instax film. I have the Instax Wide 210 model and the Instax Mini 90 model. I regret that Fujifilm refuses to bring a high end model to the market with manual controls and good quality glas/lenses. The alternative is Lomography.com, but their glas is even worse.
I modded a 1926 (!) ICA Dresden Reflex camera myself, mounting a lomography instant back (takes Instax wide film) on it. The camera has a Carl Zeiss lens. This setup makes Instax film shine and reveals its true potential.
Here is a small collection of my shots: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ivanlietaert/sets/72157650037545493

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2015 at 07:08 UTC as 10th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

nikon power: Polaroid's rechargeable Zip wireless printer can kill the Instax instantly.
At parties, people can connect to the Zip printer via bluetooth to print shots from their cellphones.
http://www.polaroid.com/zip-instant
And again, the printer would work well for women.

The polaroid zip printer allows to select and print only good pictures. Some people, though, prefer the true, analog, film, one-shot experience. Any body shooting analog will confirm this is a whole different type of photography. You are comparing apples with pears.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2015 at 07:01 UTC
On article Behind the Shot: Watery Grave (94 comments in total)

Very informative and a nice picture, of course.

I have a question: why add an ND filter to increase exposure time even more? How does this improve the looks of the picture?

(I know you mentioned the blur of the fish, but that was accidental, not?)

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 13:57 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
On article Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

Frank_BR: This Jurassic lens comes from the film era, when anything less than 6x6 was considered small format. Then digital photography came along...

More than five years ago, Michael Reichmann from Luminous Landscape showed that a digital camera Canon 1DS with "only" 11 MP produced a more detailed image with less noise than a 6x7 film. Today, that the digital sensors are even better than in 2009, a good m43 camera can equal or exceeds the 6x7 film format.

The m43 sensor has a crop factor of about 4x in relation to 6x7, so a modern 600mm lens adapted to a m43 camera should overcome the NASA monster of 2540mm. Besides, if you consider that a CMOS sensor has sensitivity 50 ~ 100 times higher than a 6x7 film, then it's clear why NASA discarded this monstrous lens long time ago.

Another problem is 'data rot'. Vinct Cerf, one of the founders of the digital age warned for it, not so long ago:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/13/google-boss-warns-forgotten-century-email-photos-vint-cerf

It is likely people of the future won't be able to open our digital files, or it will be far to timeconsuming to sift through the thousands of pictures each individual person makes, right now.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 04:09 UTC

You better have a good EVF in order to be able to nail the focus with this lens wide open. Focus assist and zebra won't be 100 per cent neither. Maybe 3 out of 100 dpreview users will be able to use this lens in real life, just because for the others, their eyes aren't good enough.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2015 at 09:47 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies

Full Definition of USABLE

1
: capable of being used
2
: convenient and practicable for use

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2015 at 18:23 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

Ivan Lietaert: In which country is the 'National Media Museum'? As any reference or even link is missing, this is just another example of poor, sloppy journalism...
The writer of this piece must think his country is the centre of the universe...

Belgium has 'French' fries and the saxophone, and of course the best beer in the world.
Why on earth does the UK have a 'National Media Museum'? Can you name just one respected UK photographer, dead or alive, that wasn't a drug addict or alcoholic?

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 19:41 UTC
On article Kowa announces pricing for three Micro Four Thirds lens (149 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ivan Lietaert: What is "TV distortion"?

http://www.edmundoptics.com/technical-resources-center/imaging/distortion/

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 17:04 UTC
On article Kowa announces pricing for three Micro Four Thirds lens (149 comments in total)
In reply to:

SDPharm: > Kowa announces pricing for three Micro Four Thirds lens

So, what is the pricing? Am I missing something, or DPR is trying not to be helpful?

Just another article re-writing text they found elsewhere; who cares about good coherence of a tex? Hide the essential information refered to in the title deep down into the captions so it is hardly noticable... Mentioning "TV distortion", but carelessly not explaining it... that's just a lazy text writers's mistake.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 17:00 UTC
On article Kowa announces pricing for three Micro Four Thirds lens (149 comments in total)

What is "TV distortion"?

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 16:54 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
On article Kowa announces pricing for three Micro Four Thirds lens (149 comments in total)

These lenses require excellent EVF in order to nail the focus, or an external monitor. I wouldn't want to use these on my GH3...

Also, I guess the caption writer works for a fashion magazine as a second job, because he/she pays way too much attention to color and style .-)

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 16:53 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply

In which country is the 'National Media Museum'? As any reference or even link is missing, this is just another example of poor, sloppy journalism...
The writer of this piece must think his country is the centre of the universe...

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2015 at 08:20 UTC as 12th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Ivan Lietaert: I actually like this kind of video. It is quite convincing.
There is one thing I wouldn't do, and that is to change lenses that close to the surf. I'm sure the your sensor will get dirty very soon like that!

I don't have a problem with the presenter being on the Sony payroll. So many people have more than one job, these days, just to get by. Even if the photographer was on Sony's payroll, I would still find this an interesting video. I strongly believe that the majority of viewers are capable of filtering out the marketing babble.
I really don't see what problems you can have with this video. Its core message is that you can make decent sport action shots with a camera and lens costing less than a thousand dollars. Why on earth would anybody start spewing vitriol on that, unless one is a cynical troll... There are better place to do that... a therapy room, perhaps?

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 18:10 UTC
In reply to:

Ivan Lietaert: I actually like this kind of video. It is quite convincing.
There is one thing I wouldn't do, and that is to change lenses that close to the surf. I'm sure the your sensor will get dirty very soon like that!

There is nothing cynical in this piece. Conversely, there is a lot of cynicism in the comments under it. The A6000 has been called a good camera by many professional reviewers. Eoshd for instance: "The A6000 is certainly Sony’s best performing mirrorless camera yet for video with an APS-C sized sensor." It is nice to see this camera in real life use.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 09:26 UTC

I actually like this kind of video. It is quite convincing.
There is one thing I wouldn't do, and that is to change lenses that close to the surf. I'm sure the your sensor will get dirty very soon like that!

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 07:37 UTC as 53rd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Rick_Hunter: KEN ROCKWELL USES THIS. (enough said)

We are looking at this because this company decided it needed to sell this app on the back of young models. They chose to push this model's skin forward. We react.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2015 at 06:32 UTC
Total: 91, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »