FinDERP

FinDERP

Joined on Dec 21, 2012
About me:

oh god how did this get here i am not good with computer

Comments

Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

FinDERP: Looks a lovely bag but it's way out of the range I'd be willing to pay for something like this - even if I had a large disposable budget I'd sooner spend it on lenses and probably large format gear too large to fit in anything carryable anyway haha.

I appreciate that ONA is taking time to answer comments and queries here though, that's really a great effort and I wish more companies would act like this!

I've seriously considered buying a Leica camera with a lens or two on two different occasions so far, but admittedly both of them were 135 film rangefinders haha - an M2 and an M3. I guess I am not the target market but still am someone who looks at and appreciates interesting photographic tools.

I commented because I'm actually looking for a small bag like this to house one of the rangefinders I do own along with a small pot of hooks, lures, and weights for drop shot fishing. This bag would be perfect but for the price alone. The rangefinder is a russian beast with an interestingly twisted history going back to the Zeiss factories of the second world war, takes superb photographs and has a focusing system I love. I wouldn't swap it for a digital Leica, but they aren't my target cameras as their price doesn't match their performance.

As for Leica lenses for the price of this bag: there are several in m39 mount, you could even buy a 50mm f/2 and a cheap but serviceable bag for $400

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2015 at 01:24 UTC
In reply to:

Sabatia: Photography and mountaineering our my two primary hobbies. More than a dozen years ago, I found that I just couldn't carry my DSLR gear up the mountains, particularly if I carried the better lenses--why take a shot if its not sharp and rich? I tried using enthusiast compacts including the S90, LX5 and LX7, but was never satisfied with the image quality.

Now I'm older and even less physically strong, but I take my m4/3s bodies and lenses hiking daily(retired and moved right to the high mountains). For work that will be published, printed or for planned shows when I don't have to hike more than a couple of miles or more than 2000 feet of elevation gain, I take an Oly OMD and the supernaturally sharp but heavy 12-40 2.8. For longer treks and greater elevation gain, I take the amazingly small Pana GM5 and either the tiny 12-32 or primes. Frankly, printed at 17x22 inches, I cannot even at close inspection tell the difference between images from my former 7D and from the OMD or GM.

cgarrard have you seen the post this comment was made on? What Sabatia said couldn't be much more relevant than it is.

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 17:04 UTC

Looks a lovely bag but it's way out of the range I'd be willing to pay for something like this - even if I had a large disposable budget I'd sooner spend it on lenses and probably large format gear too large to fit in anything carryable anyway haha.

I appreciate that ONA is taking time to answer comments and queries here though, that's really a great effort and I wish more companies would act like this!

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 16:50 UTC as 16th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

samfan: It would be funny if it wasn't coming from a legendary SLR manufacturer that still offers 4/3 DSLR lenses.

Yes I know Olympus has usually made smaller (D)SLRs than the others but still. First they leave their 4/3 customers hanging, now it looks like they're making fun of them...

To be fair though, they are legendary SLR makers in part because they managed to miniaturise the SLR so beautifully and without feature compromise in the original OM series, starting with the OM-1 they really shook up the camera market in the 70s

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 16:36 UTC
On Fujifilm makes XF 90mm F2 R LM WR official article (136 comments in total)
In reply to:

samhain: nice to see a 90 finally.

But- 7 blades, on a portrait lens?
Hmm.
Looking forward to seeing the bokeh. Hopefully it isn't lacking. That'd be a damn shame...

It only affects the shape of out of focus highlights (bokeh rings), and only when stopped down.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 13:58 UTC

...and I'd STILL rather have the Pentax K-30 I sold my Canon 650D to buy

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2015 at 16:32 UTC as 23rd comment
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (813 comments in total)

Looks like a plastic kids toy

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 11:29 UTC as 118th comment
On Lensbaby introduces Velvet 56mm f/1.6 article (166 comments in total)

Sounds interesting but £419 for this is ridiculous!

Why not buy a Zeiss Jena DDR Flektogon 35mm f2.4 for ~£150 if you want similar functionality in a single and almost certainly sharper lens

Or a Helios 44 in any variant for £10
"That can't do macro!" I hear you say; well buy a 50mm f/2.8 enlarging lens for £10 as well then you wazzock!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2015 at 13:05 UTC as 18th comment
On 3,200MP LSST camera gets construction approval article (257 comments in total)
In reply to:

Frank_BR: Moore's Law states that the integration of transistors in a monolithic circuit doubles every 18 months or so. Assuming that sensor resolution doubles every two years, and considering that today's state-of-the-art is 50MP, it can be predicted that the sensors will reach 3200MB in 12 years, ie, 2027, only five years after launching the LSST.

Only it isn't a law, merely an observation.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 12:16 UTC
On Canon 7D mirror box filmed at 10,000fps article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anastigmat: The reason Canon and Nikon have dominated the professional SLRand DSLR market is their ability to manufacture high speed shutters and mirrors. In contrast, companies like Minolta/Sony, Pentax and Olympus simply could not and cannot equal Canon and Nikon in this area.

You know Pentax's mid range DSLRs have 1/6000 shutter speeds, where Canon and Nikon both have 1/4000 right?

Also the shutter manufacture is done by completely different 3rd party companies as stated by ProfHankD. In fact copal and some of the other shutter makers have been making shutters for many decades.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 31, 2015 at 16:21 UTC

Perhaps a name change to reflect the new business model?

"Sports Unillustrated"

"Sports Described"

"Sports Imagined"

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2015 at 18:03 UTC as 27th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Photoman: What the?! I thought they closed that stupid Italian studio down. It's not even the RX100M3! Not to be judged against others...cause the other cameras laugh at it ;)

to be fair to them I doubt they need an entire studio to design wooden handles for sony cameras

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 22:43 UTC
In reply to:

Sannaborjeson: "...not intended to be judged against other cameras..." LOL :-)

INDEEEEEEEEEEED

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 22:42 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Ricoh stand report article (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anastigmat: I am still hoping for an interchangeable lens Pentax auto 110 sized digital camera with the same tiny lenses. Those mirrorless cameras have lenses that are anything but tiny.

You can use the 110 lenses on a Q quite easily I believe!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 16:36 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Ricoh stand report article (150 comments in total)

Where is the MF camera?!?!

I LITERALLY only clicked this article to ogle that thing, and you couldn't be bothered to show the single best thing on the stand? WTF dpr

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2014 at 10:39 UTC as 24th comment | 1 reply

What did he actually want or expect to gain from posting to Reddit, I wonder?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 23:30 UTC as 43rd comment
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2130 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): "And this means that, for the same shutter speed, F-number and ISO, the camera with the largest sensor will have more total light to measure. And, unless the large sensor is significantly worse than the smaller one, it will produce a cleaner, less noisy image. It's likely that the large sensor camera will be bigger, heavier and more expensive, but it should provide cleaner images."

That is not right. Noise happens at pixel level not "sensor level". Noise is affected by how much light EACH SENSEL collects and NOT the total light gathered by the sensor.

f/5.6 is f/5.6 in terms of light transmission, not light gathering. As Great Bustard pointed out there is a rather large difference between the two!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 23:25 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2130 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): "And this means that, for the same shutter speed, F-number and ISO, the camera with the largest sensor will have more total light to measure. And, unless the large sensor is significantly worse than the smaller one, it will produce a cleaner, less noisy image. It's likely that the large sensor camera will be bigger, heavier and more expensive, but it should provide cleaner images."

That is not right. Noise happens at pixel level not "sensor level". Noise is affected by how much light EACH SENSEL collects and NOT the total light gathered by the sensor.

Yeah I don't think that people who understand equivalence would suggest that lol.

Anyway dtmateojr I though this thread was about noise and the effect of image size on noise, not about basic exposure relationships

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 23:20 UTC

Is this actually meant to be a joke, or is it unintentional?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 00:39 UTC as 33rd comment
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2130 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): "And this means that, for the same shutter speed, F-number and ISO, the camera with the largest sensor will have more total light to measure. And, unless the large sensor is significantly worse than the smaller one, it will produce a cleaner, less noisy image. It's likely that the large sensor camera will be bigger, heavier and more expensive, but it should provide cleaner images."

That is not right. Noise happens at pixel level not "sensor level". Noise is affected by how much light EACH SENSEL collects and NOT the total light gathered by the sensor.

@ Dtmateojr

Great Bustard has posted an excellent example and thought exercise of why the mathematics and physics is correct and you are wrong here, you can either 'go back to basics' and read the reason I gave with film or perform GB's thought experiment/real experiment with a digital set up - both will show the same thing.

You can argue with us all you like and publish all the articles you like, but nature cannot be fooled.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2014 at 07:39 UTC
Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »