Roland Karlsson

Lives in Sweden Stockholm, Sweden
Works as a Programmer
Joined on Feb 23, 2002
About me:

Collector of K-mount and M42 stuff. Main camera K-1. Also interested in camera technology, e.g. Foveon. Also interested in computer based image analysis and transforms.

Comments

Total: 1952, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Looks to be a very nice camera. Perfect size.

I do not like the look of the lens though. Very little glass for that big can. Maybe it is tele centric and the rear lens is huge?

EDIT:

Nope, the rear lens is small also. So, it is not tele centric. Probably is a very good lens anyhow. Hmmmm, 45 mm F/3.5. Not as bad as I thought.

They also have a 90 mm F/3.2. That's better.

/Roland

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 21:45 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

AndersSJ: Has anyone tried to scan the negative and reproduce the Adams' darkroom work in Lightroom - or another photo editing software?

Interesting question. I guess - but might be wrong - that they do not dare. The risk is that it is too easy or someone comes up with a better result. Then the magic is decreased.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 09:33 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron801: Though crowd... I'm not even all that much of an Ansel Adams fan (there are many photographers who I admire more) and and yet this photo is a really great one in my book... absolutely iconic. The video to me though leaves something to be desired. It's basic points are that the exposure was determined without a meter and that major darkroom work had to happen in order to pull out what was truly great about the image. Both of these things seem to be pretty much common knowledge and the video doesn't really ad any new revelations or go into much tech detail that would be interesting to those of us who understand anything about this sort of stuff...

Yes, I was a bit disappointed when they looked at Ansel's drawings regarding the plan for the image and said - "I do not understand a bit of this". Then - by all means - put some effort in and try to understand! It is probably not all that hard.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 09:31 UTC
In reply to:

Shifter: ZZZZZZZ. ZZZ. ZZZZZZZZZZ. It's called Photoshop, Ansel lovers.

@Shifter - have you seen an actual print? Or maybe, a very good reproduction?

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 23:23 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Interesting footage.

Maybe they make too much of some details. I mean, who do not know how to expose the moon? Interesting to see the non manipulated image though. And nice to see the old man himself.

Regarding this image. I have never been able to decide what I think about it. It has something, but it is not my favorite. Interesting also that the old man himself was a bit surprised that this image is one of the favorites.

When the sky is dark, you can use the moon F11 rule. The moon consists of a rather dark material and is in perfect sunshine. In the broad day time, the moon shine is mixed with the sky, i.e. brighter. But, as long as the light is such that the moon is obviously brighter than the sky, you can use the moon F11 rule.

For the moon being brighter than the sun lit ground, I assume you have to wait for sun set. Maybe the sun shall be so low that it is 2 or 3 stops dimmer than the midday sun.

On the other hand - Ansel Adams made lots of work in the darkroom, so the moon did not actually have to be brighter than the ground. It only had to within the exposure latitude of the film.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 23:17 UTC

Interesting footage.

Maybe they make too much of some details. I mean, who do not know how to expose the moon? Interesting to see the non manipulated image though. And nice to see the old man himself.

Regarding this image. I have never been able to decide what I think about it. It has something, but it is not my favorite. Interesting also that the old man himself was a bit surprised that this image is one of the favorites.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 21:41 UTC as 33rd comment | 5 replies
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (782 comments in total)
In reply to:

jorg14: So, what's next?
2-1/4 square?
4X5?
Full frame is so yesterday.
I mean how could you even take a serious shot with APS-C or 4/3's right?

@Stan. Yes, it might never happen. And I did not claim it would happen. I just said that 9x12 cm is not unreasonable IF it can be made at a reasonable cost.

But ... you shall not count it out. Making wafers is an industrial process. Eventually someone might find out how to make a substrate for $10 and someone else how to process it (with a high yield) for $100. Then, that's a breakthrough, and we will see 9x12 cameras again.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 10:54 UTC
In reply to:

matthew saville: I love retro looking lenses. I really love the scalloped metal focus rings of early Nikon lenses, like the 55 1.2 and 35 1.4. Those things look so cool!

But, $2500-$3500 just because a (brand new) lens looks cool and has neat bokeh? That's just absurd.

If you ask me, part of the charm of old classic lenses is the fact that someone else has cast them aside. In fact some lenses may have passed hands many times, or might have been manufactured before you or I were even born.

I still have the two 50mm's that I inherited from my grandfathers, a Pentax and a Nikon. They're sharp as heck, and are dear to me. The bokeh is nice too.

This, on the other hand, is a lens for people with more money than sense. People who are downright insecure about whether or not they have the right collection of status symbols in their life. Yes, it's probably a freaking awesome lens. Yes, money is for spending and if you're this obsessed, then go for it. But you're not as cool as you think you are.

Steampunk is OK, that is faked oldies. Maybe more rust!

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 06:35 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (782 comments in total)
In reply to:

jorg14: So, what's next?
2-1/4 square?
4X5?
Full frame is so yesterday.
I mean how could you even take a serious shot with APS-C or 4/3's right?

Rather a more sensible view on sensor size. Back in the film days we had lots of "sensor" sizes. That we had 8x10 inch did not at al cannibalize on the sales of 35 mm cameras. Now, digital sensors ar so much better than film, so maybe we do not need 8x10 inch, but 9x12 cm does not sound unreasonable whenever such a sensor can be made for a non astronomic cost.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 06:33 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (782 comments in total)

I cant seem to find any extensive information and good pictures of the lenses.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 22:09 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (782 comments in total)
In reply to:

ChicagoInPhotographs: So I'm curious to know all things being equal.... Are the 50mp in a medium format sensor the same as 50mp in a 35mm sensor?

All thing being equal? How can all things be equal if one sensor is larger than the other?

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 21:43 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (782 comments in total)

Hand made in Sweden?

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 21:40 UTC as 36th comment | 7 replies
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (782 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kirk Bruner: Who are the 14 people under "I had it"? Where did they GET them?

It is always so. If you ask who want to go to Mars, and as one alternative have, I have already been there, then you will get a number of that answer. Some thinks it is fun and some simply believe it to be so.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 20:53 UTC
In reply to:

HB1969: So much hate for a company that's just trying to differentiate itself in the market.
It's camera bling for people who like that sort of thing.
The regular version of the lens is roughly $1200. Still quite pricey but this is is small lens manufacturer that doesn't have the economies of scale that canikon have or the cheap labour of many other manufacturers.

So, if someone says - this was not a good ice cream - then he hates it? Or - if someone says - "gold plated? How quaint" - that he hates the lens? Sure, that might be according to your use of language and the word "hate" - but it is a bit surprising in that case.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 17:59 UTC
In reply to:

PedroMZ: One should bare in mind the huge carbon footprint of this type of photography. Fortunately few people can afford it.

I am not sure I understand your logic @junk1. Did you read my post?

And, whatever you read, or not, how would living in caves help the planet?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

matthew saville: I love retro looking lenses. I really love the scalloped metal focus rings of early Nikon lenses, like the 55 1.2 and 35 1.4. Those things look so cool!

But, $2500-$3500 just because a (brand new) lens looks cool and has neat bokeh? That's just absurd.

If you ask me, part of the charm of old classic lenses is the fact that someone else has cast them aside. In fact some lenses may have passed hands many times, or might have been manufactured before you or I were even born.

I still have the two 50mm's that I inherited from my grandfathers, a Pentax and a Nikon. They're sharp as heck, and are dear to me. The bokeh is nice too.

This, on the other hand, is a lens for people with more money than sense. People who are downright insecure about whether or not they have the right collection of status symbols in their life. Yes, it's probably a freaking awesome lens. Yes, money is for spending and if you're this obsessed, then go for it. But you're not as cool as you think you are.

It is not retro looking. No old lens have even looked close to this. It looks more like a piece of plumbing with some glass.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 20:55 UTC
In reply to:

HB1969: So much hate for a company that's just trying to differentiate itself in the market.
It's camera bling for people who like that sort of thing.
The regular version of the lens is roughly $1200. Still quite pricey but this is is small lens manufacturer that doesn't have the economies of scale that canikon have or the cheap labour of many other manufacturers.

The hate argument again! Do you really think anyone hates the lens, or the company? I think you are imagining things.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 20:53 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1186 comments in total)
In reply to:

turvyT: It would be good to know the degree of involvement of Fuji on this camera and whether there would be a Fuji variation soon.

Such a camera would look that way, would it not?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 20:42 UTC
In reply to:

PedroMZ: One should bare in mind the huge carbon footprint of this type of photography. Fortunately few people can afford it.

Be careful @ColorBandit, the CO2 mafia is fierce an numerous! I can go so far as digging/drilling up carbon based fuel that have been collected during hundreds of millions of years and burn it up in 200 years is just insane. A totally unforgivable experiment with our precious atmosphere. Not to talk about that it is irreplaceable. We burn it one million times faster than it was produced. I say it again, one million times faster. We have thereby increased the CO2 content from 300 PPM to 400 PPM. Not bad, for just one species.

If that really means catastrophe, I have not the slightest idea. And I really think no one else either knows. But - it is a great risk taking. With a high stake.

BTW - glaciers melting prove nothing. We have had a warming even before we started burning fuel at high speed. I am personally more worried about our atmosphere than our glaciers and even flooding. The atmosphere is our main living environment. Do we damage it, we are in great trouble.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2016 at 18:03 UTC
In reply to:

ThatCamFan: Wow, mad respect to everyone who has kept that company alive. I wish I had known of it, I probably would of loved visiting such a historic place & see the studio :)

It said something about it in the article. Some kind of museum I would think.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2016 at 17:39 UTC
Total: 1952, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »