Ignat Solovey

Ignat Solovey

Lives in Russian Federation Moscow, Russian Federation
Works as a photojournalist
Has a website at http://www.dyor.ru
Joined on Jul 24, 2004

Comments

Total: 205, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Ignat Solovey: Action cameras should cease to be UWA-only. Zoom is a tender thing, but maybe something like Tri-Elmar or just interchangeable lenses...

@howaboutraw Well, that's just crop, my Chinese SJCAM does this too, cropping 170° to 70° with slight drop in quality. I don't shoot 4K yet because I don't have enough storage at least, not to mention that editing and encoding it is pain “behind, below and inside”.

No. I mean real interchangeable lenses or zoom. Tho only thing I know, at least in person, which comes close to it is Kodak SPZ1, but it's just your average cheap compact camera stuffed inside more or less rugged housing... and in reality it's far from being freezeproof.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2016 at 04:51 UTC
In reply to:

Ignat Solovey: Action cameras should cease to be UWA-only. Zoom is a tender thing, but maybe something like Tri-Elmar or just interchangeable lenses...

Because marketing guys think no one needs small rugged camera with tiny interchangeable lenses...

Link | Posted on May 24, 2016 at 14:07 UTC
In reply to:

nitroman: Yes ... but is it art ?! lol

It's not an art. It's modern art. There is difference between two things. What we know as classic art had always been practical, it was mostly just decoration of everyday things and life. Modern art exists for itself... and runs out of ideas quite often.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2016 at 13:15 UTC

Action cameras should cease to be UWA-only. Zoom is a tender thing, but maybe something like Tri-Elmar or just interchangeable lenses...

Link | Posted on May 24, 2016 at 13:02 UTC as 24th comment | 6 replies
On article Samsung unveils 256GB EVO Plus microSD card (88 comments in total)
In reply to:

kayaro: That's great to have 55,200 photos stored but if the card go wrong than you will LOSE 55,200 photos at ONE GO. Oh, is the 10 years warranty include recover all the photos?

@Luke Kaven It will be, definitely, but no sooner than action cameras will learn to record high bitrates, and their batteries will be capable of more than 90 minutes of work with top settings.
In 4K realm, though, 256 Gb mean 30...32 minutes of runtime @30 fps with appropriate bitrate, but you need a lot (and then some more) processing power to edit and encode that in timely manner, and 4Tb high-speed hard drives will be your daily consumable. This is a product for the future, when 4K will be a household thing, like FullHD today.

And the whole idea of presenting it today is just a demonstration, like “see, now we can fit five double-density Blu-Ray discs in a space smaller than your thumbnail, so imagine that bright future in five or ten years: an IKEA box of Raspberry Pi computers with a storage capacity of present day's average data center, and solar-powered to boot”

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 07:56 UTC
On article Adobe Camera Raw 9.5 introduces new color scheme (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cdog: This is like putting a bandaid on a broken leg.
Adobe,if you're going to boast an integrated workflow between LR & PS as the creative cloud suggests, you need to keep the UI consistent.
It's the same RAW processing engine, give us the same interface please.

Babart,
The engine is the same, of course, but that subtle (and not so subtle) differences in interface make ACR as PS plugin much more suitable for speedy mass processing of hundreds of files.
No “import” procedure, none of that mind-boggling “library” (guys, I have file system, why do you need anything else... although I still can't imagine myself without two-blue-panels file manager, namely Total Commander, childhood habits from early 1990s die hard). Yes, ACR itself as I use it requires Photoshop, but I do additional post-ACR processing only for pictures which go to print — either in paper publications (magazines, newspapers, brochures, etc., or large-format (A2+), or inkjet for gifts (A3-). And the best tool for batch resize (and not only resize) is PhotoMechanic, which is, by the way, is the fastest RAW viewer ever, not to mention it's Canon-friendly and considers IPTC and Adobe XMP markups.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2016 at 08:41 UTC
On article Adobe Camera Raw 9.5 introduces new color scheme (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cdog: This is like putting a bandaid on a broken leg.
Adobe,if you're going to boast an integrated workflow between LR & PS as the creative cloud suggests, you need to keep the UI consistent.
It's the same RAW processing engine, give us the same interface please.

NO. NEVER. Not that sluggish Lightroom UX catastrophe over lovely and swift ACR. Much better thing would be addition of proper PS Clone Stamp, Selection and Levels to ACR with the possibility to use it separately from PS. And, well, for those who use light interface scheme (and that's the majority of PS users who still remember PS from 1990s, when there were just Photoshop and Illustrator) that “interface consistency” feature will pass unnoticed.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2016 at 06:30 UTC
On article Flickr makes Auto-Uploadr tool a Pro-account exclusive (97 comments in total)

Finally, the most obnoxious feature made premium. Nice. There are so many cloudy apps wanting to suck in that crap I snap with a smartphone (because proper pictures are made with cameras), that one such thing less seems to be blessing.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 11:21 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Nick Spiker: It's too bad really, you've taken a SLR flange distance, but not given us the benefit of a mirror. So now we have to use the screen and have to use Sigma lenses. It's a sub frame camera, with a full frame size mount, so now we've wasted the extra area with a crop factor.
Good job :(
Don't get me wrong, I love the Foveon design, I even have a SD-14, but can we please get a full frame with a short flange distance?

@Nick Spiker Yes, it is. There are guys (and one of them can be found here on DPR forums... not me) converted SD14 to EF mount as a personal project. They told on other forums that the main problem was with mirrorbox (which is absent on these new cameras) and also Canon's IS didn't work on SD14. And regarding MF lenses... well, you can use on Sigma SA everything you can on Canon EF/EF-S, you just need to find appropriate adapter ring, which is, obviously, far less common for SA than for EF, but anyway available from Aliexpress and eBay.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 17:06 UTC
In reply to:

Nick Spiker: It's too bad really, you've taken a SLR flange distance, but not given us the benefit of a mirror. So now we have to use the screen and have to use Sigma lenses. It's a sub frame camera, with a full frame size mount, so now we've wasted the extra area with a crop factor.
Good job :(
Don't get me wrong, I love the Foveon design, I even have a SD-14, but can we please get a full frame with a short flange distance?

@Nick Spiker. I see no problem to use Russian M42, K-mount of F-mount glass, as well as Nikon on SA mount. Old FD lenses are different issue, but I have to remind that Sigma SA mount is, essentially, Canon EF mount rotated 120 degrees clockwise. Moreover, Sigma snatched the command system from Canon when they developed their first AF SLR, film then, of course, in 1990-1992 (it was called SA-300). So some guys even converted Sigma SLR bodies to accept EF lenses.... back in 2008.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 04:28 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

HB1969: There seem to be a few of these "new-old lenses" about. It's not just the Petzval and now Jupiter 3...there's the Helios-40 (85mm f/1.5) which is back in production and a kickstarter to get Meyer-Optik-Gorlitz Trioplan (100mm f/2.8) back. Interesting time in manual focus photography.

@ProfHankD. Sigma and Chinese (Zhongyi, Anhui Changgeng, Yongnuo). And Samyang, of course, who were and are responsible for all lenses badged “made in Korea”.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 12:36 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Suave: How much is real Contax Sonnar these days?

€200 tops, I guess. Especially if you know where to look.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 12:35 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neodp: Nice job with samples.

I'd recommend an old Nikkor 50mm f/1.2

(cheering): Zuiko! Zuiko!

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 12:34 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

fatdeeman: Coming soon: Helios 44-2 for only $749

Shh, Lomography guys read comments here! They may take it as feasible advice! ;)

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 12:32 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ignat Solovey: Ok. Why don't the guys recreate Argus lenses from Steinheil and Enna-Werk München for that matter, but in more adequate mounts? Why call it Russian? Russian design was a carbon copy of CZ Sonnar 50/1.5, originally developed for Contax rangefinders, and, as a copy should, was inferior in quality to original. Ok, Jupiter-3 isn't THAT bad lens when it costs $40. When it's ten times more expensive, it's utter crap.

@Jura S Remember that German-made Argus lenses were made at almost half-ruined factories in a country which suffered dictatorship and war, and that factories were sweeped by reparation commissions two years before. Your Pentacon (or Meyer-Görlitz Trioplan) 100/2.8 is at least 10, if not 20 years younger, with better machining and internal blackening, better lens polish, better coatings...

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 12:28 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: $649.00!!!!!!!!

Are they kidding?

Why not just buy a real one for $49.00?

TEdolph

@tkbslc eBay, watch for sellers from Ukraine and Russia. Or contact me in private, I guess I can try to arrange that, safe and secure. Which mount would you like, LTM or Contax? Which version — earlier white, later white, later black? With this release I doubt you'll get it even for $100, but I can promise $150 tops.
Just in case: I live in Moscow and really know my way around gear-related people and photographic community in general.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 12:20 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stollen1234: sorry but not going to invest a dime in Russia until they respect their own people.. dont forget photography is all about art and art is intesive feeling and love..and this is all missing in today,s Russia

@Stollen1234 I'd gladly invest in American camera industry, if it wouldn't be dead by 1973, after Graflex, Argus and Kodak management overlooked “Japanese invasion” of previous decade. And, well, buying that new Jupiter you'll invest into Austrian Lomography Inc. marketing department, rather than into lens production at KMZ and Russian camera industry (which is dead as they are buried since 2004). I still wonder, though, why Lomography still chooses KMZ as their OEM. Chinese Zhongyi (Mitakon) and Anhui Changgeng (Venus Optics/LAOWA) are no inferior in terms of production quality, have their own R&D, and will be much better and interesting in several years. Probably, Russian production is cheaper now... Anyway, Lomography's customers each seem to have something written on their foreheads, and in publicly acceptable words that can be described as “victim of marketing brainwash”.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 12:15 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

eyeswideshut: Why are folks so negative? It's all grist for the mill and if it is really made of brass and glass, the price is not unreasonable - comparable to cosina voigtlander and way cheaper than a Zeiss labeled Sonnar.

However, I wonder wether the good folks at Lomography and Zenith remembered this little gem:

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/compat.html

If Dante Stella is right, good luck focusing close on your Leica...

;-)

I got to know that story of Lubitel-166B cameras because in 2007, when I worked part-time in a second-hand camera shop in Moscow to supply some steady part to my freelancer photographer's income, one of these cameras was brought that shop for sale, along with original and newer test films and prints, which the seller later took back after the camera was sold. Another interesting item (not related, though) was customized pre-ware Voigtländer Bergheil camera — the back was made tilting and the lens got chemical multilayer coating at KMZ. I had really strong urges to by that Bergheil for myself, but decided against it for some reason.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 06:41 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

eyeswideshut: Why are folks so negative? It's all grist for the mill and if it is really made of brass and glass, the price is not unreasonable - comparable to cosina voigtlander and way cheaper than a Zeiss labeled Sonnar.

However, I wonder wether the good folks at Lomography and Zenith remembered this little gem:

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/compat.html

If Dante Stella is right, good luck focusing close on your Leica...

;-)

Another story related to that, but this one's true to the letter and illustrates the standards story really well. There was (and still is, though privately owned since 1993) a shop called “Amateur Cinematographer” (Kinolübitel') in Moscow, on Leninsky avenue, 62 in Moscow, which sold camera equipment (cine and photo), film and stuff, now it's just another camera store.

Once there was a shipment of Lubitel-166B cameras, 500 pieces. Shop staff took a couple of overnight shifts to check it out, as they usually did before putting cameras on sale. About 100 cameras went back to the LOMO factory in Leningrad, as they were next to defunct. About 400 other cameras went on sale, as they were passable. Three of that lot went “under a counter”, being purchased by employees to be later resold at black market at much higher price, because these three cameras yielded a picture as sharp and even as original Rolleiflex with comparable Triplet-type lens. That pretty much describes the whole QC thing.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 06:26 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

eyeswideshut: Why are folks so negative? It's all grist for the mill and if it is really made of brass and glass, the price is not unreasonable - comparable to cosina voigtlander and way cheaper than a Zeiss labeled Sonnar.

However, I wonder wether the good folks at Lomography and Zenith remembered this little gem:

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/compat.html

If Dante Stella is right, good luck focusing close on your Leica...

;-)

Also, there's partially true anecdote about Soviet approach to quality.
In 1970s a delegation from Soviet factory, where modern German equipment was installed, went to similar German factory (not clear, West or East), watched the process and asked, how the hell German stuff goes out always good and Soviet... well... not always, despite the equipment, materials and production standards were similar. How come German factory never produced sub-standard stuff? Germans thought a bit and asked: “What does ‘sub-standard’ mean? Standard is a minimum and you can't produce anything which isn't up to it”. Soviet delegation nodded and explained: “Now we've got it. In the USSR, when we do something, standard sets an average: we can produce better or worse. And you can do only better”.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 06:16 UTC
Total: 205, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »