raztec: And the Ig Nobel prize for product development and marketing goes to...
Not sure who is the dumbest: the genius who came up with this concept, the managers who approved it, or the hipsters who will buy it?
It may sell very well for nostalgia reasons as well as to the hipsters for its retro chic
ProfHankD: $50 for 2.5 minutes... that should keep home movies limited to tolerable durations. ;-)
Honestly, the only good thing about this is that it probably means there will be more modern support for dealing with old Super 8mm movies -- like the ones so many of us have sitting around waiting to be digitized.
Two excellent points. All you need is one cartridge of super 8 to do a summary of xmas day etc. with digital video people just let it record with no editing in camera so that it is too long and boring to watch. The film photography project have a long running podcast which recently covered this exact issue.?3 minutes is a lot of time for a home movie and more then enough to tell the story of a family event
I hope this means we will get an updated Nikon DF with refinement of the interface. It was a good first effort but I think it could be a brilliant camera with a few changes and improvements. One can hope
To me the d750 sensor looks the best. Now if only Nikon put this sensor and image processing technology in a mirrorless body I would be sold. Maybe somthing that looks like a Nikon s3 with autofocus and a sL style EVF.
Hi great review as always. Any news on the Nikon D810 review? I am really looking forward to it. Keep up the great work!
yahoo2u: ....."All three lenses will feature a Sony E-mount for use with full-frame Sony cameras sans an adapter.".It is "without an adapter".If you want to throw in french expressions while writing english go to france.
Sans is also used in Australian English (colloquial use) to be mildly funny or ironic. Certainly most people know that it means without. Another example is that there is a department store in Australia called Target which is at the lower end of the market but as a joke people say they bought an item of clothing at "Target" pronounced in the French way. It is not used in a mean way but in a self deprecating ironic way.The French are more worried about English infiltrating their language then we have any right worrying about French influences in English
beckmarc: Great News. I hope it can take pictures with the look of the old Kodak colour infrared film
Good to know. Yes I did mean Aerochrome. The closest i have seen digitally has been from modified sigma cameras. I also wonder if you will need IR filters on your lenses to take normal photographs with this camera
Great News. I hope it can take pictures with the look of the old Kodak colour infrared film
I wonder what film stock they used (to get the discussion back to photography) It looks like a higher ISO slide film. I get similar effects if I shoot Fuji Provia 400X in low light without a flash. Any other suggestions?
What a great idea. In many ways these SLRs are similar to modern DSLRs in the way they function.
Rodger Kingston: Since 2012 I've been a confirmed Fuji X camera user, and never in 40 years of shooting have I had cameras I liked more than the lovely little X10 and X20 - not even my old Leicas and Contax Ts. (I've retired my big clunky DSLRs.)
I'm sure the X30 is an excellent camera, but I yearn for something better: an X100Z (the “Z” standing for zoom) with a lens equivalent to the one on my X20 (but of course configured for the larger X100 series sensor).
I yearn for the image quality and only slightly larger body (to say nothing of the amazing hybrid viewfinder) of the X100T, but without giving up the flexibility of the superb zoom lens on my X20. Will Fuji ever oblige, or am I only daydreaming?
To see photographs I’ve taken with the X10 and X20, go to my latest book, "Searching for Edward Hopper," at: rpkphoto.smugmug.com/Books/Searching-for-Edward-Hopper. The 33 images from 2012 or later were made with these Fuji cameras.
I could not have expressed it better. I too want a x100z
b craw: Art markets have a history of operating, to various degrees, askew of critical dialogs about importance and historical value of artwork(s). One must accept the fact that along side work that is profoundly transformative to the art world there will also be kitsch, or otherwise commercially facil work, fetching large sums; consider Thomas Kinkade's auction successes of the 1990's. And this is not to bemoan his financial success(es), only to demonstrate that the market can, and does, oscillate wildly as an indicator of quality.
Peter Lik's chain of galleries is reminiscent of the mall-gallery explosion of a "booming" Kinkade. Much remains a bit suspicious about this $6.5 sale (it was not an auction, just to correct some who have stated it as such - undisclosed, private buyer); but should it prove genuine I wouldn't be surprised too much. His work is wholly lacking the art historical portent by other photographers, namely Sherman and Gursky, who've also sold prints in recent years in the millions USD - but I can see a crafty arc of (market) development in Lik's mannerist, and largely conceptually unengaging, landscapes.
OBI656: I love it. What a message to all those sceptics about value of photography ... All those which are only bitching, etc., ...
LOL ... I Love it, I Love it, ...
I could not agree more
I am not sure why there are so many negative posts. Most photographers complain about photography being under valued. Here is a concrete example of someone valuing a photograph and being willing to part with a serious amount of cash to buy a print. On one level this is a boost to all photographers. Our hobby/business is worth while. Photographers are appreciated.
Also he is a fellow Ozzie.
Sony are clearly in it to win it. Every few months they have a new model with even better sensors. Now will Canon rise from its slumber to meet the challenge or are they a spent force?
For a "dead" medium this post about a new film initiative sure gets a lot of comments. "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about" The fact that so many photographers are inspired to write about film, for or anti, indicates film is still relevant.
Fidibus: @ GRUBERNDOn the contrary, there have been massive changes in the area of Berlin´s architecture and city layout, in its political and social structure as well (think of the reunion with East Germany) as well as in its economic importance since the end of WWII and in particular since the reunion in 1989. Besides most media agree in the opinion that Berlin is one of the liveliest, most creative and open cities of the world.Sorry to say that, but your opinion may be either based on ignorance or resentment.
I think @Grubernd was being ironic i.e. I think he tried to put a smilie face at the end of the post to indicate this but used a ;) instead of a :)
Berlin has indeed changed a lot. I was there in the 1990s and again in 2007 and I barely recognised many of the places I had visited in my first visit.
Fuji's instant film products have been a great sales success hence lomography is moving into this market. This has lead fuji to release new cameras themselves. It looks like the kick starter was fully funded within hours. Don't forget most digital camera manufacturers are not making a profit. Fuji's instant film business is.
The quality of the work in this competition was stunning. I am a little surprised at the negative comments
ZhanMInG12: WTF is with no. 7?
The Israel landscapes were stunning