goloby

goloby

Lives in Romania Constanta, Romania
Joined on Dec 13, 2008

Comments

Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

DannyDoi: Some sample pics :

https://www.flickr.com/photos/raulblancojr/sets/72157649450505941/#

Amazing for a phone. Iso 1600 is cleaner than in my D90 and those 4 pointed stars are lovely. What's the longest exposure time you can get on it as this has always been very fast on all android phones?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 13:31 UTC

I can see myself using only this and a medium format film camera.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 20:07 UTC as 95th comment
In reply to:

Tee1up: I have an Epson 4490 that i purchased exclusively for scanning my slide collection and it has been a nightmare. I cannot get a sharp scan out of the thing, Epson was no help. I am looking at these two but am sceptical.

Anyone out there recommend a good color slide scanner that doesn't break the bank?

if your slides are 35mm you will not get super sharp results from any flatbed

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2014 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

goloby: All I'm asking is for every hobbyist or professional photographer out there that has never tried film to give it a go. Get an old film camera, they are cheap. Most of your digital lenses will work. Buy a few rolls of Provia slide. Or some negative film, Portra, Ektar, Pro400h. Send them to a proper lab for dev and scan. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Or if you are into instagram and filters get some cheap film, kodacolor, superia200/400, colorplus 200, vista 200. See where all the hype comes from.
Are you a b&w buff? Then you have to try T-Max and Tri-x. There's no substitute.

I've heard somewhere that shooting film is like having the world's best photoshop artist working for you.
People just don't realize how easy it is to get very good results on film, especially on negative stock. All you need is a good lab.
On films like Portra and Pro400H you can underexpose by 2 stops or overexpose by 3-4 stops and you still get beautiful results. Now try that with any digital.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 26, 2014 at 01:37 UTC

All I'm asking is for every hobbyist or professional photographer out there that has never tried film to give it a go. Get an old film camera, they are cheap. Most of your digital lenses will work. Buy a few rolls of Provia slide. Or some negative film, Portra, Ektar, Pro400h. Send them to a proper lab for dev and scan. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Or if you are into instagram and filters get some cheap film, kodacolor, superia200/400, colorplus 200, vista 200. See where all the hype comes from.
Are you a b&w buff? Then you have to try T-Max and Tri-x. There's no substitute.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:34 UTC as 43rd comment | 16 replies
In reply to:

GothtinPowers: So how do these compare to dedicated film scanners like the Nikon coolscans?

The coolscan 5000 and 9000 are way better than the old V700/750 in terms of sharpness and tonality. The V ED might still be better, but anything older I would avoid

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:26 UTC
In reply to:

RobertSigmund: The best method at the moment is copying the negative/slide with the digital camera. Brings better results than scanners and is faster. You need a macro lens of course, and a slide copier. I have the old minolta slide copy unit 1000 for the Minolta ring flash. Very good device.

Surely you haven't tried a proper scanner. Epson V700 is the bare minimum and it yelds better results that any digital camera. Not even thinking of Nikon 9000ED, Flextight X5, or a proper drum scanner.
You do get the resolution with a digital camera but you lose the only thing that film is better than digital, and that is color and tonality. Not to mention scratches.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

nitroman: Is the dMax of 4.0 good for scanning transparencies ?

I have the V700 and a dMax of 4 is more than enough for slides. Currenlty that's all I shoot. For negatives you could say it is enough, but if you want absolute quality 4.8 would be recomended. I think 4.8 is the max currenlty, on the now discontinued Nikon 5000 and 9000ED

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:18 UTC
In reply to:

goloby: or just get a fuji x-e2 + 18-55 + 23, cheaper, faster and, may I say, better looking

JackM, I had the same issue in the first days with my x-e1, then I turned nr to -2 and sharpness to -1 for the primes, for the zooms you can leave sharpness at 0. Remember, in weird Fuji engineers language 0 is not 0, it is actually medium. -2 is 0 or off

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 22:26 UTC

or just get a fuji x-e2 + 18-55 + 23, cheaper, faster and, may I say, better looking

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 15:16 UTC as 65th comment | 5 replies
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: I think it was supposed to be already mirroless, with a nice EVF, and its sensor 56 x 41.5mm, as it was the 645 film frame area. 33 x 44mm looks like what the APS format is to the 135 full-frame, a cropped sensor to cut their investment some slack. Not a true medium-medium. Just medium.

Dear ogl, you obviously have never experienced true 645, let alone 6x6, 6x7, 6x9

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 04:43 UTC
In reply to:

goloby: AF sensitivity down to -4eV WOOOW!!! Not even 1Dx or D4s do that!!!!

New boyz, you might be right in theory, but I never played with a mirrorless that focuses as good as my D90 in low light. And the D90 is not stellar in that regard, as it's sensitivity goes only to -1eV.
A7 has a sensitivity of 0eV. The best dslr's have -3eV. So this new A7s in theory should be a beast on focusing in low light.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2014 at 12:26 UTC

AF sensitivity down to -4eV WOOOW!!! Not even 1Dx or D4s do that!!!!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2014 at 08:57 UTC as 48th comment | 12 replies

on kenro.co.uk there's no mention of fuji fit.
on nissindigital.com it is mentioned, hope they do it

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2014 at 22:43 UTC as 18th comment
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1656 comments in total)

I always loved the Fuji colors, in my opinion they are the best. Fuji lenses are stellar as well. But one thing will keep me from buying this camera and that is the crop sensor. I need bokeh, I love my 50mm f1.4 and I do not want it to be a mid tele, I want it to be a 50. Same with the 35 f1.4. For anybody that thinks oterwise please rent a ff camera with either a 35 or a 50 1.4 lens and you will be hooked.
One question about this camera's autofocus, how low can it go? 0 eV like Sony's A7, -1eV like most Nikon dslrs or -3 eV like Canon's 6D?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 14:16 UTC as 343rd comment | 5 replies
On Nikon 1 AW1 preview (588 comments in total)
In reply to:

goloby: 1/60 flash sync. Ha, good luck getting sharp results at that speed

I am still shooting more film than digital and a slow flash sync is not an issue with everyday photos. But try freezing fish or wobbling see weed at 1/60

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2013 at 17:39 UTC
On Nikon 1 AW1 preview (588 comments in total)

1/60 flash sync. Ha, good luck getting sharp results at that speed

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2013 at 19:05 UTC as 35th comment | 6 replies

What they need to do is a digital FE2 with a full frame sensor in it. That's what they should have done in the first place. You could still use the old manual focus lenses if you wanted small lenses and the AF 50mm f1.4, AF 20/24/28mm f2.8 and the AF 85mm f1.4 are not big at all and it's all you need

Direct link | Posted on Aug 9, 2013 at 10:04 UTC as 131st comment
On DxO releases FilmPack 4, with 65 new creative effects article (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

goloby: Or just shot film!!!
I have tried both earlier versions of Dxo Film Pack and current Nik Software and, as a film shooter, none came even close to the actual films. I used raw D90 files. I think it all boils down to 3 insurmountable things:
1. how can you create a plug-in that will make a D4 file and a D5000 file to look exactly the same. Only way to do that is to have different settings for different cameras and I have not seen that. And there are a few hundred digital cameras with raw capture. I would not even mention the others.
2. film captures light differently than digital. To mention a few differences: more tonality, wider dynamic range for professional films. For a digital sensor it is just not there to begin with.

continued in replies

I might have a read at that site later, but I'll just say that I have overexposed by 3-4 stops Portra 400 and everything was there, pictures came out great. You might even underexpose it by 1 stops and still get beautiful results. Now try that with any digital. And when I mean overexpose I mean metering the scene with a Minolta ligt meter, incident reading and I do know how to use it.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2013 at 12:25 UTC
On DxO releases FilmPack 4, with 65 new creative effects article (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: So if film is such an inferior product, why waste time and $$$ making digital look like it?

There's more to film than Holgas...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2013 at 12:21 UTC
Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »