neilt3

neilt3

Lives in United Kingdom Manchester, United Kingdom
Joined on Oct 12, 2012

Comments

Total: 42, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Josh152: Like none of the people commenting have ever done something stupid. Say what you want about her but at least she got off her rear end and went out to take photos. More than can be said for most people here. Besides why assume she was being dumb? Maybe she knowingly took the risk on purpose to get a good shot? Maybe at 72 with most of your life behind you and nursing homes and walkers and such perhaps not that far off in your future your perspective on such risks is wee bit different? But no don't think about it or have any empathy or compassion at all for her. Just laugh and point like children. SMH.

I take it you've never heard of a telephoto lens ?
Nothing wrong with getting out and taking pictures , but it's just a simple bit of common sense .
Age and risk has nothing to do with it , getting in a wild animals face is just dumb .

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2020 at 21:07 UTC
In reply to:

LookintotheMirrorlessoften: haha, the amount of people who blaming Sony for quality issues here is hilarious. Especially that are the ones that never owned one...
I think the problem here is ibis in general, I wonder how in 2years all the Nikons and Panasonic FF cameras with ibis hold together.... will also be 98,4% just fine?

My 11 year old Sony a900 with in body image stabilisation is still working just fine .
So not an inherent design fault , seems to be substandard parts used is the issue .

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2020 at 12:21 UTC
On article Are mechanical film cameras better than electronic? (365 comments in total)
In reply to:

BigBen08: have no interest in film. why all these film articles on a site about digital photography?

start another site called film photography review, or fpreview.com

@ bigben08 ,
I'm guessing you've never heard of a film scanner then ?
What happens is you use a film camera to take a picture on any film format you feel like . 135 , 120 , large format , whatever .....
Develop the film , then scan it .
It then becomes a digital file .

If you've no interest in film , why did you even click on this article then go to the effort to post a comment ?

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2020 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

fti: Hmm... I used to hold out for a proper digital solution for the cameras of yesteryear. Now we've got so much mirrorless alternatives; it's no longer that relevant. I'd be more excited to see an old digital camera converted to film. Imagine turning the old D70 to a full frame film camera :-)

Sounds like the F80 your after ?

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2020 at 18:21 UTC
In reply to:

MinAZ: This can be a huge money-saver if you are shooting film. Simply load the digital back on, verify exposure, then swap out for the film back. Light meters don't always tell the complete story because you can have some parts of the scene over- or underexposed even if you meter for the face. Also, if the digital back has film simulation and black and white preview modes, that can also help you decide what film stock to use.

If it was a device that held a full frame sensor in the film gate , i could see the point .
Working in the way this does , it just seems ridiculous !
A solution to a problem that either didn't exist , or where a very good solution hadn't already been made ten years ago .

Still each to their own , some people just like gimmicks .

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2020 at 11:10 UTC
In reply to:

MinAZ: This can be a huge money-saver if you are shooting film. Simply load the digital back on, verify exposure, then swap out for the film back. Light meters don't always tell the complete story because you can have some parts of the scene over- or underexposed even if you meter for the face. Also, if the digital back has film simulation and black and white preview modes, that can also help you decide what film stock to use.

If someone can't figure out how to use a light meter , or lacks the visualisation to assess lighting effects on a final image ( with flash for e.g ) , which is where Polaroid backs came in , then taking a digital image first is fine .
Using a cheap digital camera with manual controls would help here .
Get something like a Sony NEX 3 will do that .
Take a picture with it with the ISO set to the same as your film , set the aperture you want , note the shutter speed , take the shot .
If everything looks right , transfer these settings to your film camera .
A milc is much smaller , much cheaper , can have your lens mounted with a cheap adapter , works as a simple light meter / Polaroid camera .

In fact you can even use it as a camera on its own !
It'll do everything this cludge will do , but better .

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2020 at 11:09 UTC
In reply to:

MinAZ: This can be a huge money-saver if you are shooting film. Simply load the digital back on, verify exposure, then swap out for the film back. Light meters don't always tell the complete story because you can have some parts of the scene over- or underexposed even if you meter for the face. Also, if the digital back has film simulation and black and white preview modes, that can also help you decide what film stock to use.

I shoot large format , medium format and 35mm .
Apart from the 35mm the cameras don't have a light meter , that's why I use a Minolta spot meter .
Either using a single point to meter from or taking several readings to work out the optimum exposure .
I have several meters depending on what my requirements are .
This item is a naff sensor taking a picture of an image projected onto a ground "glass" , probably plastic .
Light will be lost in this process and just because the exposure is right on the digital capture , after you've taken it home to download onto your computer , there's no saying the same settings would give the right exposure on film .

Your better getting a good meter , learn how to use it , and learn how different films react to the light , filters , and how different developers and developing techniques alter the outcome .

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2020 at 23:33 UTC
In reply to:

MinAZ: This can be a huge money-saver if you are shooting film. Simply load the digital back on, verify exposure, then swap out for the film back. Light meters don't always tell the complete story because you can have some parts of the scene over- or underexposed even if you meter for the face. Also, if the digital back has film simulation and black and white preview modes, that can also help you decide what film stock to use.

If the meter on your cameras iffy or absent , forget this cludge .
A small light meter is more compact , cheaper and accurate .
Or get your camera serviced .

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2020 at 22:58 UTC
In reply to:

Tom Caldwell: If you could slip the whole lot of works inside an original slr body and take reasonable images then it might be a cool-look. For those that would like a talking piece. But surely the early dslr camera bodies were “just that”?

I am sure that there might be some old Canon 10D bodies that many would be happy to sell for $10 just to get them out of the attic.

You could get an old Canon EOS 5d for about the same price as one of them .
The full frame 12mp sensor will give much better image quality and the camera can be fitted with quite a few lens mounts via an adapter .
Or get s Sony NEX 3 for £80 and fit just about any lens to it with a £15 adapter .
Or as the camera you need to mount the device to needs to be working , just shoot film in it . Scan it after and get all the look and quality , rather than messing with this bulky cludge .

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2020 at 22:55 UTC
In reply to:

Serjojeee: Your Nikon is broken - not a problem, just buy a new one! Marketing 101

Shouldn't have sold your back up camera !

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2020 at 12:41 UTC
In reply to:

RvEL: I doubt it will be 4.99 USD for the whole set (16 characters). Do you have a source for that?

4.99 USD EACH sounds more plausible. ;-)

Read the last paragraph again .
It's says the drone pilot will start shipping soon for 4.99 .
It also says the rest of the 16 characters will start shipping at the same time .
There's no mention of them being sold as a box set for 4.99 .

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 16:59 UTC
In reply to:

bufo vulgaris: The LEGO of today is crap. It kills the creativity of children. In the beginning LEGO was about the building blocks: - You bought a set of general pieces and then it was up to You to build something with it. The only real limitation was Your own imagination. You could do anything.

Then they started to focus on developed finished models: A car, a rocket or something like that. And the creativity was gone. Instead of following his imagination the kid is now following instructions for how to build exactly the rocket shown on the box..

When my children were small they had much more fun when they were building something themselves, instead blindly following instructions.

(To be fair, It is still possible to by sets of general building blocks, but my guess is that 99% av LEGO sold to kids today are those soulkilling models.)

I was bought Lego when I was a kid in the late 70's , and they were kits to build something specific even then .
Some kits had enough bits in to make several things ( though not all at once ) .
So what's changed in over 30 years ? Not a lot .
The range has just increased .
Same as today , you can use the bits to build whatever you want.
We had tubs full of blocks .

They still seem just as popular today .

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 16:56 UTC
In reply to:

DGrinb: I'm pretty sure it all depends on liquid you're testing with.
The test result should improve significantly if you use scotch, gin, tequila.....

Doesn't matter which liquid was used in the taking part of the process .
You need to drink at least as many bottles when you get the prints back to think they still look half as good as you did when you took the shot .
And don't scan the negatives or have them printed big , or you'd have to be on your back to still think there good !

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2020 at 08:43 UTC
In reply to:

mxx: How about those lead lined bags that were used way back when?

When a package comes through concealing its contents they crank up the scanner to look threw it .
Even more suspicious in a lead lined bag .

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2020 at 23:37 UTC
In reply to:

tkbasic: Since this is an Amzon owned site, I checked Amazon to see what people are buying.
Under the category of "Camera and Photo" where Film, DSLR and mirrorless cameras fall,
#1 Fujifilm Instax Mini Instant Film
#2 Wyze Smart home camera
#3 Wyze Smart home camera
#4 Wyze Smart home camera
#5 Fujifilm Instax Mini Instant Film
#6 GoPro Hero8
#7 is Polaroid film.

FujiFilm has 8 of the top 50 products, Polaroid has 4, and there is a Kodak single use film camera.
The only ILC related product in the top 100 is a Canon 50mm lens. No cameras (there are none in the top 250).

The best is, Amazon ranks being messed up as they always are, the #1 digital camera is a "Kodak FunSaver 35mm Single Use Camera".

There is growth in the film market regardless of Fujifilms neglect if it while other firms take advantage .
Of course digital is where the main market is and that won't change .

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2020 at 22:31 UTC
In reply to:

tkbasic: Since this is an Amzon owned site, I checked Amazon to see what people are buying.
Under the category of "Camera and Photo" where Film, DSLR and mirrorless cameras fall,
#1 Fujifilm Instax Mini Instant Film
#2 Wyze Smart home camera
#3 Wyze Smart home camera
#4 Wyze Smart home camera
#5 Fujifilm Instax Mini Instant Film
#6 GoPro Hero8
#7 is Polaroid film.

FujiFilm has 8 of the top 50 products, Polaroid has 4, and there is a Kodak single use film camera.
The only ILC related product in the top 100 is a Canon 50mm lens. No cameras (there are none in the top 250).

The best is, Amazon ranks being messed up as they always are, the #1 digital camera is a "Kodak FunSaver 35mm Single Use Camera".

@ Joel , given this topic is about film , not digital , it's kind of the point .
The list of cameras he refers too was for film , digital and mirrorless .
ILC is "Interchangable Lens Camera " so SLR , DSLR , range finder ( digital & film ) and mirrorless as well as medium format film & digital , instant film and disposable cameras .
Film related products , be it film or cameras , not being high on the sales lists , suggesting a poor overall market is a bit irrelevant .
Amazon isn't the first place you go for this type of stuff , so the sales rankings mean very little .

Presumably the car sales market is on a severe downtrend globally as sales rankings for cars on Amazon didn't make it to the top 250 sales ?

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2020 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

tkbasic: Since this is an Amzon owned site, I checked Amazon to see what people are buying.
Under the category of "Camera and Photo" where Film, DSLR and mirrorless cameras fall,
#1 Fujifilm Instax Mini Instant Film
#2 Wyze Smart home camera
#3 Wyze Smart home camera
#4 Wyze Smart home camera
#5 Fujifilm Instax Mini Instant Film
#6 GoPro Hero8
#7 is Polaroid film.

FujiFilm has 8 of the top 50 products, Polaroid has 4, and there is a Kodak single use film camera.
The only ILC related product in the top 100 is a Canon 50mm lens. No cameras (there are none in the top 250).

The best is, Amazon ranks being messed up as they always are, the #1 digital camera is a "Kodak FunSaver 35mm Single Use Camera".

There not being any SLR cameras in the top 250 listings is hardly relevant .
Amazon isn't well known as a used camera shop is it ?
What's not bought on eBay are bought in a camera shop , either in-store or online .
Likewise all the film I buy , regardless of if it's 135 , 120 or 5x4 , I buy from specialist dealers .
They have a full selection and are cheaper than Amazon .
I buy quite a few things from Amazon but rarely photographic equipment .

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2020 at 11:11 UTC
In reply to:

concorde 1954: If you have a drone and no licence what will the fines be,no mention of that.

See the second to last paragraph .

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2019 at 20:40 UTC
In reply to:

Franz Weber: Nah, I have even found a 20 year old functional iPhone in the desert. True story!

Maybe .
But on here sometimes you've got to wonder !

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2019 at 00:25 UTC
In reply to:

HaoAndHui: All I see is MADE IN GERMANY.

Where else is a B+W filter made ?
That'd be good as new as well .

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2019 at 19:47 UTC
Total: 42, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »