winkalman

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 29, 2005

Comments

Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

RingoMan: For years I used 6x7 for studio, wedding, and portraits. We used vignettes, soft focus lenses and much more. None of those were adaptable to 35 mm. Phisical size and way too much depth of field at studio apertures like f11.0 for groups simply did not work.
This camera, Fuji or Hasselblad is great to bring that routine back to classic shooters. Your comparison is valid for engineers, not most professional studio and wedding photographers. All I need now is a shift wide and the system is complete. Auto focus is useless in a studio or wedding. I need to focus myself. Works for me.

It seems like there are plenty of existing tilt/shift lenses that should be easily adaptable to the Fuji. I guess we'll have to wait and see what the 3rd party companies come up with though.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2017 at 19:46 UTC

This seems to be written for photographers who only want to optimize one aspect of image quality at a time. For anyone that wants the best dynamic range AND noise AND sharpness, the Fuji GFX 50s will likely be a great option. Also worth noting, if you care about image sharpness to the point that you're willing to spend $10,000+ on gear, shooting lenses at the FF equivalent of f1.4 is probably not something you do often.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 15:22 UTC as 81st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: How loud is the fan?

"Color Accuracy > 95 CRI (Color Rendering Index)"

Step 1) click link
Step 2) read

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 21:12 UTC
In reply to:

goodgeorge: Dear Nikon,

a) take Coolpix A
b) add better AF
c) profit

That is my recommended recipe. Please please please.

Coolpix A + weather sealing + 40mm equivalent (28mm f2.0 would be perfect) lens would be a dream.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 13:45 UTC
On article TwoEyes VR stereoscopic camera simulates human vision (52 comments in total)
In reply to:

winkalman: I think they're about 7 years late...

https://www.engadget.com/2009/01/05/minoru-3d-webcam-ships-this-week-still-looks-freaky/

I was partly taking a cheap shot at the similar design aesthetic. I'm also pretty skeptical that they can pull off convincing 3D in a 360 video with only 2 cameras per plane. It seems like the off axis parallax would be problematic. After a second look at the kickstarter page, I see that they have a sample 3D 360 video. I'll check it out on a 3D projector at work on Monday; hopefully I'll be proven wrong. If this thing actually delivers, it would be a pretty exciting product at that price point.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 04:36 UTC
On article TwoEyes VR stereoscopic camera simulates human vision (52 comments in total)

I think they're about 7 years late...

https://www.engadget.com/2009/01/05/minoru-3d-webcam-ships-this-week-still-looks-freaky/

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 20:00 UTC as 9th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

psilore: Why f/2.8 though?
DoF , okay, but if light gathering is such a priority... I'm not complaining, I just don't get the reasoning behind the choice

I'd be willing to place a large bet that they're using a fixed focus lens, hence the need for extra depth of field.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 02:05 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: Time and time again it's shown that two matching sized sensors with different pixel densities do not have a substantial sensitivity difference. 8mp sensor downsampled to 2mp should look almost identical to 2mp from the same sensor size. 4 pixels that are 1/4 the size can be added together to give the same sensitivity as 1 pixel with 4 times the area.

Downsampling at 30fps requires a lot of processor though which requires more hardware and more heat and less battery so there IS a potential advantage to purposely lower resolution sensors if:
1) The output resolution is an arbitrary maximum (like 1920x1080 for example)
2) You don't reduce the sensor size when you reduce the resolution
3) the overall cost or power consumption reduction is meaningful.

I don't think it has anything to do with image quality or low light performance though. Those would only come in if the alternative to low res is inherently flawed downsampling (which it shouldn't).

...and yet time and again specialty low light video cameras are designed with low resolution / large pixel sensors (e.g. Sony a7S, Canon ME20F-SH...)

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 02:02 UTC
On article DJI announces new Phantom 4 Pro and Inspire 2 drones (63 comments in total)

The camera on the Phantom 4 Pro looks pretty untouchable at this price point. Here's hoping that other drone companies follow suit. This is exactly the camera I've been wanting.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 00:40 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

Rhawi Dantas: Ricoh, if you are listening bring a GR with an 35mm equiv. lens. While at it slap a 24mp sensor and we are done.

I volunteer as tribute for testing. (hard job but someone has to do it.´).

+1 for a 40mm version and how about some of the Pentax weather proofing goodness!

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 13:03 UTC
In reply to:

attomole: I don't quite get this mini medium format thing, from what I understand on equivilancy, the lenses available here will not capture more light than FF with the fast zooms an primes available for that format. Maybee Fuji think FF will crash on there high end APSC offerings.

"I do think that Canon and Nikon mostly dominate the APS-C market as well. That's where most of their sales happen."

True, but despite all of the crowing here about FF, APS-C is still a much much larger market that Fuji and other niche players are able to be profitable in.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 14:05 UTC
In reply to:

winkalman: If someone releases an adapter for Mamiya 7 lenses, my extra kidney is immediately going on the market.

I mean that if you're not an alcoholic you can live a long and happy life with a single kidney. This camera might just be worth scaling back on the drinking for ;)

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 02:17 UTC

If someone releases an adapter for Mamiya 7 lenses, my extra kidney is immediately going on the market.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 19:51 UTC as 26th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

REDred Photo: Has anyone indicated anything about using legacy lenses with inert adapters? I've got a collection of manual focus Hasselblad, Pentax, and Mamiya lenses that would be fantastic with a mirrorless system like this.

@brendan1000 The Fuji GFX 50S absolutely has a focal plane shutter built into the body.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 19:42 UTC
In reply to:

King of Song: Something that must be remembered when comparing this camera to the new Hasselblad X1D.... This camera has a shutter...

The Hasselblad X1D relies on leaf shutter's in the lenses. This make the two camera's totally different animals. There are pros and cons to both systems.

The obvious advantage of having a focal plane shutter and a shallow 26.7mm flange distance is that the Fuji can potentially mount lenses from nearly any other medium format camera, including specialty leaf shutter and tilt-shift lenses. Here's hoping the adapters show up.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 19:32 UTC
In reply to:

kty: Next comes digital Mamiya 7!

The flange distance on the Mamiya 7 mount is 59mm and it's a scant 26.7mm on the Fuji. With a simple adapter THIS could be a digital Mamiya 7.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 19:27 UTC
In reply to:

Nobby2016: well some people dream about this camera will cost 7000$ because some fuji manager said it will cost well below 10000$.

i bet it´s closer to 9500$....

Fuji stated that the kit WITH the GF 63mm lens would be well below $10,000. My guess is that the body only price will try and compete with the Pentax 645Z which has a street price of around $7,000 here in the U.S.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 19:04 UTC
In reply to:

winkalman: Everyone is complaining about the lack of leaf shutter lenses, but I think the focal plane shutter is exactly what makes this camera promising. With a focal plane shutter and a simple adapter this camera could potentially mount nearly every medium format lens ever made! All of those old, abandoned lenses from Bronica, Contax, Rollei and others can finally be brought back to life. The real irony is that the Fuji may end up with best selection of leaf shutter lenses of any system since, aside from the X1D lenses, most of the other systems' LS lenses should be mountable on this camera.

@cdembrey: Who's talking about garage sale lenses? These are the systems that working pros counted on day in and day out for decades. If the Zeiss and Schneider optics from the Hasselblad, Contax, and Rollei cameras of the recent past aren't up to "pro" standards, I don't know what is.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

Svetoslav Popov: What's the advantage over FF, except more shallow DOF and maybe less expensive lenses?

More detail, possibly more dynamic range, and bragging rights. Also, this camera may end up being adaptable to a huge range of legacy leaf shutter and tilt-shift specialty lenses from other medium format systems.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 02:14 UTC

Everyone is complaining about the lack of leaf shutter lenses, but I think the focal plane shutter is exactly what makes this camera promising. With a focal plane shutter and a simple adapter this camera could potentially mount nearly every medium format lens ever made! All of those old, abandoned lenses from Bronica, Contax, Rollei and others can finally be brought back to life. The real irony is that the Fuji may end up with best selection of leaf shutter lenses of any system since, aside from the X1D lenses, most of the other systems' LS lenses should be mountable on this camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 01:20 UTC as 83rd comment | 4 replies
Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »