Richard Schumer

Joined on May 30, 2012

Comments

Total: 250, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Alphaville: What happens if I drop it?

You will almost certainly say two words, one of which is "Oh!"

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 20:16 UTC

"There are only 95 of the ‘Edition 0.95’ lenses worldwide, which have unpainted engravings...."

One wouldn't want to lead the eye away from the fine finish with gaudy, attention-grabbing operating control parameters!

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 20:13 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S vs Pentax 645Z vs Hasselblad X1D (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan Mac: Pentax made a manual focus 75mm f/2.8 leaf shutter version of their standard 75/2.8 lens for the film 645, I believe that would allow flash sync up to 1/500s. I think though that it lacked the "A" setting to allow the camera to control the aperture setting, so exposure mode would be manual only.

You're correct about the leaf-shutter 75mm; I just checked mine and there is no A-position on the aperture ring, probably because the lens was designed to be used with a flash meter or other manually-metered method. There is a version w/o the leaf shutter which has the A-position.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2017 at 02:20 UTC
On article Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience (497 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ronan_M: Well I guess you're paying for the experience of using a Leica. If that rocks your boat and you've got the cash, why not? It does look lovely if you like the retro look.
However, I will laugh hard at any hint of rationalising the use of this camera as an image-making device.
Why would anyone part with that much cash for something that performs significantly worse than a 700$ entry-level kit is beyond me. That "Leica" name has to really really give you hardons to justify this.

@dlb4 : When I was a kid, I used RF cameras until prismatic SLRs were introduced and I felt the same way, perhaps because a successful image was quite a surprise, given the approximation of the picture the viewfinder gave. It seemed a miracle.

SLRs with pentaprisms showed exactly what the film would capture, and the element of expectation was gone.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 05:45 UTC

I owned an Asahiflex I, which I bought used in 1957, when I was 14 years old. The slow f:3.5 lens wasn't fast enough (this in the days before Tri-X) for available-light shooting, so I traded it for a Pentacon with F:2 Biotar, and found the eye-level prism finder much better than either the waist-level reflex finder or the eye-level optical finder without focus aid of the A'flex. When I visited Japan in 1966, I bought a black Spotmatic with its f:1.4, 8-element "radioactive" lens (wonderful!) and used it until the K-mount was introduced, at which time I traded it for an ME. That kit was stolen, so I tried a Nikon F, but it didn't feel as well-made as Pentaxes nor did it fit my hands as well. After a few years, I traded it for another ME, which I used until the *ist DS was introduced; that was replaced by a K10D, which I still use. About the same time, I acquired a 645 with four lenses for film use.

I guess that makes me a long-time Pentaxian!

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 23:37 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

TonyPM: Is it 35mm?

@CopCaarSS -- It isn't only Rodinal which has a long shelf life: Leicanol (a "compensating" developer marketed by Leica in the sixties) came in glass vials which contained no air, only developer concentrate. The thought was without oxygen there could be no oxidation and shelf life would be improved, I guess. It was a one-shot system, so a vial's contents were used only once and then discarded.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 16:47 UTC
In reply to:

TonyPM: Is it 35mm?

@Samuel wrote: "Rodinal never dies." That may be true -- the information sheet that comes with it says "slight flocculations are of no consequence," and the glass bottle it comes in has a tight rubber stopper. I hope you're right, but Foma makes a clone, and a recipe for it using Tylenol acetominophen and lye is available online.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 03:18 UTC
In reply to:

TonyPM: Is it 35mm?

120! I would try some on my Pentax 645 as soon as it's available! I was never a fan of Ferrania before, but....

I have to check whether my horde of Agfa Rodinal is still any good.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 21:36 UTC
On article Hopes of Kodachrome relaunch put on ice (173 comments in total)
In reply to:

Turbguy1: Bring back Tech Pan, or even better, High Contrast Copy Film. High Contrast Copy Film, when processed for full range, could EASY achieve 250 lp/mm, and challenge the BEST technique and lenses. At ISO of about 2...

IIRC Technical Pan had a useful ISO of 20 when processed in Agfa Rodinal diluted to 150:1 and inverted every 30 seconds for ten minutes at 20C. Full tonal range, no visible grain, and resolution beyond any of my lenses. Adox, I believe, still sells a similar film and Foma makes a Rodinal clone, for those who are interested.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 17:40 UTC
On article Hopes of Kodachrome relaunch put on ice (173 comments in total)

<<US-based Eastman Kodak manufactures the film on the UK company's behalf and still sells cine film and filmstocks for the movie industry.>>

The article has buried the lead! It used to be companies would re-spool cine films for use on 35mm cameras. Obviously, should demand be big enough, this could be done again. Kodak cine films are very, very good -- some IIRC were as vivid as Kodachrome but could be processed in E2 chemistry like Ektachriome can.

I believe the UK licensee with respect to Kodachrome processing as I said the same when the story first broke.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 23:39 UTC as 43rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

jyw5: This isnt really medium format...just larger than FF. The price is good...but then you have to buy more glass.

For those complaining the price is too high, may I remind you it is the same as a Nikon D5 and only $500 US more than a Canon IDx-II . I doubt the FF cameras can duplicate the IQ of its larger sensor.

Some pros are stuck in the studio all day; for this use, the Fuji system makes a lot of sense -- especially since it can use Fuji's excellent leaf-shutter glass through adaptation.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 09:14 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Schumer: Here's what puzzles me and makes me doubt Kodachrome's return:

The spokesman said Ektachrome was reintroduced because of professional demand. Ektachrome came in many sizes including 120 and 220, which were favorites of wedding photographers at a certain time. OK, after working with both chemical and digital photography, I can see where chemical processes have been automated and might take less of a pro's time than digitally post-processing images.

But Kodachrome was only available in 35mm and I can't think of a pro use for it in that format except calendar work.

Can someone explain -- I guess I just don't get it.

@Paul -- I didn't get the word that K200 was 120. Thanks for the correction.

And I didn't even think about magazine work, where 35mm K"chrome had a monopolistic hold. Of course, there are fewer print magazines today, but Kodachrome slides might make a good-looking digital zine, too!

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 06:46 UTC

Here's what puzzles me and makes me doubt Kodachrome's return:

The spokesman said Ektachrome was reintroduced because of professional demand. Ektachrome came in many sizes including 120 and 220, which were favorites of wedding photographers at a certain time. OK, after working with both chemical and digital photography, I can see where chemical processes have been automated and might take less of a pro's time than digitally post-processing images.

But Kodachrome was only available in 35mm and I can't think of a pro use for it in that format except calendar work.

Can someone explain -- I guess I just don't get it.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 06:19 UTC as 66th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

TheWhiteDog: If they really bring back Kodachrome I will revisit my film past. Still have my light box, just need to get a camera and 2-3 primes. Will never displace digital for me but more choices in the toolbox make for more creativity. And the tactile feel and the constraints of working with film breed discipline and what is learned there can makes ones digital photography better. So, do it Kodak, bring back Kodachrome!

TheWhiteDog wrote "just need to get a camera and 2-3 primes..."

OMG, you just opened my eyes! Film is the ultimate retro-hipster pose, but, you are right, and, if so, buyers will need film-capable cameras -- new one that look old, as the pawn shops are now picked clean of working old ones YMMV. Next, Kodak will be bringing back the infamous Ektra....http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Kodak_Ektra...and famous Retinas. ;0}

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 06:12 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: At 4:19: Nee-kahn? Is that really how it's supposed to be pronounced?

"Nikon" was a mashup of its full name -- Nippon (Japan) Kogaku (Optical Works) -- so it would be pronounced like the first syllable of "Nippon".

Another explanation is if the Japanese language has a long-I sound, it is not transliterated into English with the western letter "i."

We Americans seem to pronounce things any way we choose and think it's correct.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 04:21 UTC
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: now, that's cool. in my opinion, every photography student has to go through at least 20 rolls of kodachrome

@Rolliex: Kodak has always held the processing of Kodachrome to in-house, for reasons that are probably technical but secret nonetheless. Whether they will license the process in future (considering the investment probably necessary) is open for discussion.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 04:05 UTC
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: now, that's cool. in my opinion, every photography student has to go through at least 20 rolls of kodachrome

entoman wrote "photographing on film, and then developing and printing it...."

Kodachrome is a slide film which can only be processed by Kodak itself, unlike Ektachrome, which can be souped in a very well-equipped home or commercial darkroom. Making prints of a slide film is a pretty finicky process, as well, and not for the faint-of-heart.

A color-negative film like Kodacolor is easier, even for university-level darkrooms.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 00:08 UTC
On article DJI reportedly takes majority stake in Hasselblad (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

Trued1: As a swede I was actually thinking about taking the step from a7rII to the ever so awesome X1D. But after this news that is NOT going to happen. Chinese Hasselblads NO way. Just like both Volvo and SAAB Cars taken over by chinese.........
Please find some SWEDISH investors for Hasselblad!

China is NOT a democracy it is a country who put opposition i labour camps and copies anything made and developed in the western world. last thing I saw was a copied Porsche Cayman. Apparently they have te guts and we should have the guts to refuse their products and apply pressure on "our" companies to pull out of the dictatorship.
I always look where a thing is made can I avoid any product from china I am pleased. Sony has some products still made in Japan and my MacPro is made in the US with pride.

@lancet: In my long lifetime, my dad had a new ca. 1960 122S (Amazon) I drove as a teenager; I was impressed most by its build quality. Eight years later, my sister bought a new 144. She loved it. Around 1990, I was given a ca. 1970 164 with 200000 miles on it and it ran great if a little slowly. Fifteen years later, I bought a 1983 240 and owned it for ten years, selling it for more money than I paid for it while doing zero repairs. When it became too beaten-up by San Francisco parkers to drive, I changed to a 1999 S70, which now has 178000 miles without a squeak or rattle. The paint still shines and everything works as well as new.

Needless to say, I am sold on the brand.

I never had a Hasselblad, though, as Volvos are cheaper!

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 20:33 UTC
On article DJI reportedly takes majority stake in Hasselblad (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

Trued1: As a swede I was actually thinking about taking the step from a7rII to the ever so awesome X1D. But after this news that is NOT going to happen. Chinese Hasselblads NO way. Just like both Volvo and SAAB Cars taken over by chinese.........
Please find some SWEDISH investors for Hasselblad!

China is NOT a democracy it is a country who put opposition i labour camps and copies anything made and developed in the western world. last thing I saw was a copied Porsche Cayman. Apparently they have te guts and we should have the guts to refuse their products and apply pressure on "our" companies to pull out of the dictatorship.
I always look where a thing is made can I avoid any product from china I am pleased. Sony has some products still made in Japan and my MacPro is made in the US with pride.

I disagree. especially about your comparison with Volvo. First, I'll take on your implied generalization about Chinese ownership with respect to Hasselblad. If we were to believe the article's speculation, DJI would be foolish to invest more money in what they saw as a sinking ship; let's assume, then, that the X1D's public response was worth the added cash in terms of future sales and profitability.

Now, last I checked, Volvos were stilll designed and assembled in Sweden. Their Chinese owners are taking the long view, IMO, and developing autonomous luxury cars. These cars may be for sale in China and it might be a significant share of Volvo's future sales (like GM's Buick division) but it will still be a Volvo, not a Geely.

With respect.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 01:08 UTC
In reply to:

scottcraig: I've generally stuck to extension tubes primarily due to the cost of Cannon Macro lens. However given the performance and price of this lens I may just make an exception.

H'mm. Has my memory failed me in this matter?

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 23:53 UTC
Total: 250, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »