Zoc

Joined on Nov 21, 2017

Comments

Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

I don't see any difference between the images, other than a greenish cast to the one on the left?...

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2021 at 13:34 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
On article Fujifilm X-E4 hands-on (180 comments in total)

Kinda hard to see what advantages this brings vs. the XA7 (if you don't mind skipping the EVF... I don't)

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2021 at 15:42 UTC as 46th comment | 1 reply

It seems that Fuji, at least, may be following the "foundry model". In the comments on an article posted here a while ago about webcam updates for cameras, there were suggestions that Fuji's low-end cameras are completely outsourced. They are in fact designed by an outside company, Xacti (formerly Sanyo) to Fuji's specifications, but they use completely different firmware and a completely different sensor.

I googled a bit to try to confirm it, but neither company has ever mentioned this relationship publicly, and there is only speculation in comments sections. It would explain a lot about those low-end Fuji cameras, though.

There was also speculation that Xacti was making cameras for Panasonic. So, it seems as if Xacti is already serving as a camera foundry in some capacity.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2020 at 07:27 UTC as 76th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

coldcut: Well, trying to understand what Kodak is today is a complicated thing.
JK imaging holds the license to use the Kodak brand on digital cameras and projectors.
Sino Promise group will (my guess) continue producing analog film and photographic paper under the Kodak brand?
What's left of Kodak-Alaris is focusing on "information capture solutions and digital transformation.
The Other Kodak is in the digital printing business combined with cinematic analog film for Hollywood and the strange new "super-8" project.
What a strange mess.

G-d damn complicated. Doesn't Eastman still make film in Rochester?

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 15:11 UTC
In reply to:

coldcut: Well, trying to understand what Kodak is today is a complicated thing.
JK imaging holds the license to use the Kodak brand on digital cameras and projectors.
Sino Promise group will (my guess) continue producing analog film and photographic paper under the Kodak brand?
What's left of Kodak-Alaris is focusing on "information capture solutions and digital transformation.
The Other Kodak is in the digital printing business combined with cinematic analog film for Hollywood and the strange new "super-8" project.
What a strange mess.

What about Eastman Kodak?

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 15:00 UTC
On article Film Fridays: 9 analog photography ideas for isolation (12 comments in total)

Turning your room into a camera obscura sounds like so much fun, but if I did I think I'd use a digital camera to make a timelapse of the changing light.

Also, experimenting with cyanotyping is a very easy and cheap way to get into printing.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2020 at 08:34 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

certo666: Does anyone else struggle in getting the film on the reels? It's my most hated part of the whole process. I think they're patterson reels but I wonder if my ones are faulty...

Those metal reels are a real pain - I've been practicing and practicing and just can't get the hang of them.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2020 at 11:13 UTC
On article Welcome to the new DPReview analog forum! (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lordemed: Recommendations for digital semiprofessional wanting to get into medium format film? Prefer 30-36 mm range lens (35 mm format). Outdoors/ landscapes/ people. No studio lighting. Willing to pay for quality camera/ lens within reason. Thanks all!

Fuji GW690. Massive negs, fantastic lens. Looks like a clownish jumbo-sized Leica.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 13:40 UTC

Always great to have more options for film! I'll definitely be picking up a box or two of this to run through my old cameras.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2019 at 02:59 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Jeff Greenberg: =
Look at all them chemical bottles.
What about climate crisis???
OK hipster millennials, wait 'til Greta finds out...

What I don’t get about climate and science denialists is where the anger comes from. Sure, science gets things wrong sometimes, but overall the track record is excellent. Listen to them, stop burning fossil fuels for a while, and if it turns out they were wrong, what’s the problem? People who used to work on oil rigs now work on wind farms. What is there to get angry about?

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2019 at 13:25 UTC

Does the out of range syncing work outside the app?

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2019 at 13:16 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

RedFox88: ...you mean the company paying to license the name Kodak for their products. NOT Kodak!

Looks like it’s still made in Rochester, NY, on the original manufacturing equipment. See: https://www.popsci.com/inside-kodak-factory-photos

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2019 at 00:30 UTC
In reply to:

Zoc: How do people use manual lenses like this on DSLRs without manual focus aids? I tried using an old MF Nikon lens on my D7500 once and trying to focus with the viewfinder was hopeless. I ended up using live view and magnifying the image. That was cumbersome enough with a tiny old 50mm f2, I can’t imagine doing that with this 5lb beast.

I had no idea you could install a split prism into modern DSLRs. Sounds like fun!

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2019 at 23:12 UTC

How do people use manual lenses like this on DSLRs without manual focus aids? I tried using an old MF Nikon lens on my D7500 once and trying to focus with the viewfinder was hopeless. I ended up using live view and magnifying the image. That was cumbersome enough with a tiny old 50mm f2, I can’t imagine doing that with this 5lb beast.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2019 at 21:32 UTC as 60th comment | 5 replies

Many people spent decades coping with film and are tired of it. For me, film is new. I like it because:
1. Process. I love mechanical things. Typewriters, etc. Now, old cameras. You can see how they work by looking at them. Their metal heft, their sounds. The forgotten craftsmanship. They were very refined devices and there is an unfamilar but visceral pleasure in them.
2. Classic films. Their look can’t be duplicated. They represent the refinement, over decades of ideas on saturation, temperature, contrast, etc. They’re masterpieces of the chemical engineers that created them.
3. Serendipity. With a digital camera I can take a hundred pictures and throw away 99 without a second thought. That makes it easy to find the one picture that represents what I had in mind when I pressed the shutter, which is good. On the other hand, when a roll of film comes back, I look at each one with greater attention. Sometimes I find something valuable that was not intentional at all.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2019 at 11:26 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply

All nice pics. I could use some insights on what “storytelling” means in this context, though. Some of the animal and people picture seem to have a kind of story (feeding time, working, going places) but what story do the desert or lake pictures tell?

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2019 at 23:26 UTC as 38th comment | 2 replies

Unbelievably stupid comments here. This video was shot on iPhones; probably mostly watched on iPhones or competing smartphones. If any of you geezers were a few decades younger and had ever held an iPhone, you’d notice that they’re easier to hold with the long dimension oriented vertically. That’s why this video was shot vertically.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2019 at 13:13 UTC as 6th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

bdbender4: "The resulting combination would act as a 64mm F1.9 equivalent. Not quite as wide or with such a bright equivalent aperture as the full frame lens used on full frame, but still better than using a pass-through adapter."

I'm not sure I'm understanding this properly. It's an interesting idea, but when I put my 40mm f/2.8 lens on my EF to EF-M adapter, which I do, I have a 64mm f/2.8 equivalent. It is small and light and suitable for my M5 or M6 body. I found through actual experience that my other EF lenses were too large and heavy to be much fun when adapted to EF-M. In that light, the 50mm f/1.4 plus the speedbooster seems like a large, heavy, expensive way to basically gain one stop from f/2.8 to f/1.9. ??

For exposure you have f2.8 equivalent, but for depth of field and light gathering you have an f4.5 ish equivalent lens if you mount a 40mm f2.8 lens on APSC.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2018 at 00:41 UTC
In reply to:

Mike Fried: What I notice about the difference between the two shots is the amount of distortion - look at the woman's exaggerated nose for crying out loud! To get a pleasing shot of people, you need to stand far enough away that their face appears like it normally does when you're not up their nose... Maybe the people putting 5 cameras / lenses in their phones have a point. A 28mm f/15 equivalent with processing to blur to look like f/1.4 doesn't work when you need a 50mm equivalent FoV. Maybe photoshop in some pincushion distortion to counter that barrel distortion.

The article states that the iPhone images were taken with the 52mm-equiv camera, not the 28mm-equiv camera, of the dual-cam iPhone. So, perspective distortion should be very similar as the Nikon 58mm lens. Yet, the distortion looks obviously higher in the iPhone images to me, too. Did the iPhone perhaps choose to use the wider camera, and DPR didn't notice?

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2018 at 01:05 UTC
In reply to:

Dolan Halbrook: What happens when you put a APS-C lens like the 18-400 on a FF sensor?

Weird that they would update a DX lens over their other FX lenses. It must be a good seller for them.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2018 at 04:26 UTC
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »