Photomonkey

Lives in United States CA, United States
Works as a Photographer
Joined on Oct 28, 2002

Comments

Total: 874, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Ellis Vener: Looks very promising! Fujinon lenses are generally excellent and the last time I used a Fuji digital camera i was impressed with the native color rendition which as more to do with the the color sensibilities of the at Fuji as the sensor's technology.

Fujinon enlarging lenses were great too.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 04:23 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Another way to spend my kid's inheritance.

There certainly wouldn't be any left for the funeral needed after my wife finds out.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 21:46 UTC

It seems that DPR is a great place to lose perspective.

"It is not MF!!"
Until very recently, the vast bulk of sensors for the classic MF cameras were all smaller than 645 film(which itself was frequently sneered at by 6x6 and 6x7 users).

"Way too much money" The Nikon D5 $6500 the Canon 1Dxmk2 is $6000. Premium lenses in both their lines sell for $1500 and up. Fuji, Pentax, Canon and Nikon are very cognizant of who is buying those cameras and they know the bulk are amateurs.

They also know that the bulk of amateurs shoot landscapes (many with cats) or scenes not requiring extreme lenses. They also know that pros using or aspiring to MF are, for the most part, not looking for extreme lenses.

Thus the stars align for the GFX and the 645z and X1-D.
While many will squawk at the price/features and make comparisons to other cameras that buttress their position, Fuji and Hasselblad will work furiously to meet demand and reduce the waiting lists.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:22 UTC as 49th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

halfwaythere: 1/125s flash sync speed, ouch.

Large FP shutter. Unlikely to get better because IIRC Copal is the only supplier of this very low volume item.

What you want is the H-adapter for Hasselblad lenses that allows you to use Hassy lenses and sync up to 1/800 sec.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 06:15 UTC

Another way to spend my kid's inheritance.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 06:13 UTC as 95th comment | 2 replies
On article Leica Boss: Hands-on with new Leica M10 (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

faterikcartman: Is it really as large as it appears in the photos? Is the size really a technological necessity, or a design choice?

"Fun size"

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 01:41 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mister Joseph: It's cool to think that those who bought a 5D MkII with the kit 24-105/4, 8 YEARS AGO, still has a really nice camera rig up to this day.

Alas

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: Fine, IF you develop and print in a proper darkroom. For those who scan, a warning. I used to scan. I stopped. Why? I stopped because scanning records the emulsion in 3D: it records and registers as image the chemical lumps. The higher the scan resolution, the more clearly they are revealed, such that you get almost a contour map of the image, and, le pire!, is that as the scan moves across the image the light creates a record of the shadows cast by the chemicals in the emulsion. You might like this, but I much prefer to do it as the process intends: in a darkroom with chemical baths etc.

You can do post process on JPG in LR or PS. Shooting RAW in the capture helps a bit but will never overcome the inherent weakness of film that is then conflated with the response of the sensor.
So in reality we have spent a lot to get back to JPG retouching from an imaging pipeline that eliminates a lot of the options that actual RAW capture gives us.

Fine for a hobby. Seems foolish for the pro.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 18:03 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Why not chrome?

A Green Lantern edition is green chrome would sell at least 5 units.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 18:26 UTC

Why not chrome?

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 05:27 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

philm5d: You are all completely barmy (US translation - crazy), just like the latest fad to produce music on vinyl. I thought I was behind the times being born in the early 50s but it's all the king's new clothes - it's different - so it's better or should I say "cool". I grew up with film, when anything over iso 400 was special order, had to be kept in a fridge and had grain like a coal heap (Fuji 1600 trannie film). I spent countless hours in smelly darkrooms - goodbye to all that and good riddance. My local Maplins (like Radioshack) is full of record turntables to play the "new" vinyl music records. Me? Well I still wince when I play a certain ABBA track that I scratched on Vinyl back in the 70s - now it's on CD I still can hear the loud click in my head when it comes to that part on the CD track - as I said you're all barmy...

@beckmarc
Some pros have gone to film as a marketing gambit. I have seen a ton of wedding MF in the current fashion and it is perfectly unremarkable.

The first time a newbie at film screws up a key roll by having it unroll in their hands or someone opens a back or the lab blows it, they will sell their gear and be solid digital the whole way.

The fascination of film today is like the fascination of wood fireplaces. Nice for a bit, but the work and mess become a real pain in everyday use.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 19:51 UTC
In reply to:

RGiskard: I shoot no video, so this may be an uninformed question, but... how far off is the GH5 going to be from "real" cinema cameras made by RED and others? Miles apart, or are the capabilities converging somewhat?

Considering that GoPros are used in a lot of credible films kind of frames things a bit differently.
What is important is content.
If the content is engaging and the DP has some skill, no one notices the gear.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 05:57 UTC
In reply to:

Toselli: Great news! It would be even greater if someone would make some "mid-range" full manual cameras. I mean something in the middle of a new film leica and plastic cameras with 1 shutter speed and 2 apertures... I know there is the used market, but fully manual cameras were made up to the early '80s, they are starting to get quite old! I wouldn't want something more modern like a film eos, as their user experience is too close to digital cameras. A needle light meter is the most modern thing I'd like!

@Toselli, Many of those old cameras are relatively lightly used. I bought a used Pentax H3v in 1970 and used it until 1975 when I gave it to my mother who used it til she passed away in 1999. I got it back and used it until 2006 and sold it for $35 to a student. I sold it with the 50 f1.8, an Olympus 35 mm f2, and a Pentax 135 f 2.8. He got a great deal.

Building a mechanical camera today is highly unlikely because it is a complex mechanism requiring expertise not easily found anymore.

Note how expensive manual Chinese lenses are and they don't even have automatic apertures.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 00:17 UTC
In reply to:

Toselli: Great news! It would be even greater if someone would make some "mid-range" full manual cameras. I mean something in the middle of a new film leica and plastic cameras with 1 shutter speed and 2 apertures... I know there is the used market, but fully manual cameras were made up to the early '80s, they are starting to get quite old! I wouldn't want something more modern like a film eos, as their user experience is too close to digital cameras. A needle light meter is the most modern thing I'd like!

There are literally thousands of superb cameras available used.
As long as we are going analog here let us also celebrate the classic manual focus lenses that made us happy back then.
Film users will want to be deliberate as they are limited to 36 shots and thus manual focus fits perfectly.
A further benefit is the ability to use cameras that don't need batteries. You will want a light meter and the knowledge to use it.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 20:01 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: Fine, IF you develop and print in a proper darkroom. For those who scan, a warning. I used to scan. I stopped. Why? I stopped because scanning records the emulsion in 3D: it records and registers as image the chemical lumps. The higher the scan resolution, the more clearly they are revealed, such that you get almost a contour map of the image, and, le pire!, is that as the scan moves across the image the light creates a record of the shadows cast by the chemicals in the emulsion. You might like this, but I much prefer to do it as the process intends: in a darkroom with chemical baths etc.

High end drum scanners are not found everywhere and when found, are expensive.
I suspect most will try to "scan" using a DIY interneg setup.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 19:58 UTC
In reply to:

philm5d: You are all completely barmy (US translation - crazy), just like the latest fad to produce music on vinyl. I thought I was behind the times being born in the early 50s but it's all the king's new clothes - it's different - so it's better or should I say "cool". I grew up with film, when anything over iso 400 was special order, had to be kept in a fridge and had grain like a coal heap (Fuji 1600 trannie film). I spent countless hours in smelly darkrooms - goodbye to all that and good riddance. My local Maplins (like Radioshack) is full of record turntables to play the "new" vinyl music records. Me? Well I still wince when I play a certain ABBA track that I scratched on Vinyl back in the 70s - now it's on CD I still can hear the loud click in my head when it comes to that part on the CD track - as I said you're all barmy...

The article said "professionals and enthusiasts rediscovering the artistic control offered by manual processes and the creative satisfaction of a physical end product.
I cannot think of any pros wanting to re-visit the nightmare of endless bracketing, lab bills (not to mention a lab worth squat) and THEN scanning and retouching.
Maybe a few hipstah pros working with a few hipstah ADs all whom were born after 1990.
Amateurs I understand. Novel experience and all that but will they really look for projectors? Or will they start looking for scanners and end up pixel peeping all over again?
I know they will not put up with a Type R print (if it can be found) and Cibachrome has been dead for these many years.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 19:56 UTC
In reply to:

RGiskard: I shoot no video, so this may be an uninformed question, but... how far off is the GH5 going to be from "real" cinema cameras made by RED and others? Miles apart, or are the capabilities converging somewhat?

As Bhima78 notes, a good DP will get great footage.
A good DP knows how to use light and when to bring in light.
Far too many people lean on DR to salvage footage from poorly planned and executed shoots.
The RED definitely excels in PP flexibility but that is gravy for the good DP.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 02:47 UTC
In reply to:

oldfashioned: minor improvements , still you need to buy a real video camera if you need a servo zoom wide to tele (and that's marketing, good old marketing)

Apt name: oldfashioned

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 02:38 UTC

So, more ignorance in the wedding client field. Nothing new.

Wedding photography is profoundly challenging because every job is a new client.
They need to be educated, coddled and nurtured to sign the contract. Then the photographer expends massive effort to plan, organize, and execute the shoot on the Big Day, all the while keeping the various miscreants happy.
Then post processing and delivering the huge job and dearly hoping for happiness and referrals.
THEN you have to do this all over again after you have been trolling for a new client.

You don't even have time to go to the bar and strut about telling everyone who will listen that you are a professional photographer. Then of course you miss out on the fistfights over your wanky Fuji camera. ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 22:22 UTC as 260th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

JordanAT: On paper, as a still camera, this looks like a rebadge and a price bump. Similar lens (range, aperture), same sensor, same size, same battery life, same sensitivity, frame rate, and shutter speed range, and a bit heaver. So, for still photogs, they're adding a touchscreen for $400?

For the still shooter it seems like a small-ish increment. However the DFD focus would mean faster AF. The EVF is an improvement and may be a deciding factor for some; Especially eyeglass wearers.
Couple that with moving the AF point via touch and one can argue that it is better camera for events and other subjects requiring responsiveness.

Link | Posted on Dec 25, 2016 at 18:42 UTC
Total: 874, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »