mrmut

mrmut

Lives in Zimbabwe Zimbabwe
Joined on Jul 8, 2009

Comments

Total: 110, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: It would be nice to see Leicasonic partnership work both ways - that is, a Panasonic badged M-series rangefinder using an M4/3 sensor paired with a built-in speedbooster tailored to the Leica M mount. With Panasonic pricing, of course.

You wouldn’t like the dust on sensor that plagues Leica m cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2018 at 10:14 UTC
In reply to:

telefunk: Thing is, it might well have much better QC and so be a worthy contender vs that new Sony VI

“Only” heh. I used only one on any camera I ever used.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2018 at 10:08 UTC

Wow. This is scary.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 20:12 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

mrmut: All the features, but works on Windows. This display also requires calibration, which is a major pain in the ass. (I am computer systems integrator and a photographer.)

@kpaddler Of course, who would drink a murky horse?

Link | Posted on May 30, 2018 at 12:36 UTC
On article Leica M7 film camera comes to an end (147 comments in total)

Oh, no!! :-)

Link | Posted on May 29, 2018 at 20:13 UTC as 43rd comment
In reply to:

mrmut: All the features, but works on Windows. This display also requires calibration, which is a major pain in the ass. (I am computer systems integrator and a photographer.)

@kpaddler Agreed. You can't make the water drink the horse. It works the other way around, tho.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2018 at 21:47 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: All the features, but works on Windows. This display also requires calibration, which is a major pain in the ass. (I am computer systems integrator and a photographer.)

@Suntan I have years of calibration of camera, lenses and screens behind me. The color was an issue before, because screens were terrible, and TBH, no level of calibration would fix most of them. Today, a color precision problem is evident only of cheap devices, and for those there is no help anyways. In my opinion image quality balance across devices is reached on Apple systems, and for most people there is no need in further hassle around it. If you think you need calibration, be my guest, but sooner or later you will understand that it is mostly superfluous (that especially if you utilize color targets).

@kpaddler (Please do not yell.) What you say is not correct. Please see upper response. Regarding the built in calibration utility: if you think your eyes are better than the factory spectroscopes Apple uses to calibrate their new screens, be my guest.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2018 at 13:02 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: All the features, but works on Windows. This display also requires calibration, which is a major pain in the ass. (I am computer systems integrator and a photographer.)

@Per Inge Oestmoen Seeking perfection is like looking for a holy grail. You won't get ideal color without ideal equipment and ideal lighting conditions. No need for such hassle. Photography is art, and deviations are more than tolerable, tho you must know what you are doing. One should play with light. The color perfection is needed only if you are photographing photographs, paintings and such.

@kpaddler Only for color critical work. One of the reasons I made a switch to Mac is to not have to do that. New iMac screens are fantastic, and more than enough for my print and design purposes.

@all People seem to ignore the fact that you actually do learn to compensate the image. If I see the histogram, the image and have a gamut measurement of a display, knowing the colors is no biggie.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 19:48 UTC

All the features, but works on Windows. This display also requires calibration, which is a major pain in the ass. (I am computer systems integrator and a photographer.)

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 08:00 UTC as 25th comment | 17 replies

"Accidentally."

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 09:21 UTC as 19th comment

I want this.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 07:31 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@kpaddler Look, there is a huge difference between "workable" and "effortless". Even a wet-plate camera is workable as a handheld portrait camera, but it is certainly not effortless. You could also drive a Model T around, but you don't.

Same with Noctilux, or any other manual focus ultrafast. To get useful photographs you need a *ton* of practice on one and the same system, and milliard of shots.

Overgaard is nothing special. The guy is a quality professional. You could give that guy a toy camera and he would orchestrate light leaks and make the photos look fantastic. But that is what professionals do. Nothing to do with Leica or Noctilux.

Coupled to the age old problems, you have the price. There is also a fact that Leica has 50+ years of really good marketing behind it.

In that light Leica is a porn. It is a good porn, but nevertheless a porn. Some people like watching porn, and some people like doing porn. It is important, however, that we call "porn" a "porn".

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2018 at 21:19 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@kpaddler If you were working and trying fast lenses when I was potty training, I should commend you for using the internet proficiently at such a ripe age. The problem is that you haven't said anything to refute my claims. You just disagreed, and in the end turned to ad hominem.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 21:20 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@tassienick What I gave you is critical thinking and my point of view. That you don't like them is your problem.

@kpaddler Try it. I did, and it didn't work. It is especially bad when you try to focus such lens in lighting conditions in which they are ought to be used (low light). Kind of misses the point, because most of the time I had to run such lens closed up a bit. Currently, I actually do use ultrafast for most of my work, and love it, but I let machine to do the focus. I have about 1-3 misses in a 1000 photographs, in any lighting (Oly EM1 and 25 1.2). On other cameras with lens ranging from F1.0 on, it was always hit and miss. I was always irritated when I had a fantastic portrait on which focus turned to be the tip of the nose, or ears. It is so easy to miss.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2018 at 18:30 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@kpaddler I commented Noctilux here specifically, but yes, problems of fast lens also apply to other fast lenses, except if you have minuscule sensor diameter so things change (a bit).

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2018 at 06:49 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@tassienick Yes.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2018 at 06:45 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@tassienick Well, if it worked for you, that is good. Go for it. But that "all time classic lens" is nonsense. If anything I have experience with fast lens. Used loads of them f1.0, f1.2, several f1.4, f1.8, f2.0, you name it. They are horror to focus by hand on any system. You think you did a good job, and than you get home and see that most all of the images are miss-focused.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 20:26 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@kpaddler Your comment is rude. There is something called netiquette, and you should consider reading it, because it seems you are lacking in that field.

And to answer your question: yes, something in the line of what you suggest, but just not at that price point, and the reason was not imaginary. I seriously considered getting a Leica M and about 3-4 lenses for the system. I decided agains it, because advertised usability was overshadowed by system issues and price/performance was completely nonsensical. Hasselblad Lunar comes to mind here.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

You can question my judgement all you want, but this process actually happened. I consider all of my purchases carefully, because I don't like wasting money or time.

Now, for the Leica as camera porn, lets define porn first: In porn you have some really nice and sexy people doing stuff that can look very appealing. However, if you would try it, you would discover that it is not hat fun, or pleasant.

In the same way, Leica stuff looks really nice and sexy, and some really good photographers do stuff with those cameras that look very appealing. However, if you would try to work with same equipment, you would discover that it is not that fun or pleasant.

Years ago I read a great comment from an old photographer, from Canada I think, regarding Leica Noctilux. He commented that at the time when the Noctilux was current, no one wanted it because it was crap to focus and images were almost useless.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2018 at 14:04 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is one of those things that cost a lot, but are actually worth it. Leica comes to mind immediately, as they are exact opposite.

@tassienick No, but bear with me: all purchasing decision, especially with high cost equipment, is based on prior research and cost/benefit valuation. This means that I don't need to jump off of a bridge to make an informed decision that that is stupid.

I seriously considered investing into Leica, but what I've seen from them was always lacking in some of the areas. I vill give you few examples: Demo images with Leica S system, which was interesting to me, had camera shake on Leica own demo RAWs. Leica M Monochrome which is appealing as I like mono images and is sharp like hell, is plagued by sensor dust problems. The color M again has same dust issues. This is true for most RAW samples I have taken a look at, and I really don't want to clean those. As for their other systems, I couldn't care less. They are essentially a *camera porn company*. Their lenses are fine, but usability doesn't stop on the brick wall and with pushing Oscar Barnack in our faces in every Leica media campaign.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2018 at 10:11 UTC
Total: 110, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »