nathantw

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jun 11, 2009

Comments

Total: 221, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

nathantw: I was wondering if we were going to see a photo of a homeless man that was taken with a $10000 camera/lens combo. I wasn't not disappointed.

The camera looks good. I was wondering if it had the little film advance lever to make it easier to hold that I saw some other reviewer had. After seeing this review, I guess it doesn't contain that.

HowaboutRAW, what are you talking about? I think we have a mix-up on what we're discussing here. I'm discussing this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Metal-Camera-Thumb-Thumbs-Up-Grip-Hot-Shoe-Protector-For-Leica-Camera-Black-/371098359851 and you're discussing the merits of the sound the camera makes when you press the shutter and advance the "film."

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2017 at 01:10 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: I was wondering if we were going to see a photo of a homeless man that was taken with a $10000 camera/lens combo. I wasn't not disappointed.

The camera looks good. I was wondering if it had the little film advance lever to make it easier to hold that I saw some other reviewer had. After seeing this review, I guess it doesn't contain that.

But why in the world would anyone want a film advance lever on a digital camera? That's just so unnecessary. A film advance lever is to do just that, advance film through the camera. However, those particular "grips" look to be useful.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 03:34 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: I was wondering if we were going to see a photo of a homeless man that was taken with a $10000 camera/lens combo. I wasn't not disappointed.

The camera looks good. I was wondering if it had the little film advance lever to make it easier to hold that I saw some other reviewer had. After seeing this review, I guess it doesn't contain that.

darngooddesign got it right, HowaboutRAW. Check out this page. It's a size comparison of the cameras but you'll see the "grip" there. http://leicarumors.com/2017/01/23/leica-m10-vs-m-vs-m9-vs-m6-vs-q-vs-sl-size-comparison.aspx/

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 06:06 UTC
In reply to:

AZPhotog86: $6,500 is way too much for any camera--including Leicas.

That's correct T3. In the 1980s the M4-p was the camera to have and that was about $2500, which after inflation, is over $5000 today.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 20:23 UTC

I was wondering if we were going to see a photo of a homeless man that was taken with a $10000 camera/lens combo. I wasn't not disappointed.

The camera looks good. I was wondering if it had the little film advance lever to make it easier to hold that I saw some other reviewer had. After seeing this review, I guess it doesn't contain that.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 20:19 UTC as 49th comment | 7 replies

Back in the 1980s the Leica M4-p was about $2500. In 2016 dollars that comes out to about $5500. So it appears that the Leica M really hadn't gone up THAT much after you factor in inflation.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 07:38 UTC as 74th comment
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: AgatePassPhoto praised the old HP B9180.
I also had an HP B9180 printer and I agree with his opinions. A real workhorse that produced excellent prints. How much is a new print head for any quality printer? Well let me say this; when my 9180 died and needed a new print head, the price quoted could have bought me a new HP B9180 printer if they were still available. HP no longer made the 9180 and never replaced it with a new model. So I bought an Epson R3000.

In general, printer prices are loss leaders to get you into the ink purchases. Because printers are loss leaders, you can expect that the replacement print heads are going to be prohibitively expensive.
The Epson print quality is no better than was the older HP 9180 and the Epson inks are more expensive. Such is progress.

BTW, the HP B9180 also had a built it print media scanner to correct ink output which assured consistent color tones for job to job.

Jim Evidon, I used 13x19 photo advanced paper and it banded. Brand new print heads too. Go figure.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 07:31 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: AgatePassPhoto praised the old HP B9180.
I also had an HP B9180 printer and I agree with his opinions. A real workhorse that produced excellent prints. How much is a new print head for any quality printer? Well let me say this; when my 9180 died and needed a new print head, the price quoted could have bought me a new HP B9180 printer if they were still available. HP no longer made the 9180 and never replaced it with a new model. So I bought an Epson R3000.

In general, printer prices are loss leaders to get you into the ink purchases. Because printers are loss leaders, you can expect that the replacement print heads are going to be prohibitively expensive.
The Epson print quality is no better than was the older HP 9180 and the Epson inks are more expensive. Such is progress.

BTW, the HP B9180 also had a built it print media scanner to correct ink output which assured consistent color tones for job to job.

I'm still using the B9180. I bought new print heads when they went out. The printer is consistent but it does have a huge problem with gradations where it would band. This is when a newer printer is probably much, much better.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 07:38 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: Can you imagine a person who hadn't stopped hearing how good Kodachrome was throughout the person's photographic life and if Kodachrome actually came out how their slides would turn out? They buy a film camera, excitedly buys a roll of Kodachrome, figures out how to load the camera correctly, shoots 36 exposures, sends it out, waits impatiently for it to come back, gets the box of slides back in the mail, nervously opens the box up and underexposed/overexposed pictures. The person never learned the fine art of how to take exposure readings and and how to compensate for the lack of film latitude. So they give it all up and go back to digital where they can see right away if the photo is over/under exposed.

My whole point was that if the person doesn't get "perfect" Kodachrome slides then they'll abandon it right away and Kodak loses sales. Then if that same person starts bad mouthing the film on social media saying it was horrible or it was a terrible experience (as people tend to do even if it's their fault) then that's more lost sales from people that listen to them.

As a couple people have correctly pointed out there are cameras with automation that should help. That's true, but many times the built-in light meter is based on 18% gray and some are even center-weighted metering only and not matrix metering where the camera compares 100,000 images to get the perfect exposure. That will lead to under/over exposures in slides with no way of recovering.

So, if it's not perfect out of the box will that new Kodachrome user see their mistake and try to learn again or take the easy way out and say "ah, forget this" and turn to their phone or digital?

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 23:01 UTC

Can you imagine a person who hadn't stopped hearing how good Kodachrome was throughout the person's photographic life and if Kodachrome actually came out how their slides would turn out? They buy a film camera, excitedly buys a roll of Kodachrome, figures out how to load the camera correctly, shoots 36 exposures, sends it out, waits impatiently for it to come back, gets the box of slides back in the mail, nervously opens the box up and underexposed/overexposed pictures. The person never learned the fine art of how to take exposure readings and and how to compensate for the lack of film latitude. So they give it all up and go back to digital where they can see right away if the photo is over/under exposed.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 15:28 UTC as 47th comment | 6 replies

Ever since medium format companies moved to CMOS sensors from CCD I actually don't see much difference in the web pictures. I'm sure there's some type of difference, but photos just don't shout "medium format" in the same way as 35mm film and 120-film.

That said I've been really wanting the Hasselblad CFV-50c for my V camera, but at $9,999 it was really out of my range. At $10,999 it's really, really out of my range. I want it because I like using my Hasselblad 553ELX. However, this new camera (X1D) looks really, really good. It's not much cheaper after I add the adapters (X1D to H, V to H ($2000+)) but it'll be much more advanced and lighter, especially after more lenses start coming out. Again, it's too rich for my blood, but it's nice to dream.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 01:46 UTC as 58th comment | 4 replies
On challenge High key portrait with RED (3 comments in total)

I think people need to take a photography lighting course. Only one or two of the photos were considered "high key" and the rest were not in any way, shape or form. Blowing out highlights does not make it high key. #5 and maybe #12 with the red sweater can be considered high key.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 22:35 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Ruby Red Dress in the High key portrait with RED challenge (9 comments in total)

I hate to say, but this type of photo vignetting reminds me of something you see on Facebook or some dating site where the person doesn't want the viewer to see their "former" significant other.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 22:31 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Canon patent shows curved sensor design (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

speculatrix: didn't Sony do this back in 2014?
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6229436014/sony-s-curved-sensors-may-allow-for-simpler-lenses-and-better-images

ah wait, Apple invented curved sensors in 2016
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8027168176/apple-patent-describes-use-of-curved-image-sensor-to-design-small-camera-module
and we all know that Apple really invented everything. or did they?
http://digitalsynopsis.com/buzz/did-apple-actually-invent-anything-infographic/

But Al Gore invented the internet.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 22:29 UTC
On article Canon patent shows curved sensor design (105 comments in total)

Something new for the marketing people to tout so that people with flat sensors will feel inferior.

I thought Sony had already patented this type of sensor?

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 22:29 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
On article Lensrentals tears down the Nikon 105mm F1.4 (157 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: Looks like a toy and is made in China and they charge a whole lot of money for it, 2527 USD in my country. And what's with that focus motor and gears, it looks as if they employed a crack team of engineers from Toys R us to design this thing.

Doesn't look good for Nikon if that's what they call top of the line nowadays.

Remember in the old days people would say "look it's made in Japan" and laugh because they were so cheap and were made of tin. Look at how times have changed. It's the same with China. Many items are cheap because that's how the manufacturer wanted them made.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 20:45 UTC
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: The Only thing I despise of this camera & the previous 4 is the small size. What's the Best grip to use for people with big hands?

Lol, the small size is the main attraction of these cameras

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2016 at 01:00 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: No 4K?

No 4k? Well, I'm not buying it then since I NEED 4k. (LOL, I really don't but I had to throw that in there because that's the most popular comment (excuse) for not buying something.)

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2016 at 03:18 UTC

" ‘The tricky question is: would you buy it for €12-15,000?"

No.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 04:37 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

nathantw: Since when has photo equipment start being called "kit?" It gives the impression of small, lightweight amateur stuff. It should be "heavy photo equipment." People will think, "big photo gear."

Well if you've been hearing it your entire life who can argue with that? I'm a bit older so I'm used to hearing it called "photo equipment." Neither right or wrong.

I just get the vision of kit lenses in my head when I hear "kit," and you know a kit lens's reputation.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 14:34 UTC
Total: 221, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »