Lives in United States United States
Joined on Nov 5, 2010


Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

TFD: Wow how small must be the market size for this.

I am a little confused about the need for a ISO 3200 label what would that be Ektachrome 400 pushed 3 stops - Yikes. Also omitted ISO 25, 50 & 64 on the odd chance someone could find Ektachrome 64 or Kodachrome 25 or Agfachrome 50 in a freezer someplace

Ilford Delta 3200 and Kodak P3200.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2018 at 04:41 UTC
In reply to:

cdembrey: Time for a name change. Fujiinstaxfilm. or perhaps Fujidigital.

Ten or twelve years ago, a Fujifilm rep said that they would be "the last man standing." Sometimes even large corporations lie :-)

Yep, they lied about the October date, too.
It's discontinued now. (May 6)

Link | Posted on May 7, 2018 at 05:41 UTC

It's now May 6th, and Fujifilm Acros 100 in all formats is listed as "Discontinued" or "No longer available" at B&H and Adorama. It is no longer listed at all at Freestyle.
I bought some in late April, when it was listed as back ordered, but the status changed somewhere around May 1st.

It's still available at Amazon and on ebay, for $12 to $25 a roll, from Japan and China.

It's gone, 5 months early.

Could be that they couldn't make money on black & white film in the US because they never made the slightest effort to market it here.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2018 at 05:26 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

DocGer: Just picked up my GX85 body, which will be a 2nd body to supplement my GX8, allowing me to have 2 lenses available in situations where lens changes are risky. Also as a better fit to my really long 100-400 mm, without having to use the GX8's shutter-shock work-around of electronic shutter.

The camera itself is much as expected, and will undoubtedly "do the job".

BUT, Panasonic have really cheaped out (at least in Canada) by not providing a separate battery charger. Instead they include a wall wart and quite short USB cable, to charge batteries in the camera. This of course makes it impossible to use the camera while it is charging a battery, a process of several hours. I can't imagine it saves them any significant money, and really puts this body into the amateur class.

There are after-market chargers available, but really, given the price of the body, should one have to spend even more for the convenience of using a camera while charging another battery!

Absolutely agree. I think this is the first camera I've ever bought that didn't come with a charger. When I opened the box and didn't find one, I thought at first that it had been pilfered, or accidentally left out.
I bought a cheesy aftermarket charger, which works OK, but it doesn't make me feel great about Panasonic. It's even worse than selling a $1500 lens and then charging $60 for a lenshood.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2018 at 01:51 UTC
In reply to:

boinkphoto: "If it turned out to be really good, maybe it would find a place in my permanent camera kit. If it ended up being a dud, I had 30 days to return it for a refund."

It may be this is one of the things that makes this shop special, but I see so many "I tried it and returned it" it just seems bizarre to me. Broken, not as advertised, missing parts, or even I ordered wrong and didn't find out until I opened it - yes, I get that. But "fully working, just didn't do it for me" seems alien to me.

Might be a generational thing, but still these returns, particularly after more than a few days use, are usually an automatic refurb and loss to the company. I sure don't want to buy a "new" lens that someone "tested out" for 29 days.

I guess if the stores are ok with it, it's "part of doing business", but it feels weird to me.

I'm not sure it's generational; I'd say it's most likely a reaction to the changed state of the retail business.
In olden times when there were many camera stores, you would never buy a camera without having played with it in the store.
Now the stores are gone and probably the majority of potential buyers have no way to actually touch the merchandise before buying.
I bought a Fuji Xt-20 from one of the New York stores. I was really excited about it, but when it arrived it was just too small for my hands. Had I been able to try it in a store, I would have known in a second that it wasn't right for me.
I'm older generation, too, and I felt a little creepy returning it, but I couldn't have used it comfortably, and those are the rules now.
And I bought an XT-2 from the same store.
I suspect fewer people would buy from those companies if they weren't able to return a mistake, so the stores know what the trade-offs are.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 00:53 UTC
In reply to:

mostlylost: What on earth could possess a Leica owner to want a budget lens :)

Why do so many people think that all Leicas cost $7k?
You can get a good Leica film body for well under $1K.
I have several.
(But I won't be buying a Handevision lens; not when there are older Leica lenses, Voigtlanders, thread mount Nikons and Canons, etc, etc. for the same or less. Lots of options.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 00:22 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: As far as I understood it, Leica's strong suit is lenses, not bodies.
Why would one buy an expensive, "ok" body, and then pair it with a "so-so" lens?
Wouldn't it be better to, for instance, adapt an M lens on an A7 body?

Unless it's for "the look"...

Through much of his career, HCB used a Leica Elmar, which was probably worse than a Handevision.
Didn't do his pictures any harm at all.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 23:15 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: Hi Barney. Thanks for the review. There have been very, very few reviews of this whole family of lenses. It's amazing that Handevision expect to sell any without making them available for testing to web review sites. I'd really appreciate seeing reviews of the other four lenses if that possibility emerges for DPR. For me, as a Fuji user, the interest would be in the 75 and 90mm lenses - Fuji offer nothing in 75mm and their 90mm is massive (as mirror-less lenses go). Thx.

The marketing on these is just weird.
They've been out for about a year (I think) and the last time I googled (about a month ago) there were dozens of "announcement" stories that just reprinted the seller's handout, and exactly one review.
They don't seem to be doing any marketing at all, which will work poorly for them in a market crowded with Chinese manual focus lenses for one third the price.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 23:01 UTC
On article Understanding old Nikon lenses: AI, AI-S, AF and AF-S (24 comments in total)

"There are still a few places that perform this conversion with different levels of finesse,"
Can anyone suggest a place or two that still does the non-ai to ai conversion, preferably at the high end of the finesse scale?

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 09:06 UTC as 11th comment
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (201 comments in total)

A more interesting article would have been a run-off between this lens and Voigtlander's tiny (and now discontinued) 28mm f3.5, which, as I remember, sold for about $350, and was a much more modern design.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 04:03 UTC as 10th comment

Guess I'm not sure what this proves.
That Rokkors and Hexars are superb lenses? Knew that.
That even an Industar can be pretty good, especially for portraits? Check.
That 28s, 50s and 100s are different? OK.
That shooting in mercury-vapor lamps makes people look orange?
Guess that was it.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2017 at 02:56 UTC as 3rd comment

Well, kind of fun, but kind of silly. On the $50 camcorder, every detail was designed to meet a price, and no one expects it to be much good.
More interesting would be a comparison with a one or two thousand dollar modern dslr or mirrorless, where the engineers were trying to squeeze in as much quality as possible, and the buyers DO expect pretty decent quality.
Just a guess: the Red would be better, of course, but you'd have to work a lot harder the demonstrate the differences.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 08:14 UTC as 26th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D review (391 comments in total)

Do people REALLY buy a dslr and then use it to shoot stills of moving bicyclists using live view? Holding the camera out at the end of their arms? Really?
Dpreview seems to love Canon for improving live view in all their models, without doing much at all for viewfinder focusing.
I use live view when the camera's on a tripod, for macro and long lenses. For 99% of my photography, improvements to live view are a waste of engineering.
Thanks for nothing, Canon.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 07:35 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Rod McD: DPR - Is there any chance they'd let you try the set for sample photos? There are simply no tests or reviews anywhere on the net. I've been watching them for the 75mm because Fuji offers nothing near the old 105mm FL that I happen to like.... It's hard to buy new designs in a total vacuum about IQ and BQ. These are not inexpensive lenses - they're chasing Voigtlander prices. Their ads talk about classic quality, but if that means soft wide open and a truckload of film-era CAs, no thanks. Let's see some images.....

I'm interested in the 75 too, for exactly the same reason.

There's a short review at Leicarumors, with comparison shots with the Voigtlander 75, and attached full size samples on Flickr.

The samples seem to be very low contrast, sort of misty, but they may not be production samples.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 06:42 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1617 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thematic: strange praise in these comments and canon forums - every post ends with "even though I won't be buying this camera...."

Why is nobody wanting to purchase it?

I thought this camera was sort of interesting until I looked at the lenses Canon makes for it.
There's a wide-angle zoom, a macro and two long zooms (240 and 320mm equiv. at the long end). All of those are fine for relatively specialized kinds of photography, but there's no normal prime (say, a 35mm f2) and the only mid-range zoom is too short (72mm equiv) and too slow (f6.3).
It's just weird, especially for a company that's known for its lenses.
They should have started with the basics, a fast compact normal prime, a solid midrange zoom, an 85 or 100mm equiv. portrait lens, and then worked out towards the specialty lenses.
As it is, their lens selection for this camera has no center.
And no, it really doesn't make sense to rely on another camera line's lenses, adapted.
Canon either cares about the M line or it doesn't. Looks like it doesn't.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 03:58 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Review (2644 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tobi Wan Kenobi: Dear Pentaxians, I think there's an important point to make, to all those who are eagerly waiting to use the K-1 with old K-mount lenses in aperture priority mode: THIS CAMERA HAS NO APERTURE FEELER, for whatever reason. So with SMC-M lenses, Ricoh (Rikenon) lenses (even with the infamous "P" contact removed) and other K-mount glass lacking the "A" position on the aperture ring (in short: lenses with K- instead of KA-mount), the camera won't measure exposure according to the aperture setting. Pentax DSLRs do have the option to use those lenses with diaphragm closed, but then the viewfinder will be rather dark, depending on the set aperture (stop-down metering). Only with KA-mount or later lenses, the camera will measure properly as former K-mount SLRs did.
I'm disappointed, as it wouldn't have been hard to include the aperture feeler. So still no proper use for my nice old non-KA-lenses.

Well, yeah, the green button works, kind of. But it is a pain in the butt, and as I remember, it's not very accurate with all lenses at all apertures.
The camera manuals have a paragraph full of weasel-works that finally says the non-A lenses "will mount on current Pentax DSLR's, and will focus manually, but aperture ring and exposure function is restricted." That's really not the same as being entirely compatible.
I'd really like to hear someone knowledgeable explain why Pentax added all the complication of the Green button when they could have added the mechanical feeler for about a dollar per camera.
Pentax makes a big deal in their advertising about "every Pentax lens ever made is compatible," when they're not, really.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2016 at 05:24 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1074 comments in total)

I don't do video and don't know anything about it, so this is a serious question. Please don't read it as being challenging or hostile.

If the lack of 4k video is a deal-breaker for you, why not look at dedicated video cameras instead? We seem to get more and more video features piled on to still cameras, which seems kind of like trying to make a camel into a horse.

It would seem to me that a videographer would prefer a camera that was designed from the ground up for video, but apparently that's not the case. Doesn't anybody make an affordable high quality video-only camera?

Can someone explain?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 19:04 UTC as 72nd comment | 3 replies
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1074 comments in total)

Wow. I'm as close to an Olympus fan-boy as you can get, and this just doesn't work for me.
It's way cute, of course, and the EVF answers my objection to the whole PEN line, but a big intrusive dial on the front for the color modes that I never use? Nope. I'd be tempted to just pry it off and throw it away.

And the same price as (for instance) a Nikon D7200? Or any number of bigger faster, more flexible cameras? Nope again.

For, maybe, $800 I'd be considering it, despite the silly dial. For $1200 I can control my GAS until they start to show up used on ebay.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 17:37 UTC as 235th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

caglistro: Updater worked fine and update 1.3 installed OK. The biggest problem is the updater software, why not a better display to show update progress? I wonder how many updates fail as user thinks the software has "frozen" and disconnects.

Yep. 1.4 installed fine for me, but the twirling circle graphic went on for almost half an hour with no indication of whether it was working or not. Probably a problem with my internet connection, but I was beginning to get concerning about whether I had bricked my camera.
Actually, I'd like to see them do it like other manufacturers do, loading the firmware on a card and letting the camera do it.

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2014 at 21:39 UTC

"However the concept [motorized zoom] failed to gain widespread acceptance amongst enthusiast photographers, mainly because motorized zoom controls have historically been unable to match the speed, directness, and precision of composition offered by conventional mechanical zoom controls."

So this is another piece of equipment with video inspired features that are inappropriate and inconvenient for still photographers.

Are the camcorder companies (actually the camcorder divisions of the same companies) just rolling over and allowing the video business to be stolen by these weird hybrids? Aren't there any high performance dedicated video cameras that don't cost $20,000?

I can see the future now: eventually still cameras will be so crapped up with video junk that the manufacturers will introduce "video-free" versions at a higher price.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2012 at 03:07 UTC as 25th comment | 1 reply
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »