Jonne Ollakka

Lives in Sweden Göteborg, Sweden
Joined on Dec 20, 2009


Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Is there a reason all of these newer MF's are using a 44mm sensor instead of the bigger 48/49mm? Some of the older models of cameras and backs with the bigger sensors are getting really affordable. As an amateur, I hardly need the high pixel count, but want the format to be as big as possible.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2017 at 22:28 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

tkbslc: Surprised nobody has tried this design again with newer large sensor cams.

Kyocera/Contax did with the U4R. (See my reply)

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 18:30 UTC

Out of all the rotating cameras, the best most stealthy for street, was the Contax U4R. 3 frames/s and very small. I found one on Ebay two or three weeks ago, my third since 2006. The waist level shooting, if you don't twist it in half, is great for candid street photography. I also have the Nikon Coolpix S4, but it's big and clumsy compared to the Contax. It has a faster lens and higher resolution, but in true Nikon compact camera spirit, the image quality is horrible.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 18:25 UTC as 54th comment
In reply to:

Will Hikari: The interesting thing about your experiment is that neither focal length nor object distance is responsible for the "distortion"--to be technically correct, apparent perspective. The "distortion" is actually a product of viewing distance. Posting web size images actually increases the apparent perspective ("distortion") and while you are absolutely right that shooting under these conditions gives a fuller feel to the person, printing it large would actually make the image have less apparent perspective. (I am not referring to true perspective which is about linear relationships to objects in the image, but apparent perspective which is related to angular relationships to the viewer.)

"Were this shot at 85mm, her right and left shoulders would been relatively more similar in distance to the camera, flattening the perspective."

Only if you moved back to get her into frame. It would be the increased distance that compresses the perspective, not the focal length. In practice, the focal lenght makes you move, and thus changes the perspective. Many photographers forget this and think focal lengths have different perspectives. In reality, they just crop the image.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 19:06 UTC
On article SLR Magic announces anamorphic lenses for filmmakers (33 comments in total)

SLR Magic, I love you.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 18:44 UTC as 4th comment

Would you use the 35mm with the Metabones XL 0.64 Canon EF- GH4 adapter or go for the MFT version? Would be nice to have it on both GH4 and 5D, even if it gives different images on both.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2016 at 18:49 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Hugo808: What's the resolution, 0.004K?

What kind of scanner do you have?

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2016 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

PatMann: Not quite 645 full frame, but close (about 93.4%). My Pentax 645 slides are about 41.5 x 56mm in image area. Certainly still a long way from 6 x 6 or 6 x 7 medium format film sizes.

It wasn't marketing that coined the term full frame. It was simply logical and true. Remember that everyone getting into DSLRs 15 years ago were using lenses made for 36x24, with smaller sensors.

The 5D was a blessing. Full frame on a budget. Being so mainstream compared to obscure digital MF backs is why the term got attached to small format.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2016 at 19:50 UTC
On article Camera FV-5 update brings DNG Raw capture to Android (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digital Imaging Technician: I bet FV-5 is based on the L Camera code, because it has exactly the same problem as L Camera with manual focus. There is no infinity focus. If I set the manual focus to the furthest possible it still just focuses a couple of meters a way (or closer than that) and things further away are not in focus at all.

Manual infinity focus could have real potential with camera phones as DOF is crazy. Basically you could set it to infinity and have focus from something quite close to something really distant. The AF on my Nexus 5 always troubles me (hunting) and it's slow as molasses.

Please fix manual infinity focus and I'll buy it (I actually bought it, but refunded because of this)!

Here's a pro tip: Set your focus to infinity with AF, then turn AF off and don't touch focus again, unless you're doing macro. Like you said, phones have crazy DOF and don't need focusing at all for non-macro shots. Everything is in focus all the time. AF is utterly useless on phones and will just make you miss shots.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2014 at 11:20 UTC

Hoping for? SX-70 Mk II together with Impossible. More realistic expectations.. well I'm not going to sit up and wait.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 09:08 UTC as 846th comment

Whoa, Canon, slow down.. What is this crazy talk about new hi-res DSLRs?

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2014 at 11:34 UTC as 27th comment
In reply to:

fotokeena: I have been wishing for Hasselblad to make such a back that can integrate with the V system seamlessly for a long time, looks like they finally did it. Now owners can use their well built bodies and lenses, as well as prism finders, I am glad that they finally recognize there are still a lot of people hanging on to their old"golden standard" system, and it's value.

Great job Hasselblad, even thought I can't afford the price, how about making a barebones version for $5K to $6K? for the non-profit making photographers.

How's life under a rock been?

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2014 at 23:01 UTC

For lowlight 4K, the A7S sure will beat a GH4. Then again, you'll need an external recorder with the Sony, while the Panasonic does it internally.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2014 at 12:00 UTC as 157th comment

I've been using VSCO with Photoshop for a few years now. Time to look at DPP again. I always liked the ability to change profiles in DPP, compared to other programs. You can get a preview of B&W in-camera and then do a more elaborate B&W conversion from a color photo.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 20:11 UTC as 21st comment

Anyone have a good educated guess if this will work with the EF50/1.2L?

Thanks to SLR Magic for stepping up and doing this. I bought my Iscorama in april 2009 and the amount of people wanting to buy it from me has been insane. Quite astonishing considering how crap that lens is. One of my anamorphic photos on Flickr is the most viewed of my photos, day after day for nearly five years now.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2014 at 19:52 UTC as 6th comment | 2 replies

I vote Samyang TS-24/3.5

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2014 at 16:57 UTC as 40th comment
On article New anamorphic adapter lens for iPhone 5/5s (37 comments in total)
In reply to:

tkbslc: If a product is not for you, you could always, oh, I don't know,... Not buy it?

Complaining about a niche product for something you have no interest in seems strange.

The face palm comes in when you realize it's for a cell phone. There's a huge gap in the low budget DSLR anamorphic lens market. Interest and demand for these cheaper lenses is enormous, supply is painful. Even if you score a lens for several hundred dollars, it's probably crap (in all honesty). If you can raise 30k for a toy, you can probably raise ten times that for a serious budget alternative for DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2013 at 20:58 UTC
On article New anamorphic adapter lens for iPhone 5/5s (37 comments in total)

Thank God it's not for DSLRs. Now my really shitty anamorphic Isco from the 60s will keep its value.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2013 at 17:25 UTC as 10th comment
Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »