keepreal

keepreal

Lives in United Kingdom Enfield, United Kingdom
Works as a Retired, was Information Technology Manager
Joined on Mar 24, 2007
About me:

Amateur with a passion for pictorial photography of more than fifty years. Likes to communicate and learn from others with expert knowledge, especially if they also live in the real world, have galleries or links to really good photos and put their camera to good use.

Comments

Total: 400, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Red cameras at a premium, a soft focus lens way over the top in price even for them, and now this, much what I have come to expect from Leica.

There are a few premium brands from the film era that were top of the heap still around, Leica, Hasselblad, Canon, Nikon, Sony né Minolta Linhof, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Schneider, Rodenstock, maybe a few more with their lenses.

What is noticeable to me is that Leica now has lost its way, comes up with gimmicks that might appeal to foolish wealthy people, but less so serious photographers in the digital age. I expect in the end, not for quite some while though, they will fold or be taken over by some bright spark like Yashica.

At least it solves one problem. I used to aspire to having a Leica.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 21:34 UTC as 79th comment
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mateus1: When Nikon will make FF pro mirrorless then everybody will see how ugly a7 line is and how perfectly Nikon is designed with best ergonomy and everything at right place. This is Nikon. Sony is still behind Minolta although it bought it many years ago.

@Doug Frost, I will have a look at an a7R III just to check what the EVF is like. I do not expect to change my mind but it is possible that the best can cope with bright sunlight better than any I have seen yet.

Still, the camera is too big and heavy at 657g making it pointless for many of us to go mirrorless unless we need all the bells and whistles. I do not dispute that the technology is brilliant though, but I do not want all that junk in the viewfinder, just a little like Nikon DSLRs discretely below the image to show the basics.

And many of the lenses are ridiculous, my latest example being the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus at 875g for DSLRs. Too many lenses for mirrorless are just as bad, virtually negating any size and weight advantage there might have been.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2017 at 01:00 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alaska Hawaii photos: If the upcoming Nikon mirrorless is a version of the D850 it could prove interesting.

Chriscotech, your physics is wrong.

How about the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Milvus ZF.2 Lens - Nikon Fit at 875g? That is ridiculous.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2017 at 00:44 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chriscotech: On point 7: Configuration and operation.
I don't know about the D850, I shoot Sony and have a 7RIII. While it is an amazing camera and hugely versatile, the setup took me ages and is still a work in progress.

The big problem is that I can't globally backup my settings with Sony Alpha cameras. I had to send my Sony A9 back for a minor issue and was told my settings would be lost. It took 22 photos of the screen to record the settings, and another two hours to reconfigure the camera to how I use it. I used to shoot video with two Panasonic Lumix GH4's. With those I could copy the settings of one camera onto an SD card and use it to quickly match the two cameras. I could also save multiple configurations on my computer.

If the Nikon D850 has a way of globally backing up the camera configuration, I have order envy on that point, it should be a standard feature with the complexity of cameras like these. I wish Sony would get it. Does the Nikon have this feature?

The backup on the D850 is a great feature, so I will check that my D610 also has it. If the D500 also does, there is some hope.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2017 at 00:26 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

everybodyisone: It is just the matter of taste and use at this point I guess.
But as the whole picture, what Sony does and did in the past few years is very cool in my book. Nikon refining a system with truly amazing details but Sony invent new things which can change photography in long run. I guess it changed already. There was an article about is Nikon saved by this new camera or not and I guess no matter how truly cool this camera is, one dslr cannot change a company. It is not new, it is a refined old system. I don't have any problem with the (d)slr system but it is old. The mirror is not an advantage anymore it is the opposite, you cannot make smaller cameras and cannot make faster fps... They should make full frame and medium format mirrorless cameras, then that could change a company's future radically. In a few more years mirrorless will lead in every feature like speed, af speed and amazing detailful evf so what future could this dslr companies hope for then... Life is changing, Are You?

I would accept what you say if you could get an albalda viewfinder of reasonable size, weight and price that caters for different focal lengtths and goes down to 14mm or so. That is because I hate EVF and always will. An OVF for me is way better but that does have overheads. Leica make such a viewfinder for their Tri-Elmar but it is far too unwieldy.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 10:30 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alaska Hawaii photos: If the upcoming Nikon mirrorless is a version of the D850 it could prove interesting.

As I said way below, the camera on my list is a Leica IIIG with lenses of that era but digital, not these huge unnecessarily complicated beasts that weigh a ton with their ridiculous lenses - and that includes the Sony.

Have a look at some of the wide aperture primes, they are enormous and heavy, heavy, heavy let alone other focal lengths or zooms.

Those whom they goods would destroy, they first make mad.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 10:23 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

panzini: D850 hands down. I own them both and am getting rid of the Sony.
The build quality of the Nikon is peerless, as are its ergonomics and energy efficiency.
With a mirrorless camera you are disconnected from your subject, effectively watching it on TV. A reflex camera maintaints that connection. I felt blind with the Sony; and the quality of the images suffered; I spent two entire studio shoots angry and frustrated; wasted time and money. With the D850 I feel like I'm in charge and not some computer operator.

"With a mirrorless camera you are disconnected from your subject, effectively watching it on TV. "

Absolutely. Those who think DSLRs are on the way out are out to lunch, not for a scrumptious meal but more the fast food variety.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 10:16 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

biggercountry: So, it seems the conclusion is this:

You like smaller cameras? Buy the Sony A7R III
You like bigger cameras? Buy the Nikon D850

You forgot one thing:

You like smaller cameras and lenses, then you are stuffed.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 10:06 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mateus1: When Nikon will make FF pro mirrorless then everybody will see how ugly a7 line is and how perfectly Nikon is designed with best ergonomy and everything at right place. This is Nikon. Sony is still behind Minolta although it bought it many years ago.

So why is your bull acceptable, that electronic viewfinders are not inferior to OVFs? They are in 2017, will still be by 2025 and probably well after that too.

Photographers who know their stuff prefer to see the full dynamic range in their viewfinder and know from experience what to expect in their results more accurately than any EVF can simulate. In straightforward lighting EVFs can be pretty good but into strong sunlight, forget it.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 20:18 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1079 comments in total)

To say there is no clear winner on lenses is incredible. LOL.

I hate EVF, so only the lesser bulk and weight of mirrorless bodies makes them in any way interesting, but only to have a cheap MFT as a second camera.

But regardless of price, the D850 body is too big and heavy as are the better Nikon and Sony lenses. That disqualifies either for me.

For landscape work I do not need AF speed and, even if 24.3MP does not give the ultimate in IQ compared with either the D850 or a7R III, I will happily rely upon my D610. Still too heavy but then so is anything by the time you choose the better middle of the road or premium lenses.

Why oh why can we not have miniature full frame digital cameras, the minimum of unnecessary bells and whistles the size of a Leica IIIG, lenses also on a par with that era? I am sure it would be possible if only photo manufacturers were not doing what for them no doubt is easier and evidently more profitable, given the public's willingness to allow it.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 19:28 UTC as 68th comment | 4 replies

A lot of fuss about nothing.

If you do not know how to use Photoshop, Lightroom or whatever properly, you should not be doing this. If you do, then what is the point of this video?

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 19:32 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
On article Buying Guide: Best cameras for travel (113 comments in total)

I have not read this article because such usually are about largely spurious preferences.

But, for what it's worth, I will give my answer. Anything that will function on a drone will do, because it can travel without the operator.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 22:51 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply

As far as I am concerned the fact that the copyright law on this kind of thing differs between the UK and US only reinforces my view that there is no natural justice in either of those alternatives and this woman is merely profiteering.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 20:07 UTC as 72nd comment | 1 reply

Fabulous. I just blew up image 9 on my monitor to 75%. That's about 100 inches wide and it is insanely sharp from edge to edge while still having smooth tones.

This is the shot of buildings into the distance, with those nearest, across the bottom covered in blue translucent material over scaffolding, 120mm F4 1/60 sec, f/11.

I do not like EVF but, even so. This camera weighs about the same as my Nikon D610 but there is no comparison between the two. Having lost interest in the Leica M10, if ever I did decide to go mad and get much better than I have, this would have to be a serious contender. And the 23mm lens for it would be great for my landscape photography. Fairly heavy though whereas the 20mm f/1.8 Nikkor I have weighs only 355g.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 21:38 UTC as 8th comment

Lovely picture and the cut down original is plenty sharp.

I had a holiday in Ireland and stayed very nearby on the coast. One morning I awoke very early and although it was about 5 am I got my mother up, she having travelled with me, and we rushed out to a treat, a beautiful sunrise over 360°.

I use a Nikon D610 and mostly the same lens. Even my style is similar, most of my shots being into the sun, though usually more into the day. It is not that I consciously seek that out but my subconscious certainly does.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2017 at 22:29 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

keepreal: I am surprised that Barney Britton says the M10 can turn out excellent results, but truly accurate focusing and composition can be extremely challenging – even for those with long experience of shooting with rangefinders.

I do not aspire to cameras in the price range but once, probably in the 1960s, I examined an M3 in a store that let me handle it. Unlike any camera I have owned before and since, and there have been many of them, when I turned the lens focus with the lever on it, I did not have to go past the focus point and back again. The optics are so precise that I had no doubts, even though I had never tried this camera before. Truly wonderful.

I am getting to the point that not being able to take "it" with me would prompt me to splash out on an M10. To hell with the price of camera and lenses. The only thing stopping me is that I specialise in landscapes, like very, very wide lenses. If there was an Albalda finder I could use with the Tri-Elmar I would get one like a shot.

We are obviously interested in very different kinds of photography. What surprised me is that you put the Leica on a pedestal in your article, but now you are bashing it!

For what I shoot the Leica is almost perfect, but for the price. Since twice now you have disputed what I say, I am flabbergasted. After all, it was you lauding the Leica and I joined in!

"And more often than not, if you were shooting at or close to your widest aperture, you'd find that your subject wasn't as sharp as you expected."

Never do use wide apertures or want to focus close.

"Accurate off-center focus at wide apertures with a rangefinder, especially with a digital rangefinder, and especially with lenses that display even moderate curvature of field, is a crap-shoot for logical and obvious reasons."

I think the M10 has an optical rangefinder, which partly dispels what you say. You do have a point about field curvature though.

Never mind.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 19:56 UTC
In reply to:

keepreal: I am surprised that Barney Britton says the M10 can turn out excellent results, but truly accurate focusing and composition can be extremely challenging – even for those with long experience of shooting with rangefinders.

I do not aspire to cameras in the price range but once, probably in the 1960s, I examined an M3 in a store that let me handle it. Unlike any camera I have owned before and since, and there have been many of them, when I turned the lens focus with the lever on it, I did not have to go past the focus point and back again. The optics are so precise that I had no doubts, even though I had never tried this camera before. Truly wonderful.

I am getting to the point that not being able to take "it" with me would prompt me to splash out on an M10. To hell with the price of camera and lenses. The only thing stopping me is that I specialise in landscapes, like very, very wide lenses. If there was an Albalda finder I could use with the Tri-Elmar I would get one like a shot.

You what?

I have a Nikon D610 and focus on the one spot in the centre, where I want the focus to be sharpest. Likewise, I take a spot meter reading at the centre and use my brain to decide on what to measure, Then, not being paralysed, I move the camera and frame what I want in my shot.

I do not need the automation, some people do for action photography, for example.

Simple, really. If I had the Leica, I would do exactly the same.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

RdCF: Leicas are the photographic equivalent to Morgan motorcars... charming in their own way, providing an experience nobody else can offer, but totally outdated and outclassed. There's nothing rational about owning a Leica these days. Which is sad, because their origins where exactly the opposite as dependable affordable workhorses...

Agree. It is not entirely rational, but the appeal of a Leica M is quite something. Even a Leica IIIf after examining a secondhand one last Monday in MW Classic Camera in London, England, is a lovely piece of equipment.

Sixty years ago, when I was 13 my father bought me my first serious camera, a Retina 1a. It was good quality and beautifully built and I loved it so, last week for nostalgic reasons, I bought an almost mint Retina 1b, Kodak sports finder and a mint Weston V. I live in Enfield, where Sangamo Weston were located. I bought a colour negative film to try the camera out but, who cares, I will never use this camera after this one roll of film, but am delighted to have it in my display cabinet.

There are some cameras that are intrinsically beautiful, high quality and a joy to use. IMO the Leica M series are king of the crop, but the Retina is a much more modest alternative along similar lines. There are a few other cameras of similar quality and equally well made, just a few.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

keepreal: I am surprised that Barney Britton says the M10 can turn out excellent results, but truly accurate focusing and composition can be extremely challenging – even for those with long experience of shooting with rangefinders.

I do not aspire to cameras in the price range but once, probably in the 1960s, I examined an M3 in a store that let me handle it. Unlike any camera I have owned before and since, and there have been many of them, when I turned the lens focus with the lever on it, I did not have to go past the focus point and back again. The optics are so precise that I had no doubts, even though I had never tried this camera before. Truly wonderful.

I am getting to the point that not being able to take "it" with me would prompt me to splash out on an M10. To hell with the price of camera and lenses. The only thing stopping me is that I specialise in landscapes, like very, very wide lenses. If there was an Albalda finder I could use with the Tri-Elmar I would get one like a shot.

I just discovered that there is a wide-angle finder that Leica make and covers this lens, although it weighs 150g and is not an Albalda type. Still I will have to look into this...

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 17:36 UTC

I am surprised that Barney Britton says the M10 can turn out excellent results, but truly accurate focusing and composition can be extremely challenging – even for those with long experience of shooting with rangefinders.

I do not aspire to cameras in the price range but once, probably in the 1960s, I examined an M3 in a store that let me handle it. Unlike any camera I have owned before and since, and there have been many of them, when I turned the lens focus with the lever on it, I did not have to go past the focus point and back again. The optics are so precise that I had no doubts, even though I had never tried this camera before. Truly wonderful.

I am getting to the point that not being able to take "it" with me would prompt me to splash out on an M10. To hell with the price of camera and lenses. The only thing stopping me is that I specialise in landscapes, like very, very wide lenses. If there was an Albalda finder I could use with the Tri-Elmar I would get one like a shot.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 17:25 UTC as 127th comment | 6 replies
Total: 400, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »