dprived prev

dprived prev

Joined on Jul 5, 2012

Comments

Total: 456, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

i'm hoping (as well as kind of sure!) film photography will be revived with more emulsion choices available like it was in the old times (even though it may not be as vastly varied as it was back in the day) simply because we see more younger photographers born into the digital era are gradually showing active interest about film photography and darkroom printing and so on ... but i'm also feeling not quite happy as i'm not sure if i'd still be alive (and kicking!) when more such stuff will make a comeback!? never thought i'd get so old to say this: fingers crossed and touching the wood! ;-)

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2019 at 06:02 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

dprived prev: o yeh:

Sigma's slow, heats up fast, consumes a lot of power and all the negative blah ...

but show me its great quality of image from other cameras offering same or similar size sensors made by non-Sigma sensor makers!

end of rant.

ps: not a real fan of Sigma for its namesake, already a Pentax rider, moving towards Medium Frame and larger formats (digital, film) as soon as i could afford it ... but if i could afford it now, i might skip digital MF altogether and get a Sigma instead!

ps2: with all the great image quality of Sigma sensors since day one, do we really need RAW?

yes, DNG RAW for compatibility is certainly good when we consider Sigma's own software is not much ... but hey, this is not they type of camera i'm going to use daily and shoot thousands of action shots in a sport or wedding event for example! this is the type of camera i'm going to use only occasionally and for mostly still shots in the studio and possibly for some landscapes outside too ...

end of rant 2.

have always admired and loved Nikon cameras of all kinds since pre-digital times ... have even had the chance to shoot with at least one great Nikon F2 camera and its beautiful 50mm F1.4 lens for months when a friend left his on my desk in the mid-1970s ... (at the same time i had my own Pentax cameras as well as working with a Canon F1 in a workplace btw ... shot a roll on my nephew's Leica M3 as well ...) but believe it or not, i touched that Nikon only once or twice, just out of curiosity and nothing more! NEVER took a single shot with it! and i wonder why? really: why didn't i do that? :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2019 at 12:16 UTC

those 'mysterious' few people who ALREADY HAD a camera (or lens or whatever) that has not even been available to the public in the market YET ...

i like that! ;-)

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2019 at 21:03 UTC as 79th comment

good choices but there are other great film cameras as well missing here ...

as for the Pentax MX, one of my most faves, although a great camera that i enjoyed using for years, its construction is not as sturdy as one might like though, compared to tanks such as the Nikon F series for example ...

however, the main advantages of the MX include not only one of the brightest VFs of ALL SLRs in one of the smallest 135 format bodies ever made up to this very day, but also the fact that when adding a power winder or a motor drive to it, it then becomes the size of a bare Nikon F2 or Canon F1 of the time WITHOUT a PW or MD attached to them!

and the total weight of the MX+PW won't go up that much either as an MX would be great only when its dedicated PW is attached to it, making it the right size, weight and the best ergonomically correct camera body to handle very comfortably! ! in fact, without its PW, MX is not as 'handy' because it's TOO small! :-)

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2019 at 02:04 UTC as 74th comment

the problem is widespread censorship going on in social media is not a thing that only Facebook does ... above all, it's not just nudity related ... it's the Freedom of Speech that's at stake now, even in the so-called free Western societies!

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2019 at 01:44 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

dprived prev: somethin's tellin' me the company that made the USB drive is dying to find out its brand name and by making this little news big it's hoping to make a huge profit from it ... but well, that's me ... ;-)

on a totally different note though, imagine if it were a roll of film found where the USB drive was revived from ... no doubt the quality of the images would NEVER be as finely preserved as the digital ones here ... digital photography wins big in such respects over film ...

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2019 at 09:48 UTC

somethin's tellin' me the company that made the USB drive is dying to find out its brand name and by making this little news big it's hoping to make a huge profit from it ... but well, that's me ... ;-)

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2019 at 09:45 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Paulusz: A potentionally golden tip to recover "dead" USB-sticks; Open the stick and simply resolder all the connections from connector to print.
"RoHs' lead-free solder causes these problems but this approved solution costs $ 0 for a year!

i'm sure your solution is not the ULTIMATE one in this regard but i'm just as sure it's one of the best i've been offered so far! :-)

also, let's not forget to periodically clean up the contacts on BOTH the SD card (or other storage media such as USB Flash Drives) AS WELL AS on the device (camera, card reader, etc) itself ... (hard to reach contacts (especially in the cameras' overly thin SD card slots are of course a big problem when doing this but well ...)

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2019 at 09:34 UTC
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

dprived prev: i love Leica but mostly for admiration ... would recommend it only to rich-daddy guys (and occasionally gals too) who buy EXPENSIVE ONLY for just the pose of it rather than actually taking photos ... not sure even if a serious Leica photographer would go for something like this these days ...

yeah ... how `bout that? i'm sure you do understand what photography's all about though: how `bout you lecture the rest of US on that? :D

but i know your kind rich boy: spending big money on fancy collectible gear without doing the real thing photography's all about: taking pictures no matter what camera and lenses or stuff you own!

btw, i HAVE used Leica cameras and gears once or twice ... great stuff but wouldn't pay for them even if daddy were rich!

Link | Posted on Jan 2, 2019 at 07:29 UTC
On article Kodak shows off Super 8 camera in first sample reel (214 comments in total)
In reply to:

dprived prev: with such a hefty price tag on the camera itself (that will surely drop down if S-8 film making picks up again and competition kicks in with cheaper models) i'm guessing the price of S-8 film will be AT LEAST $100 per cartridge ...

used to do S-8 shooting on an almost regular basis from the mid-1970s into late 1980s, when home video was surely getting more popular already while S-8 fun had not died totally yet ... and it cost less than doing VHS or Betamax for say, weddings ...

before going extinct and replaced by video, had quite a number of still unexplored areas with this medium but the cost of film material, processing and the price of camera, projector and other related stuff (splicer, editing device etc) weren't quite affordable although much less costly than this latest offering by Kodak!

i WOULD be using this again if i could afford it though ... and if the new film cartridge fits old cameras, then i know of great S-8 cameras and equipment that are still usable now ...

no, never used S-16 but did work as assistant to director / cameraman / film crew on a few regular 16mm short feature films back in the day ...

read somewhere though that there were very expensive scanners (not telecine) in the 1970s for regular 8, S-8 and other film formats that could produce very high quality film to video (and possibly film to film?) copies, with color / contrast adjustment and correction possible using such scanners ...

presently, there are a couple of brands such as Volwerine that produce really fine quality 8/s-8 (and i think 9.5mm as well) film to digital scanning ... you can find their results on YouTube for example and they're very good although the device itself doesn't look very complex ... doesn't cost much either ...

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2018 at 06:22 UTC
In reply to:

dprived prev: all great positive news here, the only negative for me: can't afford paying for film photography, especially because the main reason i quit film photography decades ago (long before digital photography took over so harshly!) is because i'd rather develop film material myself in my own darkroom (lab) rather than sending it out to others! and it's TOO COSTLY! sigh!

@ Olifaunt: i get your point and i have considered doing photography along those lines too ... but sounds like you're missing certain points here ...

1. even best film cameras of the yesteryear will someday stop working and despite careful repairs (by ANYONE!) there will come a day none of those great old film camera from ANY brand will be working RELIABLY anymore!

2. then there's the cost per frame of most digital cameras that beats film cameras even though highend digital cameras aren't cheap ...

3. besides, if you read my comment again, my main concern is i don't want to have my films developed and handled by commercial labs, which i used to do a lot in the 1980s until i (almost) totally quit film photography in the mid 1990s simply because commercial labs use replenished 'old / used' chemicals while 'hand-processing' films can be done with 'fresh' chemicals and since i AM an expert in both ways, i know very well what i'm talking about here! :-) (a PERFECTIONIST here!) ;-)

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2018 at 22:43 UTC
In reply to:

dprived prev: sounds like a fine camera overall as most GoPro cameras have been so far but that 'overcapture' thing doesn't look like FHD1080 video to me! (maybe it's my laptop's monitor that can't play videos higher in resolution than 720? the same monitor plays many other FHD videos finely even though max resolution supported on this laptop is HD 720 only!)

@ sludge21017: no, i don't use Chrome on a regular basis ... Firefox is my main browser for obvious reasons ...

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2018 at 22:31 UTC
In reply to:

ChickenBalls: wow 10fps... but how many photos can you take with a roll of film?
can you squeeze in 1000 photos in a roll of film?

Since there are apparently people who still prefer film over digital in 2018 how about telephones or computers?
Are there still people who would rather use a 1980s IBM desktop running DOS or Windows 3.1? or 1G wireless telephones instead of 4G smartphones?

@ stevo23: "fell better?" ... !?!

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2018 at 22:25 UTC
On article Pentax 50th Anniversary Asahi Pentax DSLR (4 comments in total)
In reply to:

mbpm: I've only dreamed of this camera.

On the side note, I cannot believe there's only one post besides me!

and even your own response here happened 5 years later than when DPreview posted this here! :-) (my own comment made in 2018 btw! TOOOOO late!)

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2018 at 22:13 UTC

sounds like a fine camera overall as most GoPro cameras have been so far but that 'overcapture' thing doesn't look like FHD1080 video to me! (maybe it's my laptop's monitor that can't play videos higher in resolution than 720? the same monitor plays many other FHD videos finely even though max resolution supported on this laptop is HD 720 only!)

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 20:53 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

dprived prev: great! but well, this is a 3.2K$ high-end Nikon camera and it couldn't be made in any other way at such a price range, could it? while Pentax has always offered mid-range to near-high-end AS WELL AS high-end cameras with similar (if not better!) weather-sealed properties at MUCH LOWER prices! ;-)

wanna see an actual field test of some Pentax cameras under tough 'military' conditions?

check it out here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo61t5fH6Qw

also:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mggL0Sf2jQ8

BE WARE THOUGH: NEVER EVER TRY ANY OF THESE 'TESTS' AT HOME WITH ANY CAMERA! THESE ARE NOT THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT!

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 01:27 UTC

great! but well, this is a 3.2K$ high-end Nikon camera and it couldn't be made in any other way at such a price range, could it? while Pentax has always offered mid-range to near-high-end AS WELL AS high-end cameras with similar (if not better!) weather-sealed properties at MUCH LOWER prices! ;-)

wanna see an actual field test of some Pentax cameras under tough 'military' conditions?

check it out here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo61t5fH6Qw

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 01:24 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply

all great positive news here, the only negative for me: can't afford paying for film photography, especially because the main reason i quit film photography decades ago (long before digital photography took over so harshly!) is because i'd rather develop film material myself in my own darkroom (lab) rather than sending it out to others! and it's TOO COSTLY! sigh!

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 01:14 UTC as 5th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

ChickenBalls: wow 10fps... but how many photos can you take with a roll of film?
can you squeeze in 1000 photos in a roll of film?

Since there are apparently people who still prefer film over digital in 2018 how about telephones or computers?
Are there still people who would rather use a 1980s IBM desktop running DOS or Windows 3.1? or 1G wireless telephones instead of 4G smartphones?

no one denies there are MANY benefits to digital photography (and video) than there are to the old-school film (so-wrongly-called 'analog') photography, and nothing beats shooting with film and then editing the film (negative, reversal what have you) in digital imo ...

but only those who have never done film photography for years (in a PROFESSIONAL manner that is!) so cocksure-ly believe film is dead! they simply have no idea what they're talking about!

have said it before here and elsewhere: footage shot in film decades ago can still be re-scanned and re-UPSCALED via state of the art digital technology and give even better results than the original positive film or print material of its own time ... while you cannot do the same with old lower-resolution video or even digital files themselves!

try upscaling a 2K digital still or video image file via WHATEVER the most advanced digital tech you have available and you'll see what i'm talking about!

end of rant!

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 00:45 UTC
In reply to:

dprived prev: am i being negative or what?

a 4K resolution on a small 15" or 17" monitor?

really?

this is barely good for gaming even, much less for serious professional image (or even video) editing that requires at least a 27" --extremely high quality-- monitor!

you ARE pardoned child as you'll grow up someday and learn at last! ;-)

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2018 at 23:10 UTC
Total: 456, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »