achim k

Joined on Feb 5, 2012

Comments

Total: 90, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

achim k: unfortunately there are very few samples in wideangle position. There are some tests in the internet that show that at 24mm edge sharpness could be even worse than with the predecessor. The tele samples may be sharper than with version I. I ran some of these RAWs through Lightroom (CAs corrected) and exported them in a size comparable to my 5D III. Yes, in the 70-105mm range they seem to be slightly better than those of my old version.

You are right. But in most of them I cannot verify edge sharpnes. On vacation I do a lot of landscapes when hiking in the mountains, and there my 24-105 (first edition) is not quite satisfying.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 22:47 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

FLruckas: Ken Rockwell says it's heavier and bigger than the original.
That it is brighter in the corners and 1 more stop image stabilization.
The corner darkness is compensated in the camera software anyway.
Too bad it's bigger and heavier.
I have the original version and although I have a ton of Canon glass the original 24-105 is the lens that is on my 5d2 most of the time.

Yes, it's my most used canon lens as well (for more than 10 years now), but I hoped version II would be similar to the fantastic 16-35 f/4 L IS in terms of sharpnes and contrast. Obviously it is not.
Remember: Version I was the kit lens of the original 12-megapixel 5D (12, now we have up to 50!). A bit of a shame for canon in my opinion.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 15:46 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)

unfortunately there are very few samples in wideangle position. There are some tests in the internet that show that at 24mm edge sharpness could be even worse than with the predecessor. The tele samples may be sharper than with version I. I ran some of these RAWs through Lightroom (CAs corrected) and exported them in a size comparable to my 5D III. Yes, in the 70-105mm range they seem to be slightly better than those of my old version.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 11:55 UTC as 28th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: Film died a quick death when digital came along because of the convenience that DSLRs offered in terms of development time. It's too bad too; Kodachrome, Ektachrome, and Fuji's Velvia where probably my favorite films back in the day. I'd love to see a comeback, but I'm not sure one will happen without new film camera bodies with modern autofocus features, image stabilization, and faster shooting speeds. Film needs to appeal to the next generation rather than us of the "old guard" if it's going to survive in the long run.

Image stabilization started in the film era (Canon 70-300 IS) and AF-bodies are cheap on ebay, the lenses became better and better. And AF accuracy is not so critical on film.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 14:46 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: At 4:19: Nee-kahn? Is that really how it's supposed to be pronounced?

The name comes from "Nippon Kogaku" , short "i"

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 08:36 UTC
In reply to:

bocajrs: Still shooting my D750 :)

my first Nikon was digital and was disappointing. Seemed durable but wasn't, - expensive, unreliable, bad service, I changed the brand.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 08:34 UTC
In reply to:

flashcactus: How disappointing. There's nothing dignified about another me- too mashup with an insulting "soundtrack". I had to mute the sound after 30 seconds and the images were, editing-wise, just another lash-up.
Surely the answer would have been to give the job to someone who knew what they were doing, like Stanley Kubrick or George Lucas or Steven Speilberg. They would have at least got some kind of a classic, and not this trash. Signed: Musician and photographer in advertising and film for the last 40 years.

I turned off the sound, too, after about 30 sec.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 08:29 UTC
In reply to:

RadGuy: Based on the announcer's pronunciation of Nikon (4:19), I now know to pronounce Nikon as Neekon, not Nikon (long I)

yes, short for: Nippon Kogaku !

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 08:25 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: They might be onto something. Digital has spoilt us. We now think nothing of firing off 1,000 shots a day. Those contemplating a little nostalgia will have to seriously think about technique before clicking.

For travelling I took one roll (135-36) per day!

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 22:20 UTC
In reply to:

jimkahnw: Why bother? I remember shooting skiers. One batch the snow had a cyan tint, another batch, magenta, a third blue. Scratches, dust spots and storage. Oh, and the cost of film and processing and waiting at least a week for turnaround. And, then you have to scan and process the scan. I don't have the time or the money. No wonder Kodak is a zombie.

Although I loved Kodachrome 25 and 64 I have to admit, that I was sometimes disappointed because of green tint and scratches. Then I found, that the processing was more reliable in Swizerland than in here in Germany and I sent my films to Kodak Lausanne! Later they were all sent to USA.
In the early days Kodachrome had better, fresher colors! Kodak had to change some chemicals due to environment problems.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 22:16 UTC
In reply to:

samtheman2014: I loved Kodachrome , the anticipation of the wee yellow box popping through the door was a highlight of my young photography

Exactly!
I even spoke (long time ago): if Kodachrome should be discontinued, I will give up photography! But then in 2000 I bougt my first digital camera (which was meant just to take a few pictures for emailing), and then did not use my SLR for years. Kodachromes remained in the freezer until even the processing was given up by Kokak.
I´m not sure if I would give the coming revival Film a try again...

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 22:02 UTC
In reply to:

DongaMogudu: Canon suppose to be discounting 18-55mm and use 18-150mm as a kit lens. We can see significant drop in price over the time if it happens. Used 18-135mm EFS version is available for around $200 price.

I returned 3 copies of the 18-135mm EF-S because of bad centering (one side soft in tele position) and still use a Sigma 18-125 OS, which is slowly focussing and not that sharp in wideangle position. These samples are a lot better than what I have seen in this lens category, including Olympus 14-150.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 08:28 UTC
In reply to:

Simon Fung: All sample under range 50mm, not tele photos?

and all with small apertures, sadly

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 08:21 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: I expected better colours than Panasonic but they are even worse, and far behind Fuji, Panasonic, Sony.

IQ dissapointed.

"but without facts, you'll have a hard time convincing people"
...this is not true nowadays. :-)

(a bit off topic, I know)

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 08:20 UTC
On article CES 2017: Hands-on with the Kodak Super 8 (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

achim k: there is hardly any film cartridge on the market. If Ektachrome really will be produced in the future, I would not bet that it will be for a long time.
I'd prefer a second hand camera of the real analogue times.
A.

I'm afraid, the film cassettes will not be available for many years either

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 21:16 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: I expected better colours than Panasonic but they are even worse, and far behind Fuji, Panasonic, Sony.

IQ dissapointed.

for my taste these pictures are great in color (on calibrated Eizo Monitor)

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 15:42 UTC
On article CES 2017: Hands-on with the Kodak Super 8 (417 comments in total)

there is hardly any film cartridge on the market. If Ektachrome really will be produced in the future, I would not bet that it will be for a long time.
I'd prefer a second hand camera of the real analogue times.
A.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 10:54 UTC as 74th comment | 2 replies
On article CES 2017: hands-on with the Canon PowerShot G9 X II (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bjrn SWE: Where is the viewfinder?

the camera still has a flash. For me: I d prefer a viewfinder instead. seldom use a flash

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 22:38 UTC
In reply to:

penryn: I hope all those cell phone manufacturers who have chosen to integrate the battery and making their devices "throw away" when the battery finally fails will learn from this.
If the device had a replaceable battery, which is what consumers would much prefer, then it would have been a cheap and simple matter of just sending a replacement battery of a different manufacturer and or spec together with a software upgrade, instead they have trashed an excellent phone for no other reason than greed.
I have an S5 because I can change the battery, I would have preferred the The HTC One.
Nobody is mentioning LG who have a catastrophic fault in the LG3, LG4, LG5' and V10 going into boot loop and bricking them.

I totally agree! (Note 3 user)

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2017 at 23:52 UTC
In reply to:

Boky: It's a shame..... my wife's Note 3 still works impeccably and it's a joy to use. Much faster than my iphone 6. That os10 thing swamped all my memory...

Ahhh well, tha greed....

yes, and Note 3 has a user-changeable battery. Samsung's mistake to change that. I am, too, satisfied with my Note 3

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2017 at 23:50 UTC
Total: 90, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »