VisualFX

Lives in United States Austin, TX, United States
Joined on Apr 24, 2010

Comments

Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Percival Merriwether: I still have some Kodachrome in my freezer. I wonder if the new Kodachrome would use the same processing chemistry?

probably not. Kodak didn't want to waste money on the original Kodachrome costly processing. They will probably change the processing and go the cheap way out, which means not compatible with old film, and not the same look.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 04:59 UTC
On article CES 2017: Hands-on with the Kodak Super 8 (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tactical Falcon: This is a laugh at CES. With 4K video just about anywhere, and at least 1080P. Super 8 is a bit of a stretch. But I bet there will be a few who might like it. Why? I have no idea. Why do Cassettes, and Reel to Reel audio get another go round? Because people like them. Super 8? That is a tough sell for me.

@Tungsten Nordstein
Then buy it and show us your nice videos you will make with it.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 04:15 UTC
On article CES 2017: Hands-on with the Kodak Super 8 (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vlad S: So, you get your fotage on film, and then what do you do with it? Scan back to digital so that other people could watch it?

The difference between super8 and HD video, is like a Ford Pinto vs Porsche.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 04:14 UTC
On article CES 2017: Hands-on with the Kodak Super 8 (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

VisualFX: Kodak is a very bizarre company. Who actually owns them now? Must not be owned by anyone in America. Because this is a really odd product to waste R&D money on, in today's digital age. People don't want junk like this. They want quality products.

"Bombastic
Such a bizarre company. The one that invented digital photography."
A company that couldn't see the future of digital and was too scared it would ruin their film business. Instead of looking forward to digital, they abandoned it. And no, those cheapy plastic kiddie cameras that they made, don't count.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 20:29 UTC
On article CES 2017: Hands-on with the Kodak Super 8 (417 comments in total)

Kodak is a very bizarre company. Who actually owns them now? Must not be owned by anyone in America. Because this is a really odd product to waste R&D money on, in today's digital age. People don't want junk like this. They want quality products.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 03:28 UTC as 41st comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

mactrash: Wish my client have enough budget to let me shoot this haha, do you?

Just take a cut, and make a little less money and stop being greedy.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 05:21 UTC
In reply to:

ewelch: National Geographic preferred Kodachrome, but I understand why that's never coming back.

I'm betting people will drop it like a hot potato when they realize the price of 36 frames.

It isn't the stock that makes the picture, it's the photographer.

Your book you wrote summed up in one word. "Whatever".

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 05:19 UTC

Ektachrome. The old film my dad had all turned pink/red. Only the Kodachrome still has its original colors. I say bring back KODACHROME!

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 05:17 UTC as 65th comment | 2 replies
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1295 comments in total)
In reply to:

rhlpetrus: The Nikon D500 is king of cropped cameras, in all aspects. It's at least 1 stop better in high ISO compared to the other cameras e and the detail at base ISO is outstanding. The AF is also top-notch. Maybe Nikon will make a mirror-free version someday.

Of course, everyone on here thinks the newest and greatest equipment going to make them better photoraphers. When in the long run, it just empties pocketbooks.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 02:55 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jorginho: God..."The a6500, like many small cameras trying to shoot 4K video, is somewhat limited by its ability to dissipate heat.To help with this, the rear screen automatically dims when you shoot 4K footage, making it very difficult to shoot with, in bright light."

Hmmm....well I know one cam that NEVER ever overheated even in a smaller size version.

"In fact only Panasonic offers cameras near this price point with an equal degree of video features and tools. And while the Panasonics shoot lovely 4K video, the a6500 uses a larger sensor and can shoot in more extreme lighting while keeping noise levels low."

Well...that is the cam that does never overheat in the first place. But let's just mention it when it is not the best but only compare that brand, true to style, when it fares less well than the Sony...

Also: in more extreme lighting of the other kind (bright) you are getting into serious troubles if that is in warm weather. Overheating and nothing to see on the screen with Sony.

Samsung NX500/NX1 also doesnt overheat and keeps going with video. Has to do with the processing chip and using H.265 efficiency.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 00:42 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

almhtref: its to notch expense f

what?

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 00:40 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

josovicmi: Dear all
go to Studio Scene Comparison Tool. And compare picture quality of Sony A6500 against the other APS-C cameras. Particularly by high ISO from 1600 up.
I always prefare the quality of picture in a camera. This is the reason the camera is determined for.
Then I can not understand why any Olympus Four third camera or any of Canon APS-C products can have better evaluation than Sony A6500. Is there any interest of this Web to suppress Sony against other producers?
Everything else is for me not relevant.

Definitely less noise reduction and smearing too in colors.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a6500&attr13_1=samsung_nx1&attr13_2=samsung_nx1&attr13_3=samsung_nx1&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr126_2=normal&attr126_3=highres&attr171_0=off&attr171_1=off&attr171_2=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.13454118917780591&y=0.5799195944280746

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 00:39 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

vegasdood: After just yesterday finally getting an a6300 which was $500 more than what I paid for my a6000 it just seems impossible for me to justify ANOTHER $500 for basically the same camera sans a few extra features. I should have guessed but I was immediately disappointed that my normal workflow of using Adobe CS6 Bridge to manage and process RAW images will no longer work in CS6 for the a6300 and for sure the a6500. As with all the original chatter with your preview of the a6500, I think Sony completely messed up in deploying this camera. It seems they are trying way too hard to be a faux Nikon D800 and it will never be. Like in real estate, location, location, location. With cameras, I believe there is such a thing as price point, price point, price point.

Use DNG converter. Problem solved.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 18:49 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

Krauthammer: Oly m43 and Canon user here. Just jumped into the Sony system with the A6000 with 16-50 + 55-210mm kit. For $650 (thanks B&H), seems like a pretty good way to get into Sony. For stills IQ, this A6500 seems unnecessary at first look.

@BlueBomberTurbo - What?

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

Elliot H: so now they'll space name properly, lol

and use correct font-type.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 02:12 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

joyclick: not sure if Sony will ever make a satisfactory camera.

not sure if Sony will ever make a decent, comfortable camera grip and add more dials. That one dial on top is really for basic amateurs just getting into photography.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 23:05 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

josovicmi: Dear all
go to Studio Scene Comparison Tool. And compare picture quality of Sony A6500 against the other APS-C cameras. Particularly by high ISO from 1600 up.
I always prefare the quality of picture in a camera. This is the reason the camera is determined for.
Then I can not understand why any Olympus Four third camera or any of Canon APS-C products can have better evaluation than Sony A6500. Is there any interest of this Web to suppress Sony against other producers?
Everything else is for me not relevant.

I see less moire and less noise in the discontinued Samsung NX500/NX1. Sony A6500 still has noise and not as sharp.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 22:55 UTC
In reply to:

dharmagreg: I forgot to say in my post below I think the images are great. Who the hell cares they can see a bit of noise in image bla bla etc. I am sure your family and friends will still love you if you don't always have the most perfect picture in the world. Get a life and get out in nature and enjoy yourself like Dan did!

I'm sure your family will then still love the photos from your phone too. Why use a camera then?

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 05:29 UTC

Not too impressed. Noise in brightly lit photos using ISO 800. Photos of people in the distance blurry, cant make out details in faces in distance.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 05:29 UTC as 21st comment | 7 replies
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1295 comments in total)
In reply to:

gibbygoo: There's no way the video output is 4K60p 4:2:2, correct?

correct

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 23:50 UTC
Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »