kodachromeguy

Lives in United States Vicksburg, United States
Works as a Retired and free
Has a website at worldofdecay.blogspot.com
Joined on May 5, 2007

Comments

Total: 137, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

photophile: Seem to recall the F31fd (might have been a later release) having impressive low light (max ISO 3200!!) performance - at full 6MP resolution. They were still holding their value up until 2010.

In fact, Dpreview wrote: "...the F31fd blows away all its competitors at anything over ISO 200, which is no mean feat."

Agree! I used my F31fd for several years. The jpeg files were amazing for a compact camera, with wonderful colors. One weakness was the inability to save a RAW file. Also, there was no lens thread to mount a hood or polarizer.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 13:26 UTC
In reply to:

ChicagoInPhotographs: ....and it doesn't even auto focus ;)

Even worse, it does not have in- lens stabilization. We know from Dpreview photographers that this renders it unsuitable for professional work. But the major failure: it might be used on the Leica Monochrome, thereby producing black and white photographs. How lacking in aesthetic creativity. Fortunately, your $8000 gets you a "full frame" lens, thereby capturing the full number of photons. I guess it is completely equivalent.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 03:52 UTC
In reply to:

villagranvicent: If Phase One is full frame, then the new Hasselblad X1D is something like an APS size of medium format??

Marty, NO! The equivalence nuts would pop arteries in their heads having to start the f-stops, total photons, and "true" focal length arguments all over again. The internet couldn't handle the bandwidth. Photography would come to a halt.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

Ramjager: Very interesting how people react to the concept of the exclusion zone. A zone the WHO has already stated has minimal radiation and based off the Chernobyl studies would have far far less impact on health than the uprooting and stress of relocating hundreds of thousands of people.
It's about time the R word was understood and hopefully these photos might start that.
Educate yourselves on what happened in the aftermath at Chernobyl and how we have many mistruths about radiation and its effect on health.
Nice photo study showing the devastation to how many lives that may based on the recorded levels not be worth it.

Don't try to educate the hysterical and the ignorant with data. It is doomed to failure.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 15:37 UTC
In reply to:

ThatCamFan: He will suffer so many various illnesses in the future because he "had to" get shots of that place. His ignorance is going to be his slow and painful death. Good job...

What a doofy, scare-mongering comment. What illnesses? You mean from radiation? Do you have any data whatever about epidemiology related to this event? Is this how you react to the R word?

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 15:34 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: Hope the five minutes of fame is worth the possibility of getting sick.

Getting sick, how? You mean from the short exposure to radiation? This is at sea level. You get more exposure in Bolivia, Tibet, etc., from solar radiation.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 23:02 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

Oh, no, I was waiting for the "cheats on the ISO" crap to raise its ugly head. I suppose it was inevitable. Just as the multiply the f-stop to calculate the "true" f-stop in "full frame" values oozed up a while back in the comments. Do Dpreview "photographers" really obsess about this stuff rather than spending their energy taking photographs?

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 15:01 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: Easily Fuji's best body yet, but at the end of the day, still no IBIS, still weak RAW file support in the most popular PP software, still really expensive. If they could make an X-A2 follow up with an EVF and DNG output they could have a real mainstream winner.

The lack of IBIS is certainly a crippling omission. It clearly makes photography with this camera almost impossible. Oh, the horror of it all. And as for the RAW files, there are 5 or more packages that do a superb job with Fuji's RAW format. So what is the issue?

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 15:12 UTC
In reply to:

Mac McCreery: A beautiful camera. From the days when decisions were straightforward.

From the days when photographers had some craft and needed to know something about light, photometry, and chemistry, and needed to think about every exposure.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 14:33 UTC
In reply to:

Skyscape: I'm betting that greater than 98% of the "photographers" existing now wouldn't have the slightest idea how to produce a good photo with this camera.

"How many autofocus points does it have?"

"OMG OMG the images are not super-razor sharp!" We all know the definition of a good photo is sharpness now.

"Does it shoot 4K video?"

"Where do you insert the memory card and battery?"

"Can I return it to the seller if, after 'testing' the camera I find the lens to have some silly 'flaws' that only I can see because I am a super-professional photographer that requires their lenses to be NASA-quality perfect, so as to shoot flowers and brick walls in my back yard."

Well-stated. But cheer up, at least the equivalence guys could not foam at the mouth about the Nikon F not being "full frame." But if you dared to use Tri-X film, "Why would anyone want a camera that took black and white photos? I can do a better job converting color frames with my super XYZ software, and I can add any grain that you want."

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2016 at 12:41 UTC
In reply to:

Mark9473: Curious what the attraction is, and why this is news for this site.

What is wrong with you? This was a pioneering photographic instrument, a model in use for 4 decades. The excellence of the F helped Japan cement it's place as a competitor to the German industry. I would think all real photographers would be interested in the heritage of the equipment they use and the industries that created it.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 22:54 UTC

For two decades, I used a late-production F (1972?) with some of the cosmetic features of the F2. Mine had a titanium shutter. It really was a superb precision piece of machining. The finders clicked on and off with precision. You could install any one of about 20 finder screens; I preferred the grid screen to help keep horizons straight. Mine had the viewing-only prism, not the metering head. A friend has it, and it is still in occasional use. It would be curious to see what proportion of present Dpreview readers could use a mechanical film camera like this.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 20:19 UTC as 36th comment | 3 replies

Great, this is a nice option for Leica users. The predicted Leica- haters have already started posting. However, this time the equivalence - obsessed can't blather on about f-stops, total photons, bokeh, how f/1.4 is really the same as f/2.8, and all that other stuff.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 21:28 UTC as 52nd comment
On article Hasselblad to announce 'game changer' next week (457 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Marketing Lesson for Hasselblad:

Entice and tease the the public when you are well respected and well regarded.

When you have lost all credibility in announcing new products, you will only invite hecklers and scoffers...

Like what is happening now, in this forum.

.

As shigzeo pointed out, it is the wrong audience here. However, the idiot commenteurs will certainly be "expert" enough to discuss the physics of format equivalence, photons, the inferiority of monochrome sensors, the inferiority of film, or the superiority of "full-frame."

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 17:04 UTC
In reply to:

DuxX: No AF = no interest

Well, good for you. It's a pity that a lack of auto focus is a grave impediment to your photography.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2016 at 16:43 UTC

I don't understand. Why the cr@p does anyone listen to what some " influencer" says on social media? Are typical consumers so unable to make the own decisions that they let themselves be directed by shills on social media? Do people really function like that?

Link | Posted on May 24, 2016 at 02:10 UTC as 30th comment | 7 replies
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1083 comments in total)
In reply to:

fzrTom: So now the question is : how gold will be its gold award :D

How about a plutonium award? Even more rare than the mundane gold.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2016 at 20:36 UTC
In reply to:

noflashplease: The 1977 Onestep 1000 was the beginning of the long term corporate stagnation that eventually brought down Polaroid. The SX-70 was actually quite innovative. The cheap OneStep was simply cheap, setting the pattern for every subsequent Polaroid camera.

The Brownie was a brillant business model. Unfortunately, Kodak never changed. Kodak was a company that didn't care about optics, only film. Film was incredibly profitable, while optics required an actual investment. As a consequence of the Kodak mentality, the American camera industry was effectively dead long before Japan discovered the virtues of engineering and quality control.

I guess the entire point is that American business pursued the quick buck by producing utter rubbish, and the American consumer aided and abetted the short sighted executives by actually buying the rubbish.

That is a bit harsh. Kodak made many top quality professional lenses for large format cameras as well as for the original Hasselblad. But it is correct that their ameteur 35mm cameras never reached the quality of the Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, etc. competitors. But their mass marketing in the 1960s was brilliant if you recall the Instamatic. It is a complicated history.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2016 at 15:33 UTC

I am impressed that Leica is putting out these lenses for their T. But why did they not make these T lenses also available in another mount, such as Fuji X or Sony? I have never seen a T camera even in popular tourist places.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2016 at 22:06 UTC as 25th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Thorgrem: Why is not everything converted to FF? FF is the standard and now people will suddenly get all confused. Normally with m4/3 (and APSÇ, Nikon 1) lenses, people and DPR always mention the cropfactor.

@Smiler: Rolleiflex? You mean finally there is a real photographer posting here in Dpreview? Don't confuse the equivalence guys, it is too traumatic.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 18:32 UTC
Total: 137, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »