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

ABM Barry: As usual, ... the Broke mentality is out in force on this one! Highly amusing. LOL

Well, they squirm out of the woodwork whenever a new product is introduced that they can't afford or are jealous about others who might buy it. The new Olympus body was "ridiculous." The newest Nikon is "overpriced." The new Fuji medium format is "absurd" and they have demonstrated that they can achieve the same result with their "full-frame" brand XXX with their YYY kit zoom (hand-held, at that!). And of course, anything from Leica is "obscene." Sigh.....

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2017 at 16:06 UTC
In reply to:

maxnimo: If you're doing 4K filming, you only need 8MP of resolution, so a cine lens need not be nearly as sharp as a 50MP photo lens. So why such ridiculous prices?

Oh, no. "Ridiculous price" always means the writer is uninterested, can't afford it, or owns a competing product.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2017 at 02:08 UTC
In reply to:

erik12345: Why do these cameras still have Auto on the mode dial?

Also consider how many novices buy "professional" cameras because they assume that they will take just as remarkable photographs. Leave it in A mode, install a kit zoom, and they are ready to go.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 21:47 UTC
In reply to:

kodachromeguy: A medium format prototype? I wish they had built it. After all, they already had lenses used on the early Bronica 6×6.

Remember the Palubel Makina 67 from the 1980s? It had a 80mm Nikon lens. It had superb optical quality, but the cameras were reputed to be delicate and hard to repair. I wonder if any function now?

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 14:07 UTC

A medium format prototype? I wish they had built it. After all, they already had lenses used on the early Bronica 6×6.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2017 at 21:51 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S vs Pentax 645Z vs Hasselblad X1D (340 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bobthearch: "The Pentax 645Z is the granddaddy of 'affordable' medium format."

If you say so. I've had $200 burning a hole in my pocket since I did a professional shoot last year. Lol.

What does this mean?

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2017 at 21:42 UTC
In reply to:

ybizzle: Every teenage girl is jumping up for joy right now...

Will the software make bosoms larger?

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2017 at 21:43 UTC
On article Headed to Havana? Check out these photo spots (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

dlb41: I wonder if the classic cars are rented out for photography.

Yes, they are. And they are rented for weddings, tours, and filmmakers. It's one of the limited free enterprise businesses that are allowed (at least as of early 2017).

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2017 at 18:58 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S Review: Modern MF (899 comments in total)
In reply to:

StephanBG: I'm amazed how well the Fuji does with such an old sensor. Every FF camera coming to market with a several years old sensor would be DOA. We'll see how the GFX line does with a new sensor next year.

Old sensor - Heavens! I just developed a roll of Panatomic-X film taken through my Rolleiflex's 1959 Xenotar lens. Looks spectacular to me.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 20:41 UTC
In reply to:

JakeB: Too expensive.

What a doofy statement. Too expensive for whom? For what project or purpose? How does it affect you if you don't intend to buy one? Why is the Leica lens too expensive for a real cinematographer who will be shooting a movie?

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 02:39 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: Brilliant concept. I hope they do really well with these.

Watch it, you must be on the wrong forum. This is where the "photographers" come to hate Leica and claim the prices are "ridiculous" and offer their deeply-pondered reasons why the prices are "outrageous."

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

illumidata: Wow, 1100+ posts and rising.

That sure was some quality bait...

@tex, a few here (really small minority) might have used Hasselblad, Rolleiflex, or Mamiya medium format film cameras - and hopefully they still use them.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 03:17 UTC
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

D200_4me: No matter how fun or nice a lens might be, you just can't justify the price (in this case).

YOU don't need to justify or understand the price. And you don't need to buy one. But there will be customers who will be pleased and will proceed with taking pictures regardless of the standard Dpreview peanut gallery.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 22:19 UTC
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Permit: It looks ridiculous mated to the m10. Perhaps leica should go whole hog on the retro theme and introduce a digital IIIf.

Or do it the right way - use it on a film Leica M.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 22:13 UTC
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

kreislauf: Wow, i hear some gearheads scream: "5-6?!"

Indeed, f/5.6 is so limiting to their artistic endeavors. Especially the are likely to be the first ones to complain that their camera has noise at ISO 12,500. Sigh....

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 14:40 UTC
In reply to:

nerd2: It is almost sad to see so many people has absolutely no clue about photography in general.... Kudos dpreview for giving some insights.

Oh oh, watch out. The members of this crowd here on Dpreview think they know everything.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 03:27 UTC
In reply to:

JakeB: I haven't used the camera, have never even touched a medium format camera, but I understand that it's a terrible camera and, basically, not as good as mine.

I will now share this opinion with everyone on this site.

Also, it is terrible and I can't figure out who the audience is because:
1. It does not have IBIS or stabilized lenses.
2. It's heavy
3. Its batteries wont last 20,000 shots.
4. It can't upload to Facelessbook.
5. It has the same pixel dimensions/physics/well depth/Ad nauseam as brand xxx super DSLR.
6. It costs more than $xxx, therefore is "ridiculously" or "obscenely" priced.
7. It has a monochrome mode.

I will now share (impose) these comments with everyone on this site.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 04:37 UTC
In reply to:

straylightrun: So what is f/2.8 equiv to in 35mm?

Use a hand-held light meter. if the exposure is 1/xxx at f/2.8, then that is what you will use with a 35mm camera, too (assuming the same ISO). (Now let's wait for the "Fuji cheats at its ISO" stuff.)

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 04:22 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: What? 100 posts so far and no denigrating messages about "equivalency" from the 35mm crowd? :)

Oops, no, sorry. Near the beginning of these comments, someone wrote, "You don't even gain a full stop over 135." I think that refers to some sort of arcane equivalency mathematics.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2017 at 03:45 UTC
In reply to:

tlinn: I am disappointed to read that they're sticking with X-Trans in the next gen X-T bodies. Particularly if there is an increase in resolution, this oddball CFA is more trouble than it's worth.

Based on what? What extra trouble? Thousands (millions?) use the X-trans Fijis with excellent results.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 23:20 UTC
Total: 200, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »