KAllen

Lives in United Kingdom Norwich, United Kingdom
Works as a Aerial Photographer
Joined on Mar 25, 2004
About me:

Photographer looking for a plan "B"

Comments

Total: 250, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

"user interface and could turn into a genuinely useful tool once the community grows large enough for reliable ratings. "
No mate it's of no use what so ever, file it in the draw marked B for B ollocks.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 17:50 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

Graham Austin: just looked on wikipedia and ..

"Weston made this photograph using his Ansco 8×10 Commercial View camera with a Zeiss 21 cm. lens. The smallest aperture on this lens is f/36"

Actual exposure = meter exposure x bellows extension squared divided by focal length squared. + reciprocity law. So maybe the equivalent of f240 or he made it himself. Either way it just doesn't matter he was looking at things differently to how they had been viewed before with a camera.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 17:47 UTC

The quality of the photography is not the issue here (I have not seen it, neither would I comment on it) the law wasn't judging artistic ability.
Great news for photography and all businesses in general, just because you have a disagreement it does not give you a right to blast it all over the World and destroy a business just because you can and it makes you feel good.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 10:13 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

milkod2001: Sorry to see Bowens going. Have at work studio Bowens 2x 750 pro 2x 500 Gemini. Still working just fine after 2 years of use. If i had to buy new studio flash lighting systems it would be Godox though. No reason to pay much more for Bowens if other brands do the very same thing for much less. Bowens did not innovate much and thought they are premium brand nobody can match. They were wrong. too sad :(.

Leica produce some fantastic cameras, not just the M. I don't own any or have ever bought one. They don't do any that fit in with my business or at least others fit the bill better. If I was shooting for fun a Leica would be top of my list and probably a M at that, no stupid features to learn how to switch off.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 21:46 UTC
In reply to:

KAllen: ..and this entertains millions?

no the internet trying to make something out of nothing.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 21:38 UTC

I thought the website was fairly bad, it looked like a company that didn't want to invest in it. Their products were just as good as Ellincrom but not up to Proflash or Bron. Marketing or lack of killed the company.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 08:00 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply

..and this entertains millions?

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 07:52 UTC as 20th comment | 3 replies

If the video is special and choice of decent lenses it would tick boxes for me. I was talking to a guy that sold all his video gear and now shoots all his commisioned work on a iPhone 7 with filmic software. Like this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrN1ytnQ-Tg

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2017 at 15:12 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

rajaramki: I moved away from Vari ND set up to Lee Big Stopper + Little Stopper set up due to severe banding issues.
I am not sure if banding is an inherent property of Vari-ND technology or that particular brand I used.
I am curious to know how this brand handles banding issues when shot against the sun in bright day light..all the examples shown in the demo are under cloudy skies where banding is not an issue.

I just bought the Syrp ND filter, It didn't take long for me to realise it's of no use. two corners way darker than the centre plus a colour shift. It's going back. If all variable ND's do this then it's a pointless bit of kit

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 15:22 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (808 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Far too many are plastic cameras from the 90's.
Let's look at real metal.
Nikkormat, Nikon F, F2,F3,F4.
Minotla SRT-101., Pentax Spotmatic, Fujica ST-701, Topcon Super D
Canon FT or Pellix or Canon A-1. Leicaflex SL2 is not even too expensive. Zeiss Contarex Super.
Even an Exakta VX 1000 is more amusing and fun than this lot of largely white bread gear.
As for film, that is what kept people out of the hobby. Too expensive! Too much learning about exposure!
Digital removed the barrier to those technically indifferent and allowed more people to have fun making images.
Film will be interesting to many raised on digital but the number remaining true devotees will be small.

Being lazy is what kept people out of the hobby, learning exposure was not difficult, what you couldn't do was correct mistakes easily. Photoshop is difficult to learn properly but that hasn't stopped millions from learning enough because they are prepered to make a mistake then do it again.
My father in law took up photography as a hobby in the 50's, they were far from rich, he bought a cheap camera and made an enlarger out of biscuit tins and made every shot count. Compared with satellite subscription and mobile phone contracts people are prepared to find the money for, a couple of rolls of film and developer are not expensive. We spend far more on entertainment these days than 20 years ago, it wasn't cost or difficulty that kept people away it was having to make an effort.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 13:35 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (808 comments in total)
In reply to:

KAllen: I would say go for the quality film cameras, top end stuff not budget. You will pay more upfront but I'm finding it increasing in value. To the point that my Rolleiflex has increased so much I hardly dare use it!
I have other cameras on my list I think will become collectable that at the moment you could pick up for less price than some fast cards.
I would also say darkroom equipment of top quality is very cheap...but slowly increasing in value too.

yeah well I also have others, the Rollei wasn't bought as a museum piece or as an investment. When I consider what my top end Canon would fetch second hand on the market and how that tumbles in value compared with supposedly obsolete film cameras, I find spending money on classic cameras more palatable.
There are many cameras that will be looked upon as classic you can buy for not a lot at the moment, you can use them which is fun and not feel its cash down the pan. I buy digital for work and film for fun, with film you own every square inch of what you create. The point is buy quality it works out cheaper in the long run, it's up to you if you use it or keep at home.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 13:06 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (808 comments in total)

I would say go for the quality film cameras, top end stuff not budget. You will pay more upfront but I'm finding it increasing in value. To the point that my Rolleiflex has increased so much I hardly dare use it!
I have other cameras on my list I think will become collectable that at the moment you could pick up for less price than some fast cards.
I would also say darkroom equipment of top quality is very cheap...but slowly increasing in value too.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 17:20 UTC as 314th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica SL Review (1092 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: In the days of film to show off your camera and lens then put some Kodachrome 25 in it. With the best film in the you could argue your Leica was delivering the best results, better than a Nikon or whatever with the same film. There was no tweaking post processing either so the film showed the lens characterises up.

Now you can’t put the best “film” in your digital Leica. The best “film” only exists in other cameras such as the 42mp sensor in Sony’s.

I think this is why Leica’s are seen as bad value of money. People understand the fine mechanical engineering costs money and will pay for it but to have inferior results from the built in “film” you can’t change? No one should find that acceptable. I think the best Leica quality is going to be a Leica lens on a Sony A7RII and it will be much cheaper which is a problem Leica.

I used to lust after a Leica but not now. I know despite the lenses the results will be worse than with another make and that should never be true of Leica.

Yeah but Sony cameras are pig awful to use. As for quality of the image more than good enough. How many famous pictures taken since photography began are judged by the grain or lens resolving power etc. None in my view, so it comes down to what camera works best for you, what gets the job done with minimum fuss. I don't own a Leica of any description neither do I feel a need for one, but judging a camera by the numbers it produces on paper is missing the point. If a Sony works for you OK well done, but honestly to me it gets in the way of photography.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 11:38 UTC
In reply to:

DamianFI: I finally got to shoot a Leica recently and whilst I will never buy one because as a tool it was archaic and unperformed, I understand why Leica customers like them.

The same way Ferrari enthusiasts buy the products to collect, the don't drive them, just talk about them amongst circles of similarly well heeled collectors.

When I talk to them I find they don't know as much about the products as they think they do and don't know how to drive either. Leica owners in my experience are mostly camera enthusiasts with deep pockets and similarly low levels of skill and photographic knowledge after only the experience of having an expensive bit of kit hanging from their shoulder.

The products are impressive though in the sense that they are different, extremely well built and designed and beautiful to look at.

I always find it odd that people critise the judgement of those that have been the most successful in life.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 16:40 UTC
In reply to:

King of Song: This is an esoteric boutique camera.

Leica is no longer what it used to be, because the Germans are the greatest at mechanical engineering, not electronic. Todays cameras are basically computers with lenses attached, and unfortunately Leica can't build the best computer. Compare the specs of the new Sony A99 II to this (perfect, as they claim) Leica. It's like comparing the performance of a superbike motorcycle, to a bicycle,

But the Leica is the most gorgeous, the most prestigious, and revered, Maybe that's what they meant by "perfect?"

As computers the Sony wins on paper, as a machine to pick up and take pictures with, the Leica is the better.
I will admit I have a bias against Sony, on paper they promise so much, pick one up and have a quick check to see what pointless features are turned off then it all goes horribly wrong. Great sensors, good as a computer, dreadful as a camera.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 16:34 UTC

I'm not sure Kodachrome would live up to peoples memories of what it was really like. I enjoy film, especially the Kodak neg films Portra, I like the fact it's full of colour but not saturated, just gentle with lots of tonal range.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 17:30 UTC as 4th comment

But but but film doesn't work does it, I mean you can't take pictures without huge DR can you?
Whatever next....clockwork cameras?

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 12:09 UTC as 6th comment
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)

I just bought one with the 24mm -70mm f2.8. I used yesterday on a job alongside my 1DX mkI.
Somewhat impressed, the only fault being when I filled the buffer up it took time to clear. I am pricing up trading in my Canon gear to get a second K1 body (might even get two more) plus the other two recent zooms. The 24-70mm at 24mm performs as well as my 24mm f1.4 mkII Canon L. When I look at what my 1Ds and X cameras are worth now, these Pentax make a lot of sense. I can't fault the construction or picture quality comparing with other products at any price point. I have it set up so I can pick it upand use without needing to search menu's. Well done Pentax, great camera and the 24 - 70 is looking like being a knock out, f2.8 and stabilised by the body 5 axis, Canon have nothing to compete. Not a sports camera but half the price of a 5DIV and better spec for my needs, your needs may differ of course.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 14:54 UTC as 87th comment

The last couple of weddings I've attended, it would not of mattered if it was shot on the latest Phaseone, there would still of been over 1000 crap images per wedding.
How many back of head shots, pictures of flowers, shoes and cake do you need to take to cover a wedding these days?
I'm sure there are many decent wedding photog's out there but they look like the wood you can't see for the trees. Not cheap either.Honestly a decent photographer with a point and shoot could do a decent job, the camera is way down the list on what makes a good wedding photographer.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2016 at 11:19 UTC as 86th comment
In reply to:

Snapper2013: The Leica Summilux-SL 50mm f/1.4 ASPH, would make a great stocking stuffer!

.......or stocking.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 19:03 UTC
Total: 250, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »