Picturenaut

Picturenaut

Lives in Frankfurt am Main
Works as a science journalist
Has a website at www.roland-wengenmayr.de
Joined on Jun 1, 2010
About me:

Love to shoot wildlife, birds, animals, macros of insects and spiders, plus street and portrait of people (I like to draw portraits too).

Comments

Total: 168, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hopes of Kodachrome relaunch put on ice (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

KrisAK: Kodak filed for bankruptcy and reorganized. The folks now running the company have almost nothing to do with Kodak of old.

These recent announcements about reviving Ektachrome, Kodachrome and Super-8 are all coming from the same Marketing department of the "New" Kodak, headed by an executive who three years ago was a Brand Strategist for Nokia. One of their first initiatives was to create a Kodak camera phone...talk about irony...to help folks more readily share digital images. Makes sense because, you know, film's dead.

These recent efforts, it seems to me, are a frankly cynical attempt to shake-out the pockets of whatever brand equity is left in that name.

Yes its really confusing with those two Kodak companies, but indeed KA is now important for film shooters. But KA unfortunately seems not to be a really stable company. Well, the film market is recovering slowly but still small.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 21:49 UTC
In reply to:

zakaria: GFX is the Pentax 645 killer if Pentax dosnt take it seriously and create their own MF mirrorless.

@turvyT it really depends on the setting. I use both digital and analogue SLRs and two vintage analoge rangefinders (one is a 1954 Kodak Retina IIIc). In most cases the mirror slap is no issue, but sometimes I appreciate silence. But there is another thing that attracts people, unfortunately also in a negative way, and that's when I use my Canon gear with a white lens, they think I am a reporter (in fact I am one, but a science reporter). They pose either too much or they start to get angry, even aggressive. With my Mamiya, despite it is quit big, I never make that weird experience, people do much less notice that I shoot.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 21:36 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: Fujifilm purveyor of retro classic digital cameras. I'm lovin' it! Life is good!

There are no classical digital cameras. For everyone still grown up with real analogue cameras designed by the classical rule "form follows function", the retro look of digital cameras is just fake. They are pretending to be what they are not. They are like VW's New Beetle car or hipster glasses, just fake. Retro look is a sentimental remniscence of a world that doesn't exist anymore.

A digital camera should not pretend to be designed in the 50s IMO. It should follow modern design rules with better knowledge about ergonomics, e.g. offer a better grip for the right hand.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 08:34 UTC
In reply to:

zakaria: GFX is the Pentax 645 killer if Pentax dosnt take it seriously and create their own MF mirrorless.

@turvyT "There are still people who prefer a mirror, in MF too." That's true, but the slap of those big mirrors is a real issue if you want to do street photography or shoot settings in which you do not want people to be distracted or attracted by the camera. That's why I love to use my Mamiya 6 rangefinder, despite it is not a small camera it is sort of stealthy, people stay completely relaxed. Plus, I can shoot hand-held down to about 1/30 s because its silent leaf shutter produces no vibes. You just hear a very decent "click", that's it. So a rangefinder (or a digital ML) has to offer serious advantages, besides the smaller volume of the camera body.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 08:22 UTC

'If mirrorless interchangeable lens camera is too big as a rangefinder style, a fixed lens camera could be smaller, like the GF670.’
Just think about Mamiya's fantastic New 6 or 7 cameras with interchangeable lenses - or the old Fujica G690 series is still popular on eBay. Those cameras aren't too big for enthusiasts, and the lenses are quite compact - and the image size is with 60mm x 60/70/90 mm much bigger than the sensor of the new GFX 50. I'd love to see such a digital MF rangefinder, ideally with a modern hybrid viewfinder, with a small interchangeable lens system on the market. This market will be not too big, of course, but it could attract e.g. Leica users.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 08:08 UTC as 5th comment

Beautiful "small" MF folder camera, no doubt. I'd love to try one despite I prefer systems with interchangeable lenses. If you check the crazy prices of severely (ab)used Plaubel Makinas on eBay, you know immediately that the GF670 is reasonably priced. It'l be sold easily... Such a camera is a longterm invest, and given the fact that a better FF digital body that many replace after 3 yrs costs more (w/o a lens), it's a bargain.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 09:00 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

MaxFury: This is totally pointless.
But on the other hand in a weird way I'm kinda glad film is not dead.
It's like your grandpa still hanging around and being charming and what not.

Funny thing is that I watch more and more young people using film. It is sort of hip... in fact, if every push of the button costs you some bucks, you start thinking more carefully (like in the old times) before you do it. Another thrill is that you have to wait until you see the result, another thrill...

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 08:48 UTC
In reply to:

Tim Gander: Of course all this film resurgence could grind to a halt if new, properly decent film cameras don't come back into production. I'd be interested to know if Nikon, Canon, or anyone is seriously considering re-tooling for that. I could buy a Leica M, but err...

@ Josh Leavitt: sorry for the late reply, I am not so much interested in DPR anymore ... you wrote "even at the raw materials price that he charges for a build ($2,000), it's a steal compared to shelling out $15 per roll for mail-in 120 film development. I imagine this thing could retail for as little as $299 if manufactured to economies of scale." In fact, I've seen this filmomat and talked with its inventor, a nice young guy. He builds every copy by hand, does the marketing, visits exhibitions etc. ... so I think this price is reasonable (a FF digital camera costs about that, a short lifetime product!). Of course, a sort of "mass production" by a big company would make it cheaper, but I am pretty sure we do not see such a product by Canon, Fuji & Co. soon. If film would regain a bigger share of the enthusiast's market, maybe.

With some friends we are thinking about sharing a filmomat, which would also make sense in terms of frequent usage.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 08:42 UTC
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: Ektachrome iconic? Hmmm... What am I missing? :)

As to this all film resurgence business, yes there is a trend, but I do not see it to be terribly long-lasting. At this point digital is better, easier, faster and, what is really important for professionals, cheaper. Anyone who used to burn through 100 rolls of 120 film per month knows what I am talking about.

Film will not die, yet I am not running to buy Kodak stock on the assumption that the company starts raking money by selling Ektachrome :)

the difference between shooting digital and analogue is like the one between fast and slow food.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

WGVanDyck: While I enjoy the primal satisfaction of film, there are economic aspects to be taken into account. Particularly, when discussing a slide film like Ektachrome. Fuji Provia (no price on Ektachrome yet) in a 5 roll pack (36 exp/roll) costs $49.95, with free shipping. Processing and scanning it at a pro lab, two rolls at a time (to save on shipping) costs $60.68. And, a used Nikon F100 would run $200.00. But, when looking at these costs a question arises: At what point does the cost of using film equal the purchase price of a good full frame DSLR like Nikon’s D750? Interestingly, it’s at 43 rolls of film (1548 photos).

Nikon D750 with pro level 64GB SD card: $1929.90
Nikon F100: $200.00
Film cost per roll: $9.99
Processing, scanning and shipping per roll: $30.34
Total cost per roll: $40.33

(1929.90 - 200.00) / 40.33 = 42.89

It is possible to be a little more economical with processing, but it is not going to be a significant change.

@ WGVanDyck: you can add all those gorgeous analogue mid format cameras available for little money. Even the more fancy ones are affordable. I got a complete New Mamiya 6 set with three lenses for less than 2000 Euros from Japan, used but very good condition. For a new Hasselblad X1D, which is a sort of digital equivalent, you pay here about 9500 Euros for the body only - and it's sensor is much smaller than the Mamiya' s 6 cm x 6 cm format!

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 22:36 UTC
In reply to:

Tim Gander: Of course all this film resurgence could grind to a halt if new, properly decent film cameras don't come back into production. I'd be interested to know if Nikon, Canon, or anyone is seriously considering re-tooling for that. I could buy a Leica M, but err...

@ Josh Leavitt: "Something also needs to be done to address the convenience factor of digital versus film. Printer manufacturers need to produce an affordable desk-size film processor that can process the film rolls into negatives, and then do high-res scans for large format printing."

Here's step one: a fully atomically working desktop lab, works both for 135 and 120 color film rolls:
http://www.diyphotography.net/the-filmomat-is-a-homemade-automated-film-processing-machine/
The you need only a separate film scanner and a printer...

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 22:27 UTC
In reply to:

Melvin J Bramley: Open for discussion.
Digital has reached the point where it is sharper than the human eye which 'possibly' makes the image unrealistic !!?
I still process b&w film and enjoy the final images.

Color film has still one advantage: instead of 14 or 16 bit color depth only the full analogue "infinity". In fact, if you have very subtle color shadings in your motif, film can save you in real life, not only in the lab. The German National Geographic photographer Norbert Rosinger still uses color slide film when he wants to shoot snow and ice landscapes and catch most subtle colors, he told in an interview for a German photozine. He also shoots digital, of course.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 22:20 UTC
In reply to:

harrybv319: This is great news. However, I would like to see Kodak producing Ektachrome film for medium format cameras too as I work with both 120 and 135 format cameras.

same with me, AndrewICT, I have a Mamiya 6...

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 22:15 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Kent: this kind of dribble is why I rarely visit DPreview anymore

But its true, if you still use Canon (as I do, but much more important, as really famous photographers do, see http://sonyclassics.com/thesaltoftheearth/), it is a quite unpleasant experience now to visit DPR, because of all this Canon hate poring through the comments. I am just a user, no fanboy (in fact my current favorite is an analogue Mamiya 6 system). And like others I have sometimes been annoyed about Canon's conservatism in the past 7, 8 years. But they still make very good, reliable tools that are a joy to use when you just want to get an image.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:51 UTC
In reply to:

Bruno E: The gear used and the year it was released

2x Canon 5D Mark III 2012
Nikon 3DS 2009
Canon 500D 2009
Nikon D800 2012
Canon 5D 2005
Nikon D300 2007
Canon 5DS R 2015
Canon 1200D 2014
Nikon D90 2008

Nicely shows what Scott Bourne is always saying in his podcasts, every camera from recent years can take great pictures, so learn how to really use the camera and not jump from camera to camera without ever mastering one of them.

And don't forget the sucking dynamic range of Canon gear... ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 09:21 UTC
On article Opinion: Park vandals need to be stopped (335 comments in total)

This is so sad, for me this feels already a bit like what the IS did in Palmyra. Obviously some people do actively hate this planet that allows them to exist, to breathe, eat, sh(beep)t and destroy every beauty that nature still offers.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 08:51 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies
On article Fujifilm to introduce monochrome instax mini film (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: I would like to see a 4x5" instax prosumer model that records in raw simultaneously (with a good sensor and lens of course). 6mp would be enough.

Carl

In fact, Fuji could include a separate small smartphone camera, that would be easily feasible, and add some filters that automatically emulates the look of the film you have loaded. But such a hybrid camera would somehow destroy the charme of classic analogue photography.

I think DPR is not an appropriate forum to really discuss any surviving forms of analogue film photography. DPR is like MP3, film photography like vinyl.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 08:39 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2098 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoshack: Being that I'd used Canon (largest investment, lots of lenses), Sony A7S II, Fuji X100S I have always gone back to FF Canon bodies. I don't care about GPS but could see why travel guys would need it, I don't care about Wireless (I had it, found it clunky and too slow to actually use and chewed battery.) Occasionally I use a Camranger on the Canon for wireless previews, long exposure but really that is more of a toy.

So while people are slamming Canon for its sticking with DSLR form-factor using that old mirror and being "big", I really don't see the problem...the others cannot compare when you are looking for the results. Granted I have looked at Nikons with some envy, but to me they are the real competitor not mirrorless consumer cameras.

So this IV seems like a good upgrade for those who need those features, and the extra MP and ISO range is very good.

The funny thing is that mirrorless FF bodys seem to grow with each generation to finally approach a FF DSLR's body size - just wait for Sony's A7III ;-)

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:45 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2098 comments in total)
In reply to:

Picturenaut: I think many of those complaining about the lack of a fragile articulated screen do not get for what purposes such a rugged camera is made. My 5D3 for sure would be already broken if it didn't have a fixed screen in a massive body, I use it frequently for wildlife shooting in quite tough environments.

Since the 5D4 now has - finally! - WiFi you can use your smartphone as a super flexible additional screen if you need that.

Okay I give up...

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:28 UTC
In reply to:

Yake: With a Sony sensor he could be doing those most excellent shadow pushes that are so critical to saving highlights and producing usable pictures, as every informed amateur knows. He must really struggle with that old inferior sensor, poor guy.

Shame on Canon for crippling these cameras and not giving them the dynamic range of next year's 5DIV or the 2020 1DX Mark III. But then Canon is strictly run by some dude in the Marketing Dept. who doesn't crave on-chip ADC new fab nanometer blah-blah like all real photographers do.

Before you start thinking that this Canon is a good camera, remember that pros often don't have a choice about which camera they use because their employers choose for them. They just run with whatever the boss hands them and can't say a bleep about. Oh yeah, and the cost of switching to a better brand like Sony would be too prohibitive for a pro with a vast inventory of lenses like this guy has. ;-)

P.S. But seriously, he's a great photographer!

Yake, sorry for the extremely delayed reply, I was off here for about a month because I prefer to spend my time more with photography, less with posting comments.

Sorry I missed your "tongue-in-cheek" point, maybe because it was late here in Germany and I was tired. I apologize much, in particular I "hit" a real Selgado fan. He's one of my fav photographers, too.

I think I am getting a bit to thin-skinned of all this Canon bashing, not because I am a fanboy (my current favorite is shooting film with a mid format Mamiya 6 system) but because of all those - sorry - idiots commenting every little news including the buzzword "Canon". So if you use Canon and you want to read something really useful here at DPR you have to delve through all this toxic nonsense. This is in fact one of the reasons I nearly quitted visiting DPR.

I think we both can deliberately agree that its not the gear or brand that makes a good photographer.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:04 UTC
Total: 168, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »