Joined on Jan 23, 2011


Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: The problem is it is all reproduction work of copyrighted pieces. There fore no one can publish or display them publicly. What would be the point.

Yeah copyright laws, in U.S. I suppose, as well as in Italy, are not very contemporary.
One thing that I would not take as granted is the "slides being copies of other 2D work" so what? what it is the intrinsic worth of an artist's work if it is taken out of context? There is no meaning to art without context to its message, therefore, a slide of a given work, or experience, at that, being removed from the original piece, is already a different thing.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2013 at 21:54 UTC

In the 20 years since I encontered the format, I cannot remember I ever thought to pronounce its name, or to ever have heard it pronounce anything but "jif".

Link | Posted on May 22, 2013 at 21:53 UTC as 56th comment
In reply to:

smatty: Although I would love the 23mm f1.4 and 56mm f1.4, they seem to be a bit too bulky for the compactness that I learned to love the X-Pro 1 for.

I might actually rather get the XF 27mm f2.8 pancake and have to compensate the larger DOF with better composition of more interesting subjects - now how is that for a concept? ;)

I kind of think that's more because they did not want to overlap with the X100 / X100s offer.
Me too I would have preferred a pancake 23mm though.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2013 at 15:18 UTC

That's amazing, I've thought nobody thought of that, that I invented it :)

I sure hope they do it right, film like quality on a electro-chemical, or bio-electric, what you have, sensor; adjustable iso by camera knobs, 35 exposures, then you rewind it, extract it, plug it on a computer and post produce.

Winding again the film erases the images on it and reset it.

And, as I'm sci-fictioning, it should be as affordable as original film rolls were in their heyday.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2012 at 21:25 UTC as 90th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

marcuz: Should this be called "rangefinder style" mirrorless, as in the specs?
This is just yet one more tiny sensor plain mirrorless imho.

Yeah, I cannot know that, I don't dispute it, I'm just saying, a rangefinder body isn't something you would say only of cameras with a rangefinder mechanism using parallax focusing etc?
I may be wrong, maybe in english language rangefinder style is synonym of mirrorless?

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 18:03 UTC

Should this be called "rangefinder style" mirrorless, as in the specs?
This is just yet one more tiny sensor plain mirrorless imho.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 09:50 UTC as 184th comment | 2 replies
On article Interview - Phil Molyneux, President Sony Electronics (129 comments in total)

Yeah, towards the end, I read something like "buy us or we destroy you"...

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2012 at 00:01 UTC as 30th comment
On article A sneak peek at our forthcoming camera test scene (320 comments in total)

I don't know, I agree that depth of the old scene was a bit of a problem, making difficult to understand if what was blurred in a camera result was indeed unresolved or simply slightly out of focus, but what it seems to me here is that there's much of the same stuff repeated all over a bit hectically.

I mean, the printings on a a curved surface (the bottle) with the ulterior complexity of the reflection of its etiquette, the etchings of the paper money and the slight pattern of its watermarking, the tone of yellow and red of the kinda universally known mickey mouse figurine, that are maybe more reliable to note how a sensor handle colors than the color grid here, at least to me, well I'll miss them...

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 19:33 UTC as 68th comment
On article Winter Photography in Iceland (85 comments in total)

Amazing images, interesting insights on the reportage and on the picture making, good read; thanks for your article!

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 21:18 UTC as 49th comment

This is really a lovely camera. Fujifilm is the only one company with an approach to mirrorless that I like, and I say that as a Oly e-p1 owner.
Pity it's too expensive for my pockets!

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2012 at 08:27 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply

Core business in finance... that's sad.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2012 at 18:29 UTC as 83rd comment

Nice look, very low capabilities against other mirrorless cameras, huge price...

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 13:54 UTC as 46th comment
In reply to:

Atlasman: A 100mm equivalent in the m4/3 format looks like a 50mm—the image still has the characteristics of a 50mm—I would never use it for portraits.

I use a C/Y Zeiss 1:1.4/50 as standard portrait lens on the EP-1 and I'm very satisfied by it... Great bokeh, DOF and feeling. As long as you don't shot your portraits from half a meter distance, a 45 mm lens still can qualify as a portrait lens for this format.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2011 at 17:26 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sigma SD1 preview Raw and JPEG samples (88 comments in total)

Not taking into account the cost, it is really outstanding: the shoreline shot with the person reading a book, is really oozing detail, most of the sample here are.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2011 at 22:20 UTC as 36th comment
On article Pentax Q Hands-on Preview (281 comments in total)

The image under the "Compared to the Sony NEX-C3" title up here in the article says it better than words could.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2011 at 11:37 UTC as 94th comment

Imho it looks like it was designed throwing ideas randomly to the drawing board.
I love Pentax, old and new and colored ones too, but this looks like a ugly tiny derivative brick of nonsense with ridiculous specs for photography.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2011 at 09:27 UTC as 168th comment
Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16