MartinDixon

Joined on May 4, 2014

Comments

Total: 70, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On article Ming Thein joins Hasselblad as Chief of Strategy (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

GaryJP: He walks the walk while others just talk the talk. Good luck to him.

No one is ranting. It is a basic question - I merely wonder why the conversation about equipment supersedes the conversation about strong images?

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2017 at 10:43 UTC
On article Ming Thein joins Hasselblad as Chief of Strategy (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

tinternaut: I've been an occasional reader of Ming's blog and wish him all the best. I'm also surprised at some of the negative things written in the comments here, regarding Micro Four Thirds. To put things into perspective, his last round-up of lenses was pretty complementary towards some of the Micro Four Thirds options. Ming is now predominantly a Medium Format photographer. He's quite young, as photographer go, and very much living the dream (you can read his blog to get a good sense of that).

I'm sorry, what does any of that mean? You're judging someone by the camera they use instead of by the images they makes? Does a crappy photo made with a Hassie rate better than an excellent photo made with a M43? This is not a photography blog. This is useless tech talk. Cameras don't make images. People make images. Cat-scans don't make doctors, guitars don't make rockers. A tool is a tool is a tool. What's the mystery?

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2017 at 20:28 UTC
On article Ming Thein joins Hasselblad as Chief of Strategy (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

tinternaut: I've been an occasional reader of Ming's blog and wish him all the best. I'm also surprised at some of the negative things written in the comments here, regarding Micro Four Thirds. To put things into perspective, his last round-up of lenses was pretty complementary towards some of the Micro Four Thirds options. Ming is now predominantly a Medium Format photographer. He's quite young, as photographer go, and very much living the dream (you can read his blog to get a good sense of that).

We seem to be confusing photography and cameras. And this has been going on for some time. I look at images and ask myself what the photographer wants to say. I don't ask what camera they used. I have never gone to a concert and said the guitarist should have used a Gibson. Good in, good out, whatever the tool. But so many people seem to care more about what's hanging off their neck than what's hanging on the gallery wall. And that is unfortunate. The internet has no filter. Everything is "great." Which to paraphrase Pixar's Incredibles, "if everything is great than nothing is great." Photo editors served a vital function - they reminded us when our @#$@ didn't cut it. And when we didn't get the spread, we improved ourselves.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2017 at 17:15 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S Review: Modern MF (917 comments in total)
In reply to:

canonluber: The IQ of the Fuji is notcibly better. Look at the left eye of the fellow in bottom left test image. It is defenitlysharperandbetter resolved. Look at the wrinkles in the skin. Skin is softer with the other cameras. Even the a7rIi. I have playe with the Fuji & a7rii. The viewfinder on the Fuji is every bit as good actually better than MF film cameras like Mamiya, bronica, Hasselblad. It's beautiful. Plus the image magnification for focus accuracy in the viewfinder is so much easier to use than with a7rii.

Yes, that is true but then look at the left eye of the woman upper left and one could say the Canon is better. Perhaps the field is distorting or there is a slightly less than perpendicular alignment. Would that make me spend an extra $3,000 on the body? Not too sure when I already own Canon L glass.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2017 at 17:05 UTC
In reply to:

Team Yeti: Well, one thing is for sure... baggage theft is about to exponentially increase.

Without a doubt considering many operators will max out your insurance at about $500. My Manfrotto bag empty was $259 and is usually stuffed with two Canon EOS Mark IVs, numerous L lenses, Metz flash unites and a Macbook Pro. Total replacement: value over $12,000. This is robbery waiting to happen. Someone should do a search on how many people are now applying for baggage handler jobs.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

The Davinator: Once again, cue the anti Leica trolls who will blindly trash another product they are jealous about but cant afford.

I'm not sure what that mean.."we have so much perfection." Are you saying we should spend thousands of dollars for imperfections that will give our photographs a nostalgic charm? Because we can always degrade the quality of our files for free. Buy why pay for it? Would you fly an imperfect airplane or hire an imperfect architect to build your home? Perfect lenses won't produce perfect pictures, but they will allow photographers to accurately tell their stories.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 12:18 UTC
In reply to:

Pete_W: This is hilarious.

"FF" (35mm) fanboys have long said that their sensor size provides much better image quality than APS-C and MFT. Now they are trying to argue the same things that APS-C and MFT camera users have said about smaller sensors.

Can't have it both ways, people.

Quality in, quality out. Forget about the digital medium for a moment because any good software and decent lighting can provide beautiful files. Let's harken back to yesteryear and imagine comparing a 35mm film strip to a Rollei, a Fuji 6x9cm or a 4'x5" sheet of film. In no way would we pretend they are of equal output because the constant for all these film types is that an enlarger's light must pass through it. We have to compare lenses focused at infinity, up close, shutter vibration, human movement, the list goes on. But we never talk about the actual image and just what we are doing with these cameras. Is the camera more important than what we make with it? Are Bresson's photos less strong because he used older lenses from the 40's? Pick a camera, use it , publish good work already. What else matters? Cheers.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 12:36 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1103 comments in total)
In reply to:

arcaswissi99: for me this is a honest review. Thanks!
OK, Leica was always more expensive than most of the other companies but there were times where no other company came close in quality of the produced photos due to the great lenses and cameras. You could argue I pay more but I get the best.
Thus, if we got the best quality files with the SL as well I even wouldn't complain about the price but unfortunately you can shoot - technically - better quality pics for a fraction of the cost with many contenders nowadays.
Although Leica lenses at least M lenses had very steady prices over years this isn´t valid for electronic gadgets like digital cameras of whatever company.
Thus you really have to be a die-hard Leica fan with enough money to consider buying the SL.

Correct, quality is a noun that simply means among other definitions: the degree of excellence of something - a distinctive attribute or characteristic. Of course I was applying it to photography equipment. I have 3 Leica and Zeiss lenses, a 50mm, a 35mm and a 28mm. I would never use the 90mm on my M. But I notice no one addressed my comment on the quality vs expense myth. I made a point that if you're good at what you do, no one will care what tools you used. And then, curiously enough, you ask me what Leica lenses I use? If DPR is an amateur blog, why are we discussing $12,000 cameras? If it is a professional blog, why are we kidding ourselves that equipment defines our profession? When my present gear no longer fulfills my professional needs, I will gear up. But if it isn't broken... Case in point, Ellen Von Unwerth shoots so many Vogue spreads that use flash and ambient light blurred together.If anyone cares about sensors and sharpness, shoot 4x5".

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 20:55 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1103 comments in total)
In reply to:

arcaswissi99: for me this is a honest review. Thanks!
OK, Leica was always more expensive than most of the other companies but there were times where no other company came close in quality of the produced photos due to the great lenses and cameras. You could argue I pay more but I get the best.
Thus, if we got the best quality files with the SL as well I even wouldn't complain about the price but unfortunately you can shoot - technically - better quality pics for a fraction of the cost with many contenders nowadays.
Although Leica lenses at least M lenses had very steady prices over years this isn´t valid for electronic gadgets like digital cameras of whatever company.
Thus you really have to be a die-hard Leica fan with enough money to consider buying the SL.

If it's expensive it must be quality is one of the biggest marketing myths ever created. Leica engineers operate on a much smaller scale than the big Japanese companies. And yes, they make fine products. But I shoot with M9s because they are small, discreet, full frame, and relatively less well-known. When I am filming, I don't want to scream, "hey, look at me." I want to see without being seen. No one has ever bought one of my exhibition prints and asked what camera I used? And likewise I don't pretend that what I made could only have been done with a Leica. It's a personal choice, like a Fender guitar vs a Gibson. If you know how to play, it won't matter what axe you grab. Word Processors don't make you a better writer. Cameras don't improve your vision. If the pictures are boring, what does it matter how sharp it is?

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 20:45 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1103 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: In this $5k+ territory of professional all-round cameras, I only see Canon, Nikon and Leica competing. And it is interesting to see that Leica, already now built its bridge head in professional mirrorless territory with the SL.

The SL won't beat yet the best of DSLRs. But it is a surprsingly good starting position in the race to come. Leica dropped out of the SLR race. Maybe not this time. After all, Leica has a heritage in professional photography.

I wouldn't actually put this camera in the +$5,000 category. After outfitting it with a lens you are talking +$10,000 for the simplest of combinations. A variable 24-90mm lens at F4? Come on, really? I don't see any pros looking to upgrade or downgrade to this mirrorless camera. If I'm looking to spend $10,000 I would just get a Phase One DF body and a used back. The sensor size alone would easily make up for differences in lenses available. And Schneiders are tack sharp. Leica has a long proven history but I have to ask, who is their client base today? - working journalists, studio photographers, safari travelers? I am not convinced that I can't get a better user experience from many other cameras. And as far as the wow factor is concerned, shouldn't the artist provide that? As I always say, the best camera in the world is the one you are holding when you make the best photograph in the world.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 20:28 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: I feared this was coming - serious competition for the Fuji X-Pro2. Now all us guys who just bought the Fuji are going to dump them for this puppy.

But seriously, this thing has to be the sexiest Leica to date, hands down. It weighs 1.5 lbs and is built like a fine instrument of measure. I'm sure I'll never own one, but it looks to be a joy to use. After all, it's not just about the photos you take, it's about the fun of a fine tool in your hand. And maybe they got the sensor right too.

I'm sorry. Was I to know you were being sarcastic? I couldn't tell.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: I feared this was coming - serious competition for the Fuji X-Pro2. Now all us guys who just bought the Fuji are going to dump them for this puppy.

But seriously, this thing has to be the sexiest Leica to date, hands down. It weighs 1.5 lbs and is built like a fine instrument of measure. I'm sure I'll never own one, but it looks to be a joy to use. After all, it's not just about the photos you take, it's about the fun of a fine tool in your hand. And maybe they got the sensor right too.

I'm sorry but these comments are confusing. Who's dumping their cameras because a new Leica model comes out? How does it look like a joy to use? Have you tested it out yet? It's not just about the photos... fun tool in your hands? Yes it is about the photos. The photos you make and your ease in achieving them are all that matters. Because let's face it, when you are not making photographs with this camera it is simply a tool. It's not jewelry. Would anyone wear a broken Rolex Datejust ll? I have used Leica film and digital cameras for over 25 years and the biggest issue with the M9 was the buffer which forced me to wait. I have covered events around the world and the last thing I need is the mechanics of a camera telling me it isn't ready. Leica has switched from a CCD sensor to a CMOS and improved the buffer. Those are the only issues that would affect my decision since I already own enough lenses and my eyes are as sharp as they ever where. Cameras can't give you vision.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 13:09 UTC
In reply to:

MartinDixon: Let's be clear on somethings Deep 7 or Shallow 6. Cameras don't whet my appetite. I do not drool over equipment. I do not visit galleries to ask the artists what paints they used or what lenses they attached. I look at art to enjoy strong content and stimulating ideas. Beauty is not empirical so there can be no honest discussion of the photographs' content. I will simply say that the lighting and the subjects didn't help me assess the merits of this camera. But I find it comical that someone would tell me that I don't "deserve" a medium format camera as if they get to determine what I buy. I have owned Hasselblad and Leica films cameras (plural) since 1990. I don't hide behind avatars and monikers. Look up my first book, Brooklyn Kings: New York City's Black Bikers. I also have two new projects on Dakar and Addis Ababa. Professionals welcome criticism. Their business model demands constant improvement. But amateurs are easily offended when challenged. So I apologize if you are hurt.

Again, my apologies if I parodied the wrong poster. My mentor was Roy Decarava who filmed with an old Nikon F and F2 for maybe 40 years. And the only thing that ever needed updating was fresh film. Every musician has their favorite axe but the music lives within them. A great artist would be great using anything. Did the word processor make writers better? Did new brushes make Rembrandt better? The best camera in the world is the one you are holding when you make the best photograph in the world. Does anything else really matter? Cheers. It's Christmas. Have a snowball fight.

Link | Posted on Dec 25, 2016 at 15:06 UTC

Let's be clear on somethings Deep 7 or Shallow 6. Cameras don't whet my appetite. I do not drool over equipment. I do not visit galleries to ask the artists what paints they used or what lenses they attached. I look at art to enjoy strong content and stimulating ideas. Beauty is not empirical so there can be no honest discussion of the photographs' content. I will simply say that the lighting and the subjects didn't help me assess the merits of this camera. But I find it comical that someone would tell me that I don't "deserve" a medium format camera as if they get to determine what I buy. I have owned Hasselblad and Leica films cameras (plural) since 1990. I don't hide behind avatars and monikers. Look up my first book, Brooklyn Kings: New York City's Black Bikers. I also have two new projects on Dakar and Addis Ababa. Professionals welcome criticism. Their business model demands constant improvement. But amateurs are easily offended when challenged. So I apologize if you are hurt.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2016 at 13:01 UTC as 24th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

MartinDixon: RubberDials, You can't honestly believe these photos are interesting enough to inspire anyone buy this camera. They are just boring, dim images of whatever happened to be close enough for a quick test. Editor of Amateur Photography kind of nails it on the head, wouldn't you say? For a cellphone review, sure, they're just fine for when you want to pull something from your pocket. But if you think a consumer will spend that kind of money to photograph a boat in shadow - which could be made with so many other competent cameras - you have to be pulling my leg. Pixel-peepers like to talk about Dmax and sensor size, I have an old fashioned idea; why don't we talk about images that excite and inspire? Because the last time I had an exhibit no one asked me what camera I used. Would a review of Ferrari's latest roadster compare it to a school bus in traffic? Would you review Canon's D1X Mark ll for the Rio Olympics with photos of chess players staring at the board? Come on already.

I am neither pretentious nor undisciplined. I am merely fatigued listening to tech talk instead of discussing art and imagery. I am a working professional. If I am going to switch from my Mamiya Leaf rig to a mirrorless medium format I would hope to see files that would mimic real life scenarios where the need for an expensive medium format replacement makes sense, i.e. location advertising shoots, fashion, daring reportage, etc. I am sorry but dimly lighted boats at sunset don't do it for me, that's all. And unless DP review has changed its name to Digital Camera Review, I would certainly love to see some inspired images. An expensive camera doesn't make you a pro photographer just as my Big Bertha in the closet doesn't make me Tiger Woods. It's just a tool. When my present tools break, maybe I will look into something newer. But if it isn't broken...

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2016 at 09:42 UTC

RubberDials, You can't honestly believe these photos are interesting enough to inspire anyone buy this camera. They are just boring, dim images of whatever happened to be close enough for a quick test. Editor of Amateur Photography kind of nails it on the head, wouldn't you say? For a cellphone review, sure, they're just fine for when you want to pull something from your pocket. But if you think a consumer will spend that kind of money to photograph a boat in shadow - which could be made with so many other competent cameras - you have to be pulling my leg. Pixel-peepers like to talk about Dmax and sensor size, I have an old fashioned idea; why don't we talk about images that excite and inspire? Because the last time I had an exhibit no one asked me what camera I used. Would a review of Ferrari's latest roadster compare it to a school bus in traffic? Would you review Canon's D1X Mark ll for the Rio Olympics with photos of chess players staring at the board? Come on already.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2016 at 10:41 UTC as 29th comment | 6 replies

Am I expected to judge the quality of a $13,000 mirrorless medium format camera based on these images? At least 65% of the files are in such terrible light that I can't see anything important. What can I possibly assess from an LCD screen on the web? Please put the camera in the hands of a professional who might actually use this camera on a job. I can't judge anything from these files. They're God awful...

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 15:10 UTC as 106th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

upgrader: Got both, the A7RII and the 7+ but shooting with the iPhone in such locations would be a waste of time IMHO... The A7RII is too good to be left @home.

I would love to ask how many forum members have actually gotten into a fist fight for making images? - anywhere in the world, ever. After Enter the Dragon I would most certainly lean towards Bruce Lee over Norris but the question stands. Have you made any photographs so important to publish or have that you got into a real knuckle brawl to defend them? Because if you haven't then it's quite possible what you're looking for and what pros are looking for are very far apart. No one is going to war over a cat photo just to show how sharp the fur looks. Who cares? Visit bbc.com and look at the "Gang City" in pictures portfolio on show at the Venice Biennale. There are some strong images there. Or look up Joe Rodriguez's "EastSide Stories" book or mine, "Brooklyn Kings: NYC Black Bikers." I practice what I preach. Cheers...

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 17:57 UTC
In reply to:

upgrader: Got both, the A7RII and the 7+ but shooting with the iPhone in such locations would be a waste of time IMHO... The A7RII is too good to be left @home.

Okay, so you get accosted. Ignore them and move on. Any foreigner will be accosted while photographing abroad simply because they imagine you have disposable income. But you traveled there for an experience and that should matter more. Make the damn pictures and sort it out later. I don't pay anyone and I have years of filming in Nigeria, Ethiopia, Dakar and Capetown to prove it. Years, not trips. If you're a holiday traveler, I get it. It's your vacation. But if you are in this for the long run, and make a living selling images and shooting advertising, editorial, accept the challenges and buck up.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 17:19 UTC

I can see Jamaa EL FNA in one of the earlier photos taken from a roof top terrace. The Marrakech markets are vibrant and bustling with energy. There are some great colors and fantastic Moroccan architecture in these files. My only question is are we filming what fits our gear's limitations or filming what we wish to see and then bringing the proper equipment? I just returned from Morocco and I found my Leica M9 to be more than adequate. A few lens in a shoulder bag with spare batteries lasted me all day. But if the final use of the images is presented greater than typing paper, I would hate to travel so far and not come back with images I could sell as gallery prints. DPreview may be doing some plugging for the iphone but another question is why be so lazy? We're not carrying a Deadorff through Eygpt here. How much can an SLR or micro 4/3 weigh that I leave it at home to trust my adventures to a phone with too much depth of field? Is your phone also a printer? Invest some energy.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 17:05 UTC as 78th comment
Total: 70, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »