Tom_A

Joined on Aug 19, 2010

Comments

Total: 255, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ramonjsantiago: "85mm F1.2 is equivalent to 67mm F0.95"
How is that? Maybe its equivalent to to a 67mm F1.2.

To be more complete
This 85mm f1.2 will:

- measure light like any f1.2, it won't be magically quicker
- have the angle of view of a traditional FF 67mm
- all the while it will show the perspective "flattening" of a 85, hence the image will look quite different than a ff 67mm
- wide open will have approx the dof of a full frame 67mm f0.95. I think this may depend innthe focus distance, but less sure about that.

Light gathering, light per image etc are unimportant concepts.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 01:15 UTC
In reply to:

ramonjsantiago: "85mm F1.2 is equivalent to 67mm F0.95"
How is that? Maybe its equivalent to to a 67mm F1.2.

I don't like all that aperture equivalence, it can be utterly misleading, it is important to state that it is an equivalence for depth of field.
Otherwise it is the same aperture of the lens for light metering. It won't let you take photos in the dark like a 0.9 lens would. Light per image equivalence is not important.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 00:49 UTC
On article Trends to watch at NAB 2017 (25 comments in total)

Would be cool if Blackmagic launches a new Pocket Cinema camera...

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 10:56 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: In an ideal world, all cameras use something standard like DNG, so that there's no issue with software support, and software will be cheaper. It's Sigma and Pentax (Ricoh) using DNG for now, but hopefully there will be more in the future.

Similarly, all APSC and M43 cameras ideally would use the same mount, for choices in lenses, much lower prices, and choice of camera bodies to use. You can just buy bodies, whether it's made by Sigma, Pentax, Olympus or Canon based on particular features needed for the application at the time, and use it with your set of lenses, which means more sales. For now, people are reluctant to switch systems. We do have Panasonic, Olympus, and a few others ... using the same mount. Sigma like some other niche camera makers (Samsung and Pentax) will never make it big without a good range of lenses. It would make sense for them to join M43 with their MiLCs, but they didn't.

So, prices continue to rise and only the dominant makers will survive.

No brand wants to make it too easy to change, hence most cameras will be stuck with the company mount.

Leica also outputs DNG.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2017 at 09:13 UTC
In reply to:

Tom_A: I am still puzzled about the hoopla about aperture equivalence.
F2 is f2, a handheld meter will not ask you about the camera format.
Yes there is a kind of equivalence for depth of field but not exposition. I still don't understand any real use for "light gathering capability".
The way I see it, if you shoot both a "small MF" camera like this one and a full frame camera at f2 or higher, then the larger sensor size and resolution will play a role. In my own perception and just like with "real" mf film camera it is the subtlety of for example skin rendering that gets better, more importantly than resolution.

Mike, well I still don't get it. For a given iso, a correct exposition will at F2 yield the same shutter speed, say 1/60th.
Then for no matter which sensor or film format, from a compact digital to a 4x5 technical camera, there will the same amount of light per surface unit falling on sensor or film. No matter what kind of " equivalent light gathering" lenses are used, it doesn't matter.
Obviously more pixels per square millimeter means less light per pixel, more amplification needed, but that is besides the equivalent apertures discussion which I still think has no practical meaning when it comes to speed of lense

As an aside, I have several medium format film cameras, lovely subtle results. I could briefly try the Leica medium format camera which I believe has the same sensor size as the fuji and probably not too dissimilar quality. Well the difference with a friend's 5D, while not as big as in the film days with a negative that was a multiple bigger, was still there, it was immediately obvious in skin tints that the medium format brought a little extra.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 15:54 UTC

I am still puzzled about the hoopla about aperture equivalence.
F2 is f2, a handheld meter will not ask you about the camera format.
Yes there is a kind of equivalence for depth of field but not exposition. I still don't understand any real use for "light gathering capability".
The way I see it, if you shoot both a "small MF" camera like this one and a full frame camera at f2 or higher, then the larger sensor size and resolution will play a role. In my own perception and just like with "real" mf film camera it is the subtlety of for example skin rendering that gets better, more importantly than resolution.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 13:04 UTC as 193rd comment | 11 replies

I have 2 Lomo products.
- The Belair with an optional semi decent glass lens can yield rather impressive 6x12 negatives. It is a camera with its share of irritations but when you get it right, you will get beautiful pictures with it. The 6X12 format with a reasonable lens would surprise even a jaded digital photographer.
- The Horizon (Russian panoramic camera with turning lens) which is a wonderful travel companion ... if it works well. Unfortunately mine like many others now occasionally shows some banding, a sign that the lens does not turn at perfectly constant speed.
All this leads me to think, it would be great if they would aim a little higher, replicating a true medium format rangefinder (like a vintage fuji or mamiya) with a fixed lens would be awesome.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 03:18 UTC as 9th comment

I have 2 Lomo products.
- The Belair with an optional semi decent glass lens can yield rather impressive 6x12 negatives. It is a camera with its share of irritations but when you get it right, you will get beautiful pictures with it. The 6X12 format with a reasonable lens would surprise even a jaded digital photographer.
- The Horizon (Russian panoramic camera with turning lens) which is a wonderful travel companion ... if it world well. Unfortunately mine like manybothers now occasionally shows some banding, a sign that the lens does not turn at perfectly constant speed.
All this leads me to think, it would be great if they would aim a little higher, replicating a true medium format rangefinder with a fixed lens would be awesome.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 03:15 UTC as 10th comment
On article Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience (495 comments in total)

Nice photos. Indeed manual focusing through a rangefinder is something to get used to again. In general for my kind of photography, I like the slowing down, it makes me take better pictures.
I don't have an Mx. I do like to bring an all manual, medium format 645 film fuji rangefinder on my holiday next to currently my fuji XE1 digital camera. It is still surprising how much higher my percentage of interesting pics is with the all manual old camera.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 10:46 UTC as 155th comment

I have 3 medium format film fujis:
- a 6x9 beast
- an all mechanical 645
- an AF 645
All are splendid and I still use them. Esp the 645 is fun to bring on holiday next to my digital camera.
Which leads me to think, an upscaled X100 with a gfx sensor would be quite similar in feel as my old rangefinders and absolutely marvelous.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2017 at 03:12 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: Based solely on the sample pictures, I'd say FILM Ferrania should set the price very wisely. P30 will face tough competition from Foma, Agfaphoto and Kentmere on the low budget side and will have a hard time when put against something like Ilford FP4.

All b&w films have their own tonality, and that is great. I don't really think in terms of competing films, they are all interesting.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 15:58 UTC
In reply to:

Chasing Summer: The comment about this being a Cosina camera is untrue. This is a Fujifilm camera, made by Fujifilm for itself and for Voightlander. It is a truly outstanding medium format film camera, and out of every camera I own (and there are MANY) it would be the last one I would part with. Compact, lightweight, an incredibly sharp lens with great bokeh, it's the ultimate travel medium format body. I carry it every day in my messenger bag, and despite having an X100T in the same bag it's the one I choose when I want an image to treasure.

Sure you can get a GW690 for less money, but until you see them side by side don't give me that argument - the GF670 is a fraction of the size and weight, and features a very accurate lightmeter. Compare it to a 645? Well, can a 645 take 6x7 images? I don't think so.

This camera doesn't appeal to many, but the folks who want one KNOW that they won't be happy with anything less. Now if only Fuji would find a cache of GF670W cameras I'd be extra happy!

It doesn't really matter who made it, it is simply a good camera.
Whether it wouldn't make sense for Fuji to make it for Cosina, well they made the XPan for Hasselblad so it wasn't inconceivable.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 13:37 UTC
In reply to:

Chasing Summer: The comment about this being a Cosina camera is untrue. This is a Fujifilm camera, made by Fujifilm for itself and for Voightlander. It is a truly outstanding medium format film camera, and out of every camera I own (and there are MANY) it would be the last one I would part with. Compact, lightweight, an incredibly sharp lens with great bokeh, it's the ultimate travel medium format body. I carry it every day in my messenger bag, and despite having an X100T in the same bag it's the one I choose when I want an image to treasure.

Sure you can get a GW690 for less money, but until you see them side by side don't give me that argument - the GF670 is a fraction of the size and weight, and features a very accurate lightmeter. Compare it to a 645? Well, can a 645 take 6x7 images? I don't think so.

This camera doesn't appeal to many, but the folks who want one KNOW that they won't be happy with anything less. Now if only Fuji would find a cache of GF670W cameras I'd be extra happy!

(continued)
Also of interest, while the lens of the GW690 (and I assume the 670) is excellent, I expect that images with the folding GF 670 to be better still. The reason: the big fuji rangefinders have a rather simple angular diaphragm with 5 blades, quite angular (I expect the folder to be more circular due to more blades). The result in the image is that the bokeh can look rather busy, depending on the subject. I expect the folder to have a more creamy fuzziness in the out of focus areas. Even so the big 690 fuji is cool to walk around with.
Finally, an interesting superaffordable 6x12 folder is the Lomography Bel Air (yes, yes...) when used with the optional glass Russian lens (made by Zenith). It is limited and not that easy to use and can have vibration due to the shutter location, but when you can work with the limitations it can give wonderful results. I use mine occasionally, and it is quite something with its enormous negatives.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 07:48 UTC
In reply to:

Chasing Summer: The comment about this being a Cosina camera is untrue. This is a Fujifilm camera, made by Fujifilm for itself and for Voightlander. It is a truly outstanding medium format film camera, and out of every camera I own (and there are MANY) it would be the last one I would part with. Compact, lightweight, an incredibly sharp lens with great bokeh, it's the ultimate travel medium format body. I carry it every day in my messenger bag, and despite having an X100T in the same bag it's the one I choose when I want an image to treasure.

Sure you can get a GW690 for less money, but until you see them side by side don't give me that argument - the GF670 is a fraction of the size and weight, and features a very accurate lightmeter. Compare it to a 645? Well, can a 645 take 6x7 images? I don't think so.

This camera doesn't appeal to many, but the folks who want one KNOW that they won't be happy with anything less. Now if only Fuji would find a cache of GF670W cameras I'd be extra happy!

Thanks, is what I thought as well - I am pretty sure I remember reading from a good source that it was a Fuji camera that was also supplied as an OEM product to Cosina. But whatever, it should be excellent and superbly portable due to its folding nature.
I do have the GW690III I bought cheaply, and there was a 670 variant as well. Sturdy, not too heavy and a great lens but indeed absolutely a monster in size compared to this folding gem. You won't put the GW670 or 690 into a briefcase. No light meter is less of an issue for me, at the cost per negative this is no a point and shoot camera, hence I use a lunasix or sometimes a light metering app on my iphone with it.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 07:48 UTC
In reply to:

Tom_A: I have 3 Fuji medium format rangefinders:
- an all manual 645, like a big leica m6, but with less easy focusing
- an AF 645
- a 6x9
They are all awesome and I still use them. While i like digital, every time I see my film scans I am still impressed with the subtlety of the tones.

I remember now, it is the GS645S. Perfect walkaround camera, a joy:
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170124/f6f02681cef28b6d27663497bbe9a5f0.jpg

Here are two holiday pictures made with it. I love the subtle tonality and rendering. It has a different feel than digital.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170124/4ded88926ace2d1f9cddf61daf80a30a.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170124/21a96490c213a8b07494eba3c8d46b79.jpg

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 10:54 UTC
In reply to:

Tom_A: I have 3 Fuji medium format rangefinders:
- an all manual 645, like a big leica m6, but with less easy focusing
- an AF 645
- a 6x9
They are all awesome and I still use them. While i like digital, every time I see my film scans I am still impressed with the subtlety of the tones.

Actually a near perfect travel camera would be the all manual one with a whopping 645 sensor in it, otherwise same compact external package. I would even love it without a screen.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 10:44 UTC

I have 3 Fuji medium format rangefinders:
- an all manual 645, like a big leica m6, but with less easy focusing
- an AF 645
- a 6x9
They are all awesome and I still use them. While i like digital, every time I see my film scans I am still impressed with the subtlety of the tones.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 10:36 UTC as 53rd comment | 3 replies
On article F is for '4th': Hands-on with Fujifilm X100F (424 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarcMedios: I have an X20 as a "visual notebook" and like it a lot, especially the 4:1 zoom. I can't, for the life of me, seriously consider a $1,200 camera that does not have interchangeable lenses. Why would I want to limit myself to the focal length that some anonymous engineer decided for the camera?

They mean the equivalent angle of view of a 35mm on FF.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 16:29 UTC

Here is a good appraisal with excellent images.
https://www.prophotonut.com/2017/01/19/gfx-high-res-samples/

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 07:22 UTC as 25th comment
In reply to:

OhWeh: The same price as the Leica M10, but so much more camera for the money. More IQ, AF, sealed, ....

The fastest lens is like the same 2.8 on whatever format if you are looking at shutter speed. Equivalency is only of importance for depth of field.

Anyway, fuji apples against red dot strawberries. The Leica is a perfect discreet walkaround device (if you can focus quickly and correctly). The Fuji will come into its own for slower photography and will shine in the digital darkroom because more detail can be found in the darker regions. Not to mention the glorious subtlety of medium format skin rendering.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 07:09 UTC
Total: 255, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »