Tom_A

Joined on Aug 19, 2010

Comments

Total: 190, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom_A: I have a Fuji GA645 medium format AF rangefinder.
Compact, light, stellar results. Same approach in digital would be awesome...

The GA645 is truly a gem. And user friendly!

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 03:45 UTC
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (367 comments in total)

I have a Fuji GA645 medium format AF rangefinder.
Compact, light, stellar results. Same approach in digital would be awesome...

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 01:27 UTC as 84th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

stevstoc: I converted to Fuji a couple of years back. I shoot with an X-Pro 1 and an X-E1.
I just love using these cameras, much much more than any other since the good old MF film camera days.
The quality on the Fujis take some beating, especially when you consider the "feel" of the finished images. They are are joy to use....slow but a joy.
There were several things I would like to have seen on the X-pro 2 and minus the moveable screen, everything (And some) has been added or improved. My X-Pro 2 is on order and I can't wait until February to get my hands on it.
You can keep your mega Nikons and Canons....Fuji for me every time baby!
Main thing guys...buy what you want and need, not what everyone else tells you to get. Happy snapping!

I bought the XE-1 with the 35mm kit exactly the week when it was released, an aggressively priced combination. Very very nice results. Pin sharp and when I use jpg I like to set a film colour profile.
Its slower than autofocus makes it not good for action, but otherwise I am very happy. Meanwhile I also have the standard zoom and the 23mm, all are excellent lenses.
Hence not sure what was there to dislike about the xe1? I could conceivably be in the market for the xpro2, yet we have other costs in the household now.
I was a Nikon user before, used a d200 for many years, of course an older camera yet with good lenses. I do prefer the fuji lenses and relative compactness though.

Not sure why

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 00:59 UTC
In reply to:

Searching: The 35 f2 on the Fujitsu is too limiting a focal length for a travel camera.

Actually I find 35mm equivalent a wonderfully universal walk around lens. I loved it in my film days (FM2 or F3 with only the 35mm lens during trips!), and I still like the aps equivalent of 23-24mm.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 12:27 UTC

While on holiday in Japan last June, I bought an XA2 kit as a gift for my wife. Bought at popular discounter BIC camera, the price was very low.
We were both pleasantly surprised by the general quality of the output at all usual iso levels.
the output didn t feel much behind my XE-1 with the more expensive kit zoom.
The xa2 is also a joy to use.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 01:27 UTC as 32nd comment
In reply to:

Frank_BR: The new generation of high-resolution lenses and sensors for the 135 format have practically caught up with the digital medium format. Add that global electronic shutters will make the leaf shutter totally obsolete. Does the digital medium format have a future?

50mp on a big sensor will look better than 50mp on a small sensor (assuming the sensors are both good). The lens quality and small diffraction effects will have less impact on the bigger sensor area. A ff 35mm camera like a d800 is best set to f8 because of that.
There is also a kind of beautiful depth effect you get even at standard apertures with mf.
What i still dream about is to one day be able to convert my beautiful classic rolleiflex to a digital camera with full size 52x52mm sensor, even if at today's resolution. I made my best pictures with it. Not only because of its technical excellence but also because it forces you to slow down.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2015 at 15:10 UTC

Mamiya 6 and 7 were superb medium format rangefinders, like big Leica M's and suitable for traveling. I still own a few Fuji MF rangefindzrs with dimilar philosophy and quality.
It would be awesome to see Phase 1 resurrecting the concept of a portable MF rangefinder in the digital world.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2015 at 04:38 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Frank_BR: The new generation of high-resolution lenses and sensors for the 135 format have practically caught up with the digital medium format. Add that global electronic shutters will make the leaf shutter totally obsolete. Does the digital medium format have a future?

A D800 with a top nikon lens is a powerful tool.
At the same time when you compare to an MF camera with a sensor with roughly similar resolution you will know the answer why they are still being made...

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2015 at 04:30 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100T successor rumored to feature new lens (334 comments in total)
In reply to:

donCortizone: Fuji should improve the optics, if it's possible to do it without making the camera any larger.

Hopefully they can also bring their AF up to par with the best micro 4/3.

If anything the Fuji optics is the one thing that does least of all need to be updated.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 17:01 UTC

back in my he film days, my Rolleiflex once fell from the table. I was so relieved when the first pictures afterwards all pictures were not ok in all areas of the image. A bit of deformation would have yielded frustratingly fuzzy pictures. So I can imagine how the leica owner felt.
As an aside, this memory made me decide to pick up my Rollei again for pictures. I made my best pictures with it, mainly because it forces you to slow down.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2015 at 10:57 UTC as 53rd comment
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 makes leap to 20MP (168 comments in total)

I find it looks quite a bit like my XE-1.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 14:41 UTC as 23rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: The existence of this product shows how anal photographers can be. Nobody will notice the difference between B&W photos taken with this camera and those taken with another camera/lens of similar quality. Even if they did notice a difference, that difference would not be important to anyone. Photos in general are hardly important anyway. It's all just anal retentiveness.

Have a look at the samples.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 08:01 UTC
In reply to:

22codfish: For that money, I would prefer the Pentax 645Z

Juck, have you seen the samples? You would not so quickly dismiss the camera then.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 01:59 UTC

The sample images on the photo blog are excellent. Loved the detail and creamy tonality in the picture of the middle ages man.
I shot and enlarged lots of bw in my pure film days (those superb results from a rolleiflex!), now i still regularly use film for bw. And even on my iphone I like to use hipstamatic with Akira "lens" and Nike AO "film" which gives often surprisingly good results.

All this to say that yes, I would be happy using this camera. We have currently other priorities in the family but I wouls be considering one in a year or so.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 01:14 UTC as 102nd comment
On article Fujifilm X100T Review (691 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaru: Hi FogdeanDurn.
It is a 23mm F2. 23 X 1.5 = 34.5mm

JACS, I now see the point you want to make about shot noise. obviously the bigger a pixel is (and usually FR sensors will have bigger pixels than APS sensors), the more photons fall on a pixel, which would lead to less influence of poisson noise. Fine, this demonstrates that for high quality available light pictures you cannot beat a bigger sensor. But I don't agree that you can translate that into a simple 1.5x aperture equivalence.
Aso, in the case of DOF, I checked dofmaster.com . On a distance of 2 meters the 23mm lens on APS film at f2 has DOF from 1.69 to 2.46m; a 35mm lens on 35mm film at 2m needs to be at f4 (not f3 !) to have a similar DOF (1.68 to 2.48m).

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 08:10 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100T Review (691 comments in total)
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: Apologies for putting this here instead of the 'report issues' button wherever that is - the intro says this has a "23mm f/2 lens". This actually got me excited, but unfortunately it is an error. If you've divided 35 x 1.5 to give some 35mm equivalence wouldn't it be 50mm equiv?

Richard, light gathering equivalence is absolutely irrelevant. The important thing is that it is f2. Obviously bigger lenses for bigger sensors have more glass and will let more light through at the same aperture, but this is totally unimportant since the light needs to fall on a bigger sensor.
If you use a hand held light meter, and it tells you that say f2 at 1/125 is correct then that is what you set, independent of your sensor/film size. In no way at all should you care about an imagined f3 equivalence.
If it were possible put a 24mm f2 full format lens on the fuji then it would still be the same exposure, the light falling next to the sensor would be wasted (or more practically, likely slightly degrade the image quality because of reflections)
In no way does any "aperture equivalence of f3" have any practical implication.
The only area where it is important is DOF. You may have the view of a traditional 35mm lens, but you have the DOF of a 23mm lens at that aperture and distance.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 07:56 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100T Review (691 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaru: Hi FogdeanDurn.
It is a 23mm F2. 23 X 1.5 = 34.5mm

Look I will try to explain it one last time before I give up.
Take this fuji,, a full frame camera, a good old Mamiya 7 (which has an image size of more than 4 times that of a full frame camera), and a lunasix handheld meter.
Set all of them to iso 100 and point them to a wall (to do away with aspect ratio differences). Assuming that all meters are correctly calibrated they will all give the same result. it is not as if when you meter with the fuji 1/60 at f2 that on the nikon you have to set 1/60 at f3 and on the mamiya 1/60 at f5.6. That is pure rubbish.
f2 is f2.

The only area to look for equivalency is depth of field. DOF is dependent on the physical focal length. Hence the fuji's 23mm at f2 will have more DOF than a FF 35mm lens at f2. There are tables where you can see DOF equivalene depending on distance of the subject, it is not simply a 1.5 factor.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2015 at 16:44 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100T Review (691 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaru: Hi FogdeanDurn.
It is a 23mm F2. 23 X 1.5 = 34.5mm

a 23mm lens with a traditional 35mm equivalent angel of view, and a normal f2 aperture where you don't need to do any conversion for, indeed that is correct

.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2015 at 16:16 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100T Review (691 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaru: Hi FogdeanDurn.
It is a 23mm F2. 23 X 1.5 = 34.5mm

JAQS you are also absolutely wrong. it is f2. f2 is independent of sensor size. read my post:

Proof: remember handheld light meters? You set iso, point it and find combinations of aperture and shutter speed. These light meters work with absolutely ANY kind of film or sensor size.
If your light meter tells you: f125 at f2, then the fuji will make good pictures with that setting. You do NOT need to set it to f3 for a correctly exposed picture.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2015 at 15:48 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100T Review (691 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaru: Hi FogdeanDurn.
It is a 23mm F2. 23 X 1.5 = 34.5mm

termix you are absolutely wrong.
It is f2. No conversion needed.
Proof: remember handheld light meters? You set iso, point it and find combinations of aperture and shutter speed. These light meters work with absolutely ANY kind of film or sensor size.
If your light meter tells you: f125 at f2, then the fuji will make good pictures with that setting.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2015 at 15:01 UTC
Total: 190, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »