BPA4

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Feb 23, 2005

Comments

Total: 64, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: Do not add own conclusions, DPR. Nowhere Mr. Toshikazu Umatate stated ".. mirrorless camera designed *to replace* Nikon's flagship D4/D5 DSLR lineup." You added that. Nikon can have two lineups.

I noticed that, too. I think Nikon has stated they intend to keep both systems. I think SLR will remain the choice for many wildlife and sports photographers.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2019 at 05:25 UTC
In reply to:

elefteriadis alexandros: Give back NPS 160. We have many b&W.

I don't presume to speak for Elefteriadis, but compared to color films there are still quite a few black and white films. There are original films from Kodak, Ilford, Adox, Foma, and Orwo FilmoTec.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2019 at 00:53 UTC
In reply to:

elefteriadis alexandros: Give back NPS 160. We have many b&W.

Let's have that and this 100 ACROS II.

PRO 160 NS is still available in Japan in 120 format.

https://fujifilm.jp/personal/filmandcamera/film/color/professional/index.html

https://fujifilm.jp/personal/jan/color.html?pSch501010109

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2019 at 14:00 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Ok, so now film is coming back, when is someone going to start manufacturing a film camera? And I mean a practical, affordable one - not a boutique model for collectors. With good, reliable cameras getting harder to come by on the second hand market, surely there are enough people using film worldwide to make it worth while? It really shouldn't be that expensive to produce one using existing parts from a digital model. The only major differences are for film transport and space for the film.

BlanksMcgee, I agree a reissue would be fine. The Rolleiflex TLR would be nice, as it has the built-in lens, so a complete lens line would not have to be reissued at the same time. They only quit making the Rolleiflex TLR a few years ago, so tools and metal dies might still be around. I suspect this is the issue facing many reissues, that even if the design already exists, the equipment for manufacture would have to be created again, perhaps at greater cost than the companies think it is worth thus far. New ideas develop over time, too, and sometimes the companies might also want to change something about the original design or production -- I think this has happened with Nikon reissues in the past.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2019 at 14:47 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Ok, so now film is coming back, when is someone going to start manufacturing a film camera? And I mean a practical, affordable one - not a boutique model for collectors. With good, reliable cameras getting harder to come by on the second hand market, surely there are enough people using film worldwide to make it worth while? It really shouldn't be that expensive to produce one using existing parts from a digital model. The only major differences are for film transport and space for the film.

Nikon1977k, it is true there are still cameras available secondhand, and these will probably continue to find use, but it means something different for film when new cameras are also available. And some people prefer to buy new and have knowledge of the camera's use, maintenance, history.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 22:50 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Ok, so now film is coming back, when is someone going to start manufacturing a film camera? And I mean a practical, affordable one - not a boutique model for collectors. With good, reliable cameras getting harder to come by on the second hand market, surely there are enough people using film worldwide to make it worth while? It really shouldn't be that expensive to produce one using existing parts from a digital model. The only major differences are for film transport and space for the film.

I think an SLR is the most practical for current production, though. And for a mechanical model, Nikon is the most doable given that they still offer AI-S mechanical lenses.

A good quality rangefinder would be difficult to develop at a lower cost. And unless someone wanted to develop a new lens line, it would use Leica M mount, for which lenses are not inexpensive -- although the Zeiss Cosina ZM and Voigtlaender Cosina VM lenses are more reasonable than Leica lenses.

Another option could be an autofocus fixed lens compact camera. Someone else in these comments suggested something along the lines of the Fujifilm X100. Maybe that could be like a modern Contax T3, which is a respected compact camera. Sigma could also be an interesting maker for a compact film camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Ok, so now film is coming back, when is someone going to start manufacturing a film camera? And I mean a practical, affordable one - not a boutique model for collectors. With good, reliable cameras getting harder to come by on the second hand market, surely there are enough people using film worldwide to make it worth while? It really shouldn't be that expensive to produce one using existing parts from a digital model. The only major differences are for film transport and space for the film.

The 35mm film cameras still in production are the Leica MP, Leica M-A, and Nikon F6. I would consider all of these serious cameras meant for use, not collecting. The Leica are fairly expensive, though. The Nikon is half the price of the Leica, but still not exactly inexpensive. It would be nice to see Nikon do another camera along the lines of the FM2 and FM3A, which would be less expensive than the MP, M-A, and F6. Even better, would be something like the Nikon F2, an excellent mechanical model to complement the electronic F6.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Although I own a GR2, my main body is a DSLR, so I never left. ML has nothing to offer wildlife shooters.

I don't think most wildlife photographers are really that concerned with features like 'animal eye autofocus'. I think we will see SLRs continue to feature heavily in the technical specifications of the Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2019 at 19:09 UTC
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Although I own a GR2, my main body is a DSLR, so I never left. ML has nothing to offer wildlife shooters.

Possibly so, but I think most wildlife photographers will still favor the SLR. The top SLRs are no slouch in the categories you mention. And some of the greatest wildlife images were made with manual focus mechanical cameras. I think auto focus tracking and decent frame rates are generally appreciated nowadays, but the best wildlife images are still about knowing the craft, knowing your subject, and picking the right moment.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2019 at 16:46 UTC
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Although I own a GR2, my main body is a DSLR, so I never left. ML has nothing to offer wildlife shooters.

For most wildlife photography the noises of an SLR are not too much. There are decades of great wildlife images made with these cameras. In addition, the ability to view the natural lighting conditions and scene through an optical viewfinder keep the wildlife photographer better engaged with the surroundings. For extended viewing duration the optical viewfinder is more comfortable. And SLR have longer battery life. All of these things make the SLR the premier wildlife photography camera.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2019 at 16:26 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stacey_K: I see people talking about "film dying". As a hobby, film use is more likely to survive than APS-C digital IMHO. There is something unique about shooting with film and as a hobbyist, many people still enjoy shooting it.

Many Nikon F and F2 are still going strong. We will see how many digital cameras are still being used 40-60+ years after their manufacture.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2019 at 19:56 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

I don't think film is very often used for commercial or news images anymore. I think those using film nowadays are enthusiasts, art photographers, portrait photographers, fashion photographers, and others that can absorb or justify the cost because of their (and sometimes their customer's) interest in the rendering of film.

I think Zograf's point was that this price increase, even if not welcomed, is unlikely to have a large impact on current users of film. The understanding being that those that do not want to deal with it in their workflow, as you describe, are probably already not using it.

It is true there are fewer films available nowadays -- probably because of less use overall by the general public and commercial and news photographers. If Kodak and Fujifilm tried to keep producing the range of films they used to make, it wouldn't work -- so the more limited portfolio of films is a balanced approach to keep some film available.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2019 at 18:37 UTC
On article From F to Z: we tour Nikon's Sendai factory (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

apestorm: Good read. I didnt realise the F6 was built there too.

I am guessing they do occasional production runs of the F6. It could possibly be that they are "custom made to order" when a shop requests them. They come in stock at B&H periodically and seem to sell out quite quickly.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2019 at 22:29 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

The reasons to use film are for people interested in the traditional photographic process and/or that like the grain and overall rendering of film and/or that like the physical and thought process of using film. There are plenty of reasons to use film. You do not feel so, fine -- but others still see reasons. I feel like we are just going in circles here now with this discussion.

Environmental impact would probably need a fairly in-depth investigation into the materials of film and development versus the materials of sensors and processors and digital storage cards and more frequent camera purchases (for many). Volume of images a photographer produces would also come into play.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2019 at 23:24 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

I try to take a philosophical view of it, and I like crafts of all sorts, so I think I can get more absorbed in the nuances than many people care to delve.

I think for some film users it can be kind of a defensive position, because some digital users seem to want to see the demise of film, whereas I think most film users are open to both film and digital existing, and definitely want to see film continue. Having film and digital be seen as two crafts could be one way to help with that rather than taking a view of digital completely replacing film.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2019 at 22:51 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

That's fine. I am not trying to insult you. I am just trying to make the argument that I think was the original debate we started, that film and digital can potentially be seen as two different (but related in the goal of an image) crafts or pursuits.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2019 at 22:43 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

To say that "I could not care less if a photo was produced on film or digitally" is to take a very utilitarian view of an image.

Others have taken a very different view, such as the movie directors that have stated that they will no longer work if they cannot use film. They are not interested in trying to tell stories without film -- which is to suggest that it is a very different pursuit to some.

I mean that to recognize craft or aesthetic differences in material or process can be to recognize that they are different pursuits, even if they both lead to an image.

I am not saying digital imaging is not a craft or has no aesthetic value, just that to recognize that there is enough of a paradigm shift in film versus digital that they can be considered different crafts or pursuits.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2019 at 22:35 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

I suppose it depends one's response to and focus on craft and aesthetic versus convenience and utility.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2019 at 21:14 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

Even in the commercial world, when the exhibition media is the same for the film or digital recording, such as an offset lithographic magazine or book page or a digitally projected movie, you have creators who have decided that there is enough difference in the original recording being made on film to make it worth using film -- both in the process of recording and in the characteristics of the look.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2019 at 19:11 UTC
On article Fujifilm Japan to increase color film prices by 30% (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian_Hill: the only people saying film is dead are posting on this thread. Others, like me, are still enjoying film and its in a revival. its not going anywhere. stop caring so much about trolling it if you don't care that much about it.

It is perhaps an exaggeration to state them as wholly separate pursuits -- both are making an image -- but there are enough unique aspects to each pursuit that they can to a large extent be viewed as different.

Another example, a drawing with pencil and paper is a drawing and so is a drawing done on the computer -- but they are also really quite different.

Different thought processes and ways of seeing are brought about by the different materials, including the sense of touch and relative permanence of the physical materials.

Following the whole photographic process of negative and darkroom print is different also than digital sensor and inkjet print. Specifically with the prints, you have the difference in appearance of the image that forms from layers in the paper versus being sprayed onto the surface.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2019 at 19:06 UTC
Total: 64, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »