Knackerman

Lives in Norway Oslo, Norway
Works as a Computer programmer
Joined on Sep 21, 2004
About me:

Done some paid work since 2007, can't be arsed to try to make a living out of it.
Last 5 years, concentrated more on analog processes.

Comments

Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (754 comments in total)
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: I already know I will get tons of don't feed the troll replies. I can't help it, my fingers are already typing it.

Yes, this Leica has a bit lower performance here and there compared to Sony sensors. Whatever. I really mean it, whatever

At this level of IQ, it's already possible to produce world class images. To be honest, it'd be possible to produce world class images with cameras 10 years older than this one.

So I call this obssession with comparing sensor A vs B a bit an@l. All of then are good enough.

The 10k pricetag is not because of a sensor. It's because of Leica lenses, and the Leica experience.

To experience something that's truly unique is something very underated in a gear forum, but I think it should be the opposite

You're paying for a different experience, not for a "better" sensor.

Besides, you guys get so defensive about IQ. You should try digital medium format someday.

After you try it, you'll see how pointless is defending FF sensors IQ of any brand, anyway.

Actually it's one of the film ones.
Got it for cheap, then why not?

Can't say it's making me all tingly though, my zorki 1 and my old, beaten up Rolleiflex automat is more "fun", but I also have a Yaschica c from 1953, a Hasselblad 503CW and a Mamiya RZ 67 (all gotten very reasonable). For most work I use my 5D mk III because digital is easier as tools go, my leica isn't used all that much in comparison to the others.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2015 at 08:45 UTC
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (754 comments in total)
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: I already know I will get tons of don't feed the troll replies. I can't help it, my fingers are already typing it.

Yes, this Leica has a bit lower performance here and there compared to Sony sensors. Whatever. I really mean it, whatever

At this level of IQ, it's already possible to produce world class images. To be honest, it'd be possible to produce world class images with cameras 10 years older than this one.

So I call this obssession with comparing sensor A vs B a bit an@l. All of then are good enough.

The 10k pricetag is not because of a sensor. It's because of Leica lenses, and the Leica experience.

To experience something that's truly unique is something very underated in a gear forum, but I think it should be the opposite

You're paying for a different experience, not for a "better" sensor.

Besides, you guys get so defensive about IQ. You should try digital medium format someday.

After you try it, you'll see how pointless is defending FF sensors IQ of any brand, anyway.

What the heck is a "Leica experience" anyway?

I own a Leica, can't say that I've "experienced" anything special yet.

it's a tool

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 15:47 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1513 comments in total)
In reply to:

joyclick: Another emperor with no cloths.There will be enough folks buying it at whatever cost Leica fancied should screw out of them.

HowaboutRAW, you're wrong.

Leica should stop the whole camera joke and start make lenses for other brands, that's how they could make real money in the modern camera marked, trough their name and old reputation.

Their glory days of their old analog cameras and manual lenses are long gone.

You seem to front that Leica is best in every class, concerning photography, you seem to forget that it definitely isn't, not even in the lens department.

- They are good, but when you start comparing, you'll find that there are many lens-makers making better glass.

Most modern brands have glass that is equal or superior to the various Leica glass.

You are trying to convince yourself that spending way to much doe is somehow justified by "Leica superiority", while at the same time making a fool of yourself for not recognizing that there is no such thing any more.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 14:47 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1513 comments in total)
In reply to:

doc steel: I'm with Leica since 40 years. But it seems that Leica felt asleep when the first digital cameras was introduced.
where are the advantages of this camera?
she is bulky, she is ugly, she is very expensive and her technical layout is waay behind of the most japanese $700-cameras.
so why should i buy this camera?
because the legendary quality of their lenses?
it is fact, that there are a lot of third party lenses on the market who defy a Leica lens and if not, so they will come very, very near to their level with the Advantage to be a lot cheaper.
for the amount of >$12.000 i will get a D4s with 3 prime lenses and a SB910, a carbon Gitzo and a nice bag for all the stuff!

HowaboutRAW: I guess the person in the photo has seriously small hands then?

The camera looks like a huge flat slob of chunky metal with a cartoon-logo.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 14:36 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1513 comments in total)

Wow, huge, heavy, ugly as sin and a price tag only a drunken sailor can come up with.

Good luck with that, Leica.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 14:31 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
On article Kodak to stop making digital cameras (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Francis Carver: Which company is next to go down the proverbial drain, I wonder?

Sigma? Pentax? Canon? It's not going to be Fujifilm or Fujinon, of that I'm pretty sure.

Actross_mountains: You are actually wrong, the future of the -consumer camera business- lies in the unit you make calls with. It lies in network based photo sharing, online photo ordering business, social media.
Normal people want small units, able to do everything with ease, not in huge and bulky DSLR's like _enthusiasts_ and _professionals_ use.

An by the way, Canon, Nikon, Sigma and Pentax does a helluva lot more than make cameras and printers. Go to their actual websites and check out what they are actually making.
Even Fuji is doing stuff like making chemical compounds for the pharmacy industry. Both Nikon and Canon (and Sigma) have huge contracts in the military and space industries around the world. as the same for Kodak, they are a lot more than a "film making company"

The huge companies mentioned in this thread makes a LOT of money in other markets than the consumer one.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2012 at 10:31 UTC
On article Kodak to stop making digital cameras (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mk7: Kodak is but the latest in a long line of once-mighty American companies destroyed by stupid, incompetent, short-sighted, self-serving, greedy managers and executives. But to hear the executives tell it, their downfall was caused by taxes, regulations, health care, welfare… BS!!

Never fully investing in a Velvia-beater? Brilliant. Still pouring hundreds of millions of R&D dollars into film, in the 21st century? Genius. Abandoning the enthusiast digicam market? Bravo.
Gluttonous executives roll the dice, American workers pay the price. RIP Kodak.

Kodak wasn't/isn't all about consumer products.

Their big losses came when the movie industry also went digital.
- But off course the collapse of the analog consumer market also played a role.

Still, the analog and film business is doing well, as far as reports go, there is quite a big marked for it, even today. Even though they've cut down on the number of film brands produced, they still seem to support the analog community -and making a profit.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2012 at 10:22 UTC
Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7