rmbackus

rmbackus

Lives in Netherlands Zeist, Netherlands
Works as a ENT surgeon (retired)
Has a website at www.roelfbackus.nl
Joined on Jan 6, 2009
About me:

ENT-surgeon, musician, photographer

Comments

Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic GH6 (51 comments in total)

How is the fan cleaned?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2022 at 18:39 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies

Still that ridiculous pricing 16,999 and 19,999.
As if you get more buyers than when priced at 17k and 20k.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2022 at 12:11 UTC as 90th comment | 1 reply

Oskar Barnack was thinking about a 35 mm camera as early as in 1905 and was at that time an employee of Carl Zeiss in Jena, however Zeiss rejected the idea!
See the books of Hartmut Thiele about the history of Zeiss and Leitz.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2021 at 16:57 UTC as 51st comment | 1 reply
On article Why have cameras and lenses become so expensive? (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

Just Another Photog: Well, I retired a couple of years ago. I'm now on a fixed income. Its a good income, but those cameras and lenses look expensive to me. Taking a look at my gear list will show I have a great camera and some great glass. But I'm hoping these will last me for another decade or two.

Same for me, but I'm also an old-school photographer who wants a camera with ISO, time and aperture, optical viewfinder and of course autofocus. So I bought the cheapest full-frame camera: the Canon 6D with a 24-105. More expensive gear won't let me win challenges.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2021 at 17:04 UTC
In reply to:

rmbackus: Leica already was for: the professional reporter, the doctor, the rich and the snob.

I was talking about the rangefinder-cameras of the previous century.
Their digital cameras are the Apple of the photographer.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2021 at 18:37 UTC

Leica already was for: the professional reporter, the doctor, the rich and the snob.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2021 at 16:27 UTC as 48th comment | 5 replies

Pity, the pictures of all the other cameras haven't the same size: see Canon 1D-X

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2021 at 15:29 UTC as 41st comment

For DPreview it's still pixels what count, not the size of the sensor?
Same as in the old days: we have now a camera with an ultra fine grain film.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2021 at 17:29 UTC as 77th comment

Find my pictures sharp enough.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2020 at 13:18 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

H Akay: The curve shown on the diagram should be the opposite ..(concave).! Great marketing (!) if you can't even get the promo material done right !

So was my reaction.
Maybe it's not a mistake, but very confusing and a bad way to explain things.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2020 at 13:16 UTC
On photo At the Baldeney Lake in the Autumn Leaves - with human (f)actors challenge (25 comments in total)

Don't quite understand the 640 ISO, ND filter and pol filter combination.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2020 at 18:31 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

StevenN: Meh. No flippy screen.

No self-timer.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2020 at 11:10 UTC

It seems to me that the baby photo are no real pixels. More a blurred picture with a grid overlay.
Within the individual 'pixels' are different shades of gray and that's not the case with a pixel and its definition.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2020 at 10:07 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

rmbackus: Metric size sensor area please.

We should abandon the obsolete video-tubes sizes of the 80's. We're talking here about photographic sizes, like 35mm, 24*36mm, a 105mm focal lens and so on.
Ask a person what is bigger: 1/2.7" vs 0.37" and is it square or rectangle...or: draw it on paper,
But I give up, this discussion is ongoing for twenty years.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2020 at 13:04 UTC
In reply to:

rmbackus: Metric size sensor area please.

= 5.58 * 7.44 mm (41.5 mm2)

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2020 at 11:13 UTC
In reply to:

rmbackus: Metric size sensor area please.

Still not satisfied:
2 * 21.5 mm ?
4 * 10.75 mm ?
4.5 * 9.5556 mm ?
6 * 7,16665 mm ?
43 is a prime

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2020 at 16:41 UTC

Metric size sensor area please.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2020 at 20:01 UTC as 13th comment | 7 replies
On article Samsung launches 64MP image sensor for smartphones (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

rmbackus: I'm more interested in the sensor area, is it 4 x 6 mm ? Did anybody ever know the amount of silvergrains on a 8 x 11 mm Minox film?

so true !

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2019 at 16:58 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Fujifilm GFX 100 (580 comments in total)

We have to realize that this is a camera for only the happy few....$10,000 !

Link | Posted on May 28, 2019 at 23:36 UTC as 21st comment
On article Samsung launches 64MP image sensor for smartphones (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

rmbackus: I'm more interested in the sensor area, is it 4 x 6 mm ? Did anybody ever know the amount of silvergrains on a 8 x 11 mm Minox film?

Minox sold in the seventies a 'Spy' camera that used 8 mm smallfilm. I worked in a photo laboratory those days and never saw a quality pictures coming out that tiny film-format. So it was a only retorical question. It's not the pixels that count but the film/sensor area. Way back in the old days there was already the quote: 'the best camera is the biggest camera'.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2019 at 09:47 UTC
Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »