|
Brad, I think you should go MF. Given that 1) you prefer to shoot in-studio, 2) you now have studio space, and 3) you prefer to shoot tethered, you negate basically every downside people see with digital mf cameras. You'll be getting higher quality images, and you'll be able to use some fantastic glass. As I see it, the only reason for you to go with a 'normal' dslr is versatility, which you will still have if you keep your 1d as a backup. On another note, I'm worried about my local photo lab. I was talking with the owner the other day, and he doesn't know if he'll even be able to make rent this month, for the first time in maybe 20 years. All of his machines and stuff are pretty run down, some barely work, and the quality of developing I get is hit and miss, but they're the only game in town for film, and the owner and I have become friends. Most of the time when I come in he'll just have me go in the back and run my stuff through the developer myself. Over time it's become obvious that he doesn't really know much about photography, or even cameras. I've often wondered how he stays in business, since they only get a couple of rolls a week for processing, and it seems like half their wedding clients never come to pick up and pay for their prints. I guess he's just been able to do enough odd photo work over the years (passports, family portraits, etc.) that is now being done by amateurs with xti's. If he ever does go under, I'd be without a place to do 120 locally. I already have to take my E-6 and 4x5 to another city to get done. I'd seriously consider buying as much of his hardware as I can, but I have nowhere to store/use it, and nowhere near enough money to run it.
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2010 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:07 |
|
|
Well that's all sorts of terrible.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2010 23:08
|
|
|
Funny, my TLR helps me avoid the opposite problem. In a similar vein, I need to get a tripod that goes higher up. I almost never use a tripod, but now that I'm shooting 4x5, I can't really do without it, and I can't get it up to eye level with my subjects!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2010 04:01
|
|
|
Just get a point and shoot, y'all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2010 19:38
|
|
|
Speaking of point n shoots, I don't think I'll ever actually buy one. I'll just keep pining for a Contax T series, but never actually shell out the money for one.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2010 20:54
|
|
|
I'm excited, I can finally get my E-6 4x5 processed within walking distance of me, same day 3 days of the week! I was expecting to have to mail out all my slides in the foreseeable future. Their website only listed 35mm and 120 processing prices, but when I went by and asked I was handed a price sheet, and it's only 25 cents more per sheet than the place I would be mailing to.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2010 00:59
|
|
|
That's a pretty poor analogy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2010 23:33
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Anyone apologizing for the actions inside the video is human scum. hth
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2010 19:05
|
|
|
That's almost as ugly as a Leica R8.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2010 02:19
|
|
|
By giving your camera to strangers?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2010 03:50
|
|
|
45 Pages of reading on depth of field and bokeh from Zeiss
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2010 18:54
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Dorkroom creatives, I need help. Walking around campus with a 400/2.8 invariably invites comments like "drat, that's a big camera!" or from those who are really on top of their game, "drat, that's a big lens!" What the hell are you walking around with a 400 2.8 for?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 21:56
|
|
|
Try the Voigtlander or Zeiss offerings.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2010 22:26
|
|
|
I'm just laughing about the fact that they included Ryan McGinley between Eggleston and Winograd.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2010 22:11
|
|
|
Bird photography has more in common with bird-watching than art, it's only associated by technology.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2010 00:52
|
|
|
If you define what you do as Bird Photography (explicitly or by convention), then you are self-segregating from art.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2010 01:40
|
|
|
Well why don't you show us their stuff instead?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2010 04:22
|
|
|
diarrhea for girls posted:http://www.birdbook.org/ Interesting stuff, Zuckerman approaches birds in a very similar style to his portraits. This is what I was trying to get at before, these are photographs of birds, but they are not bird photography, which is a different animal.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2010 04:50
|
|
|
I feel physically ill looking at those.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2010 05:41
|
|
|
There's also the limited dynamic range of output media to consider. e: Oh I see.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2010 02:55
|
|
|
I would love to have a D3s to use with my manual focus primes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 06:38
|
|
|
Heck, if attaching them didn't destroy the body (ancient pre-AI mount), I'd love to use my manual focus zooms!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 06:44
|
|
|
Pop photo is a really terrible magazine.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2010 22:31
|
|
|
Hollowed out lens as chamber, seal around the sensor area/rest of body, empty out the viewfinder housing and attach a bowl to it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2010 06:19
|
|
|
Just looks like more gimmickry to me.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2010 02:45
|
|
|
Other than the M9 this is the first digital camera in a long time I would consider carrying around: http://dpreview.com/news/1009/10091910fujifilmx100.asp
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 23:26
|
|
|
Compact with a 35mm equiv f/2, from Fuji, who, despite not being a main digital player, has got to know what they are doing (the s series dSLRs are amazing), is going to be amazing. If it had manual focus it would be perfection. Please don't let it cost a mint.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
Zegnar posted:That ring on the lens is probably focus, since it's a prime? Optical viewfinder without a rangefinder means it'd be zone focus, wouldn't it? The lens ring is for selecting aperture I assume.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 23:51
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:HAH! The joke is on you! It doesn't even TAKE a screwmount! M-mount adapters are only like $40.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 05:57
|
|
|
Then sell all your gear and pick up a cheap film slr, only take pictures when the mood really strikes you.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2010 07:58
|
|
|
If I'm not wearing my camera all day I don't see a reason to use a strap.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2010 21:20
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4_ogz10kH8 The Silver Footprint, Documentary about master silver printer Robin Bell. Full version here (still rough audio, not final): http://vimeo.com/13659991
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2010 15:54
|
|
|
Ah, the full version went down for editing today, I forgot. Should be back... sometime.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2010 23:15
|
|
|
365 Nog Hogger fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Nov 4, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2010 23:30
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I want to enter, but not sure exactly how. I added a few clarifications.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2010 05:53
|
|
|
dakana posted:Photos have to tell the truth. That's rich.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2010 22:53
|
|
|
That's a camera blog, not a photography blog.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2010 06:45
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:That's not what I said at all. You can't tell someone how to make a good photo out of a boring or thoughtless premise. If they have nothing to say, they have nothing to say. You can encourage them to find things they are interested in, and to develop genuine and interesting opinions on them, and go from there. But the time for that is not during critique. If you bring a technically 'well executed' photo with nothing to say, there is nothing constructive that can come of it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 00:18
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:"The only person who thinks this photo is about Jack Nicholson is Jack Nicholson." -Stanley Kubrick yes ftw obvious statements ftw
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2011 12:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:07 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I don't think it's really possible to photograph a man with an erection without it looking cheesy and pornographic as apposed to artistic, but he might want that. Straight photography disagrees. It might not come off erotic, but I can definitely imagine some deadpan portraiture involving erections being pretty cool. Or on the other extreme, defusing it through laughter (the subject, that is, the photographer laughing might be a little hard to cope with).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 22:42
|
|