|
Interrupting Moss posted:Additionally Why wouldn't you be able to control DOF on a E-P1 or other Micro 4/3 camera? They use the same sensors as normal 4/3 cameras which are perfectly able to achieve a shallow DOF.
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
I wonder what brand of camera this was? Any guesses? http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2010/01/15/consumer-lost-camera.html quote:An Australian man who found a camera washed up on a Queensland beach in October is crediting Facebook and his own dogged sleuthing with helping him track down the Ontario owners six weeks later.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 00:43
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I wonder what brand of camera this was? Any guesses? The guy who found it posted in the comments, said it was an Olympus Stylus Tough: http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1483
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 02:44
|
|
|
Augmented Dickey posted:Why wouldn't you be able to control DOF on a E-P1 or other Micro 4/3 camera? They use the same sensors as normal 4/3 cameras which are perfectly able to achieve a shallow DOF.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 05:34
|
|
|
I have a friend who's wife is in the "If I have a more expensive camera, I will take better pictures" crowd. To her, expensive camera always ends up meaning "entry level DSLR" and she still ends up taking terrible pictures. I have a feeling this is most entry level DSLR buyers and it used to piss me off. If you're not going to ever take the drat thing out of AUTO, why are you buying it? Then I realized that the more people that bought DSLRs, even if they were terrible photographers who used the camera as a crutch, the more the prices on DSLRs would drop, and the more likely it was that someone would eventually fire sale price a camera I wanted on eBay or Craig's list. So, buy on uninformed consumers! Keep thinking that it is the camera that takes the great pictures and not the photographer!
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:07
|
|
|
I love those people, they subsidize the R&D. If only they would buy H3's....
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:09
|
|
|
brad industry posted:I love those people, they subsidize the R&D. That's the next level isn't it? I need to start e-mailing the people I know who are like this. "See these professional quality pictures? Do you know what kind of camera they use? Here is a link. Its called a Hasselblad. 50 megapixels. FIFTY! Think of how excellent your photos would look at FIFTY megapixels! Think of how envious all of the other soccer moms are going to be when you pull up in your Hybrid SUV and a FIFTY megapixel camera. FIFTY! Think of all your friends and their 10.1 megapixel cameras. You could have a single camera that has as many megapixels as five of your friends. FIFTY! Plus, the name recognition on these cameras is amazing. Its like driving a Jaguar or BMW. In fact, think of this as the BMW of cameras. I'm sure that if BMW made a camera, it would look like a Hasselblad H3 and its fifty megapixels of photo perfection. As always, when you get tired of the pictures the H3 puts out because they aren't as good as the magazine photographers, I'll give you $300 for it."
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:18
|
|
|
The reason the medium format digital stuff is so expensive is almost no one actually buys them. Everyone gets it from a rental house, outsources it through their digital tech, or puts them on a lease from Phase One. Or if they do buy it, they get a used P20 or P25 and never think about upgrading unless it breaks. 90% of the time when I digital tech it's a P20 stuck on a Mamiya or Contax and that's a good enough file to do basically anything. It is fun working with a brand new H3D+P45 rental though. I'm pretty sure my next camera upgrade in a year or two is going to be a P20/P25 to stick on my 500c/m. The used prices have dropped to not much more than what a 5Dmk2 is new, at that point it doesn't make sense to me to stick with 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:36
|
|
|
brad industry posted:The reason the medium format digital stuff is so expensive is almost no one actually buys them. Everyone gets it from a rental house, outsources it through their digital tech, or puts them on a lease from Phase One. Or if they do buy it, they get a used P20 or P25 and never think about upgrading unless it breaks. I understand you'd mostly be shooting with lights at iso 80/100 whatever is base, but how do you find the dynamic range on the older backs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:48
|
|
|
It's several stops better than 35mm because of the larger sensor size. I believe the original 5D is around 8-9 stops whereas a P20+ is 12 (and the newer backs are more like 13 especially on the H3D). Bigger sensor = better everything, even if the pixel size is equivalent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:55
|
|
|
For you aspiring drug cartel photographers out there, VBSTV has a pretty cool interview with Pablo Escobar's personal photographer. Not so much about the technical aspects of photography or anything, but it's an interesting look into their personal lives through photographs. http://www.vbs.tv/newsroom/el-chino--2
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 05:32
|
|
|
If I ever win the lottery, I'm totally getting a Phase One 645DF and P65+ back. For concert photography.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 08:02
|
|
|
Want to upgrade to an AF Mamiya 645, but I'm trying to tell myself I should hold out for an AFD-2 or AFD-3 body so I can use a proper digital back on it. Then I realize I'll never in a million years be able to justify a digital back and I get all depressed  On the upside, 645AF and AFD bodies are getting cheaper every day, so hey -- at least I can shoot 120 at 3200 with AF 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 08:08
|
|
|
well wait those million years and maybe sensor prices will go down. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 09:37
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:well wait those million years and maybe sensor prices will go down. Shame it'll be somewhere close to that since sensor size doesn't increase nearly at the same pace as other technology.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 13:03
|
|
|
JaundiceDave posted:Shame it'll be somewhere close to that since sensor size doesn't increase nearly at the same pace as other technology. Other technology doesn't cost as much to update to the newest at a reasonable pace. I can buy a computer with amazing performance improvements every 2 years, but it only costs me $1,200 or so. Think about how much money you have in gear that wouldn't work with a larger format... But yeah, the weekend I got to use a P45+...god drat, what an amazing sensor. I felt very strange walking around Chicago with a single camera, lens, and digital back worth more than I make in a year. Street photography isn't easy, everyone is like WTF ARE YOU POINTING AT ME!?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 15:34
|
|
|
I really wish DSLRs were built with with an eye toward being upgraded. Though, I would assume the sensor is a major factor in the cost, so there may not be any sort of cost savings.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 20:59
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:I really wish DSLRs were built with with an eye toward being upgraded. Though, I would assume the sensor is a major factor in the cost, so there may not be any sort of cost savings. I actually read an article not too long ago about a team at Stanford making a modular/upgradable DSLR. So it's in our future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2010 23:16
|
|
|
Quick question in case anyone can remember off the top of their head...there's a photographer, I can't remember his name, that did this awesome picture of the Queen in front of a British flag, where she's smiling quite a lot, and the whole thing just seems so out of character for her. I can't for the life of me find it though. Anyone know what I"m on about? Edit: NVM, gottit, Robert Rankin. Pantsmaster Bill fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Jan 22, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 01:10
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:I really wish DSLRs were built with with an eye toward being upgraded. Though, I would assume the sensor is a major factor in the cost, so there may not be any sort of cost savings. http://www.dpreview.com/previews/RicohGXR/
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
I know how much you all love Ken Rockwell but my god this is some of his best work yet http://kenrockwell.com/tech/everything-sucks.htm Hes just trolling us now
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 04:49
|
|
|
Fists Up posted:I know how much you all love Ken Rockwell but my god this is some of his best work yet Ken Rockwell posted:When I shoot a real camera, I drop in my film, shoot it, drop it off at the lab, and then drop the slides in my projector. I'm done, and get fantastic colors with no work. ahahaha. As a former lab monkey, you're tripping balls if you trust them completely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 05:02
|
|
|
Fists Up posted:http://kenrockwell.com/tech/everything-sucks.htm I read that and just kept thinking:  Some more K-Rock gems: "[img posted:http://fi.somethingawful.com/forums/posticons/Dorkroom-K-ROCK.gif[/img]"]
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 05:08
|
|
|
Beer Coaster posted:I read that and just kept thinking: I must be getting old, cause I agree with about 70% of that article. Though almost nothing he says about photography.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 06:41
|
|
|
I had heard all the jokes (warnings) about Ken Rockwell, so I had never bothered to actually read anything he says, just browsed his lovely pictures. Now that I've taken the time to read something from him, I realize that he is, indeed, the biggest twat in the entire universe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 07:02
|
|
|
Fists Up posted:I know how much you all love Ken Rockwell but my god this is some of his best work yet ugggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 07:02
|
|
|
Well the fluorescent light stuff is interesting. My no-touch voltage detector goes crazy around fluorescent lights, yet something with 240+volts has to be pretty close. I always thought it had something to do with photons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 08:02
|
|
|
spog posted:I must be getting old, cause I agree with about 70% of that article. But the "Garbage Covering the Pictures" part is dead-on, because gently caress that poo poo. I can actually remember what channel I've tuned to without needing the station's logo in the corner to remind me. And that's just the bugs; the promos for other shows on the bottom of the screen are even more annoying. HEY YOU BE SURE TO WATCH THIS CRAP THAT'S ON NEXT!! I want to watch the show that's on NOW, please stop ruining it. Thankfully most of this frustration is avoided by never watching cable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 11:04
|
|
|
"This was frame 39 on a 36-exposure roll of film. Digital doesn't even go to frame 39 or even the 37th frame; when you fill your card or your buffer, you're bonked. Worse, with digital, you pay for a 4GB card, but it only holds 3.8GB. What's up with that?" Reading his newer posts is morbidly fascinating; It's like staring into the abyss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 15:04
|
|
|
I'm absolutely convinced he's the photography world's equivalent of Fox News: saying whatever it takes to get the most viewers excited one way or the other so they'll keep coming back. In other words: a troll to behold.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 16:15
|
|
|
Interrupting Moss posted:I'm absolutely convinced he's the photography world's equivalent of Fox News: saying whatever it takes to get the most viewers excited one way or the other so they'll keep coming back. I think he deliberately has opinions that he knows will wind people up. In other words, he's not an idiot, he is a clever troll. Let's face it, he gets quoted a lot more than people with sensible/mainstream opinions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 16:24
|
|
|
dreggory posted:"This was frame 39 on a 36-exposure roll of film. Digital doesn't even go to frame 39 or even the 37th frame; when you fill your card or your buffer, you're bonked. Worse, with digital, you pay for a 4GB card, but it only holds 3.8GB. What's up with that?" What a loving idiot. If he really believes this poo poo he is insane. EDIT: Is this the guy who said Nikon made a one of a kind left hand camera for him or something like that? Whitezombi fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Jan 22, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 17:20
|
|
|
Sorry to break into the hate fest, but I just found 3 rolls of film, and it has expired to take out the N2000. I also found some prints I did in highschool, and they aren't that bad. I miss having darkroom access.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 17:35
|
|
|
For someone who claims to have worked in television and on HDTV in the NINETEEN EIGHTYS he's pretty loving clueless about how digital cable works. I wonder if he's got an onion tied to his belt. You know, it was the style at the time. In fact, I remember when I used to take the ferry to Shelbyville with K-ROCK, who in those days was called Keneith Vos Rockgrandly. Anyway, we had onions tied to our belts, because it was the style at the time, but you couldn't get nice white onions, on account of the war being on, so we had big yellow onions tied to our belts, because it was the style at the time. Back in those days, the ferry cost a nickel, which has pictures of bees on them. Give me five bees for a quarter you'd say. Anyway, where was I?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 17:57
|
|
|
Whitezombi posted:EDIT: Is this the guy who said Nikon made a one of a kind left hand camera for him or something like that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 19:08
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:Yes, and he also claimed that he had a custom elephant penis skin put on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 19:10
|
|
|
Interrupting Moss posted:As a testament to the man's madness, I did not immediately dismiss this as a joke. http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm#lefty His proof that the lefty elephant penis F100 is real is the fact that he wears his watch upside down, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 19:29
|
|
|
Oh my God.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 19:44
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm#lefty Holy loving  . K-Rock is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
http://consumerist.com/2010/01/another-reason-to-avoid-giant-megapixel-point-and-shoot-cameras.html I hope stuff like this gets more publicity for two reasons. First, the more people know about science, the better. Second, if enough people understand this kind of thing, there might be enough educated people to at least cause a hung jury when someone asks me why I got a used 8MP SLR instead of the 16MP pocket sized camera they're selling at Best Buy for the same price and I stab them in the eye with a pair of scissors. But seriously, it's a good article and explains the science in a very understandable way. Fists Up posted:I know how much you all love Ken Rockwell but my god this is some of his best work yet If he's trolling, it worked on me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2010 21:56
|
|
