Pages: « 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 »
 on: Today at 02:11:09 PM 
Started by KMRennie - Last post by AlterEgo
Nikon D810 Nikon 70-200 f4
Whilst trying to understand my camera settings better in order to ETTR more accurately

there are convenient and user friendly tools to be used to decide on how close you are getting to clipping in raw channels - you can use both in trial mode if it is a one time exercise for you




but certainly you then need to see how a specific raw converter of /your/ choice is handling the raws during the conversion (when you pull ETTR'd data back in whatever manner you want to)

 on: Today at 02:09:36 PM 
Started by peterv - Last post by eronald

Leica works together with Jenoptik. The M9 firmware is coming from Jenoptik, so I guess you may be right.

Yeah, I looked at an old  Leaf Aptus 22 back once, and that one was an interesting double-box concept which looked suitable for military use in dusty locations. The stuff which comes out of Japan on the other hand is usually designed for 100% humidity conditions.

As an engineer it's always interesting to decipher other engineer's handwriting ...


 on: Today at 02:08:01 PM 
Started by Theodoros - Last post by sgilbert
I'm pretty sure the delay is the result of chemtrails. 

 on: Today at 02:05:30 PM 
Started by eronald - Last post by Joe Towner
The markets where MF will rule is shifting with the higher resolution 35mm gear.  The places where MF still excel will not change, the places where folks are willing to pay for it will.

It's unfortunate that 35mm gear is accelerating faster than MF gear.  Imagine how pissed off this entire forum would be were it not for the Sony 50mp chip.

 on: Today at 01:59:53 PM 
Started by John Camp - Last post by John Camp
This is a riff on the discussion taking place in the thread called "4/3 vs Nikon APS-C."

I have both full frame and m4/3 systems (and a Sony RX100compact and a cell phone camera) and I've found that the handier the camera is, the more you tend to give up in terms of control.

But to limit the discussion to interchangeable lens cameras, I've found that discussion tends to revolve around four aspects of these various-sized cameras: physical size (dimensions and weight), lens speed, depth of field aspects and sensor qualities.

The advantages and disadvantages of physical size is pretty obvious to all of us, and I think is really a matter of personal preference, a balancing of all the different ways we may shoot as individuals. Your best system isn't mine, simply because we shoot in different ways and may have different subject interests.

It's figuring out the other aspects that's tough.

I would suggest (as I did in the earlier thread) that lens speed (at least in terms of a one-stop difference) is not as important as it was with film, because digital ISO abilities are so much better. In film, I really felt handicapped in terms of quality even shooting at ISO800. I think digital has a two- or three-stop advantage here, which means that an f4 lens may practically be as good as an f2.8 used to be.

Except for depth of field. Here there are two aspects. You have less depth of field control with a smaller sensor (like a m4/3 compared to FF) for any given lens speed. But is depth of field control really important in general purpose lenses? (This is an actual question of mine, not a rhetorical one.) How often do we want to limit depth of field in general shooting, and how much depth of field control do we practically have with f2.8 zoom lenses on even a FF camera? Isn't depth of field control really something you want to deal with in specific circumstances, for which an even faster, more specialized lens would be more effective? The practical effect of this question comes from the other thread, where somebody pointed out that depth of field with an m4/3 system's f2/8 is more like the equivalent of f5.6 of a full-frame system, while a FF's f4 is the f4 we're all accustomed to. But is depth of field really a matter of interest in choosing between f4 and f5.6-equivalent?

Then there are pixel questions. A lot of high quality cameras seem to be settling on offerings in the mid-20s (24-26mp.) The next Panny GX8 will have ~20mp. People have argued since the dawn of digital about the  storage capacity of larger vs. smaller pixels, and also about the printing abilities of different numbers of pixels. Is there really a discernible difference between ~20mp and ~25mp at common, fairly large (say full-page large format magazine) sizes? Do marginally larger individual pixel sizes make more difference than the camera's processing engines that produce the final image?

In the guitar world, some people obsess about the sounds produced by vintage, usually incredibly expensive (now) instruments like the '59 Les Paul and the older Strats and so on, but a friend of mine pointed out that given all the different skill levels, by the time you run the signal through a couple of stomp boxes and maybe a looper and out an amp, and given all the different acoustic qualities you might have in any given room, you're sometimes lucky you can tell that it's a guitar being played, much less a quarter-million-dollar 59 LP. Are the analogous qualities true of cameras? That by the time you finish running a scene through your personal technique (tripod, no tripod), the autofocus, the lens glass, the sensors, Lightroom, and finally the printer...does it really matter much whether it's an m4/3 or a Nikon D800?

 on: Today at 01:58:54 PM 
Started by Quentin - Last post by Norm Nicholson

I have been following your work with the Merrills since the beginning, and still use mine. I've never bonded with the A7, and mine sits with 3 Zeiss lenses unused. Would you care to compare the A7RIi with the Merrill?


 on: Today at 01:56:41 PM 
Started by sdwilsonsct - Last post by graeme
It's a cracking photo isn't it?

The devil in me wants to add 'Seasons Greetings' in the top right hand corner. ( In matching blood red of course ).

 on: Today at 01:51:15 PM 
Started by cortlander - Last post by hokuahi
For the fun of it, I called Epson sales. They were apologetic but said sorry, the rebate wouldn't apply to my situation (purchased June 30 from B&H). The person I spoke with gave  "...the printer just went on sale." as the reason for offering the rebate now, although checking the Epson store I don't find it listed.

 on: Today at 01:49:06 PM 
Started by Chairman Bill - Last post by Chairman Bill
Thanks for the positive comments

 on: Today at 01:47:45 PM 
Started by Chairman Bill - Last post by Chairman Bill
Certainly the viewpoints are often only really accessible from the train, so it is quite likely that there's not too many others photographing these views

Pages: « 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 »