Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Leica Buys Sinar  (Read 19491 times)

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Leica Buys Sinar (Pure speculation, but...)
« Reply #40 on: November 28, 2013, 09:52:00 am »

Hi BC,

I tought you use live view on the Panasonic and even feel that EVF is great?


snip


Don't you think LV makes life easier?

Best regard
Erik


Uh, the live view I've used on the mirrorless cameras is the evf, but don't have much choice.

Probably LV would make a technical camera easier, though it's funny, the same people that love optical viewfinders and hate evf, also want live view.  

Don't get it, other than I think everyone is a traditionalist unless the old ways don't work, then they love new technology.

I probably am the same, as I thought I'd never use an evf, then used the RED's bomb, got use to it, then the Panasonic gh3's got use to it, then  . . .

But why you can't get an electronic view from ccd sensors?  

CCD video cameras in analog and digital had it forever.

It's interesting though that my leica m8 and the olympus em-5 have virtually the same level of detail.  It's almost impossible to say one is much if any better than the other, except in the depth of the file.

The m8 file is much more interesting.  I can make a cmos file look good, make it have depth, but it never is as deep as a ccd file in my work.

In the same subject when I recently tested a d800 I liked the camera, wasn't that wild about the color, though can work it, but found that any lens that wasn't the newer models with nano coating didn't hold up as well as my old Contax and p30+.  With the new lenses it was a dead match in detail, except I don't like the character of the newer Nikon lenses, but that's all down to personal taste.

What I find interesting is my contax and p30+ are 7 or 8 years old and it took dslrs that long to get to the same level of detail, though I still don't think the file has the same depth. 

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: November 28, 2013, 11:10:23 am by bcooter »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica Buys Sinar (Pure speculation, but...)
« Reply #41 on: November 28, 2013, 03:16:22 pm »

Hi BC,

That has to do with type of CCD used. I got the impression that motion cameras and small sensor cameras use line transfer CCDs, for each line of sensor pixels there is line for buffer cells, so only half of the sensor area is used for making the image and the other half to transfer the image. The other issue may be heat build up.

CMOS is much more flexible, as you can access any pixel by raw and column.

The third factor is that many sensors use massively parallell converters, a 24 MP Sony sensor has about 6000 ADCs, so each ADC handles just 4000 pixels, allowing long conversion times. If you have a 24 MP CCD-sensor with say 6 external ADCs, each of those would need to handle 4 million pixels. So a raw conversion on a a Sony sensor is 1000 times longer than on said 24MP sensor with 6 ADCs.

Regarding EVF contra OVF, I don't know. I have both. Sony Alpha 900 has OVF, Hasselblad 555 ELD has OVF, Sony Alpha 99 has EVF. EVF make focusing on static objects easy. Sony Alpha VF image is large and bright but not easy to focus. Had a few iterations with the Hasselblad viewfinders, the PM5 I have works best for me. I have also a Pentax 67, that viewfinder reminds me of a black hole.

I do think that future belongs to EVF. It is just a simple and logical solution which happen to come at a low price. In the long run it will win.

Best regards
Erik



Uh, the live view I've used on the mirrorless cameras is the evf, but don't have much choice.

But why you can't get an electronic view from ccd sensors?  


« Last Edit: November 28, 2013, 03:26:07 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica Buys Sinar (Pure speculation, but...)
« Reply #42 on: November 28, 2013, 03:54:17 pm »

Hi BC,

From where I stand, I guess that it is more about the colour filters (CGA) on the sensor than about silicon. Both older Phase One backs at Leica m8/M9/ME are using Kodak Sensor with Kodak CGAs. Later generation Phase One backs use Dalsa designs, with Dalsa CGAs. Doug Peterson says most consumers prefer Dalsa color rendition to Kodak color rendition.

I am a landscape shooter. Personally I can see little difference between my P45+ and my Sony Alpha 99. The P45+ almost always wins on detail, but I cannot really say which is which on print or screen.

Best regards
Erik



Uh, the live view I've used on the mirrorless cameras is the evf, but don't have much choice.

hat my leica m8 and the olympus em-5 have virtually the same level of detail.  It's almost impossible to say one is much if any better than the other, except in the depth of the file.

The m8 file is much more interesting.  I can make a cmos file look good, make it have depth, but it never is as deep as a ccd file in my work.

In the same subject when I recently tested a d800 I liked the camera, wasn't that wild about the color, though can work it, but found that any lens that wasn't the newer models with nano coating didn't hold up as well as my old Contax and p30+.  With the new lenses it was a dead match in detail, except I don't like the character of the newer Nikon lenses, but that's all down to personal taste.

What I find interesting is my contax and p30+ are 7 or 8 years old and it took dslrs that long to get to the same level of detail, though I still don't think the file has the same depth. 

IMO

BC
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849
Re: Leica Buys Sinar (Pure speculation, but...)
« Reply #43 on: November 28, 2013, 09:28:02 pm »

Hi BC,

From where I stand, I guess that it is more about the colour filters (CGA) on the sensor than about silicon. Both older Phase One backs at Leica m8/M9/ME are using Kodak Sensor with Kodak CGAs. Later generation Phase One backs use Dalsa designs, with Dalsa CGAs. Doug Peterson says most consumers prefer Dalsa color rendition to Kodak color rendition.

I am a landscape shooter. Personally I can see little difference between my P45+ and my Sony Alpha 99. The P45+ almost always wins on detail, but I cannot really say which is which on print or screen.

Best regards
Erik




Erik also one has to think about system resolution. You use the P45+ back on a Hasselblad CF camera and lenses which is not the ideal setup for landscape. You should try that back with a tech camera and schneider or rodenstock lenses made for digital. It is a significant difference. I have downloaded several of the P45+ raw files from your setup that you have posted and they have a softness at 100% that tells me that the back is capable of more. The file size is there obviously but the resolution is lacking a bit.

Regarding the Kodak vs Dalsa I have used medium format digital cameras with both and I personally prefer the Dalsa but either can be manipulated quite a bit in post. The Dalsa file handles the highlights better though and are easier to recover, both have excellent DR but the Dalsa might have .5 or 1 stop better DR.  

I played with some Leica S files and honestly did not find them that much different than the 645D files besides the better performance of the leica glass.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica Buys Sinar (Pure speculation, but...)
« Reply #44 on: November 29, 2013, 12:04:52 am »

Ken,

Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately I don't see me testing my P45+ on a tech camera. Getting into Hassy and P45+ was a significant stretch on my economy.

My latest comment was more related to color than detail. I am pretty much aware that modern lenses are better than the Zeiss lenses. But I find that prints are much more forgiving for lack of sharpness than actual pixels view.

I got a couple of images from Marc McCalmont that illustrate the difference in sharpness between his IQ180 with Rodenstock HR (left) and his Nikon D800E (right), really impressive:

 http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Images/MFMythsReality/McCalmont_upsize.jpg (full size)



Best regards
Erik





Erik also one has to think about system resolution. You use the P45+ back on a Hasselblad CF camera and lenses which is not the ideal setup for landscape. You should try that back with a tech camera and schneider or rodenstock lenses made for digital. It is a significant difference. I have downloaded several of the P45+ raw files from your setup that you have posted and they have a softness at 100% that tells me that the back is capable of more. The file size is there obviously but the resolution is lacking a bit.

Regarding the Kodak vs Dalsa I have used medium format digital cameras with both and I personally prefer the Dalsa but either can be manipulated quite a bit in post. The Dalsa  
« Last Edit: November 29, 2013, 01:58:27 am by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849
Re: Leica Buys Sinar (Pure speculation, but...)
« Reply #45 on: November 29, 2013, 06:19:02 am »

Ken,

Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately I don't see me testing my P45+ on a tech camera. Getting into Hassy and P45+ was a significant stretch on my economy.

My latest comment was more related to color than detail. I am pretty much aware that modern lenses are better than the Zeiss lenses. But I find that prints are much more forgiving for lack of sharpness than actual pixels view.

I got a couple of images from Marc McCalmont that illustrate the difference in sharpness between his IQ180 with Rodenstock HR (left) and his Nikon D800E (right), really impressive:

 http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Images/MFMythsReality/McCalmont_upsize.jpg (full size)



Best regards
Erik






Yeah, that is a nice comparison, you can see a huge difference and it is a macro shot where the smaller format D800 would have an edge due to much larger depth of field. On a distant landscape at longer distances and/or infinity the difference should be even greater.

I played with the Leica S and a few lenses and the system is superb but the sensor itself is no better than the one in the Nikon or the 645D. The lenses are better so the system resolution is a touch higher but not a huge difference. The Leica S would be awesome with a 50-60 mp sensor with a touch more DR. It is a great body looking for a sensor.
Logged

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2017
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #46 on: November 29, 2013, 03:34:30 pm »

The file is upsized to meet the IQ180, so it falling apart is expected.  How about the P45 vs D800E (39vs36mp is closer) using same Rod HR lens?
Thant would make more sense, no? Otherwise this says that if you upsize a file, you will lose in comparison?
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #47 on: November 29, 2013, 03:38:42 pm »

The file is upsized to meet the IQ180, so it falling apart is expected.  How about the P45 vs D800E (39vs36mp is closer) using same Rod HR lens?
Thant would make more sense, no? Otherwise this says that if you upsize a file, you will lose in comparison?

I agree that a like to like MP comparison would be more appropriate -and in the context here useful.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

EricWHiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2639
    • Rolleiflex USA
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #48 on: November 29, 2013, 03:47:26 pm »

I've done a bunch of tests between d800E and AFi-ii 12.   Where the D800E fails is in the color information, but it does hold up well with luminosity detail. For flowers and things like that, you'll see a lot flatter image with D800E.   But as has been pointed out in other recent threads, there are a lot of reasons to choose a camera besides the sensor, or a chart or test or theoretical conjecture.
Logged
Rolleiflex USA

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #49 on: November 29, 2013, 05:01:44 pm »

Hi,

The reason you buy a high res back is that it is a high res back. The pair of images illustrate what you get for your 50 k$US (or so), this is also the difference you would see if you printed very large and looked close side by side.

The samples I show orignate from Marc McCalmont, and he used the best lens he could find for his Nikon D800E a Leica lens in a Leitax mount.

I was really responding to "Ken R", who in general seems to be of the opinion that low end MFDBs don't make a lot of sense as they are evenly matched with Nikon D800/D800E and probably the Sony A7r at a much lower price. Ken also says that my Hasselblad V & P45+ images don't make the P45+ justice as the old Zeiss lenses are not really good enough. That has also been stated by Doug Peterson, who also indicated that although the Zeiss lenses are nice the more modern designs from Phase One are significantly sharper, and I have little doubt that is the case.

Best regards
Erik




The file is upsized to meet the IQ180, so it falling apart is expected.  How about the P45 vs D800E (39vs36mp is closer) using same Rod HR lens?
Thant would make more sense, no? Otherwise this says that if you upsize a file, you will lose in comparison?
« Last Edit: November 29, 2013, 05:05:03 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2017
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #50 on: November 29, 2013, 05:25:13 pm »

I think placing the D800 on rails for use with the same lens and a good uprez will be much closer...I think. The grain in that file doesn't coincide with the info I have in mind.
But as you note, lenses can make all the difference, and sharpest Leica he found, not sure which it is on the Leitax mount, hope Ken gets some use out of.
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #51 on: November 29, 2013, 06:42:15 pm »

Doug Peterson, who also indicated that although the Zeiss lenses are nice the more modern designs from Phase One are significantly sharper, and I have little doubt that is the case.



I don't care that much about micro detail, but I'll take Doug up on any bet how the Zeiss  Contax lenses compare to any Phase One lens.

BC
Logged

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #52 on: November 29, 2013, 07:28:04 pm »

I don't care that much about micro detail, but I'll take Doug up on any bet how the Zeiss  Contax lenses compare to any Phase One lens.

Zeiss Contax lenses were all very good.

But as long as I get to pick the lenses I'll take the bet.

Phase 150D or Schneider 110LS shot near wide open on a high res back (e.g. 60mp) will show a difference compared to the Contax equivalents. Other lenses like the 35D are less likely to show such an improvement.

Mind you this difference may be entirely unimportant to many styles of image making and for many output purposes. For instance the 150D really excels at corner sharpness wide open, but in a portrait or fashion shot the corners may not have any content which you want to render sharply.

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #53 on: November 29, 2013, 11:06:15 pm »

Hell of a photo Cooter!

Maybe Leica has too much money and Sinar doesn´t have enough... how did that happen?
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #54 on: November 30, 2013, 01:23:54 am »

Hi,

Something that should be kept in mind is that absolute focus is seldom achieved, and it is only possible over a single plane. So, most part of most picture will be a bit out of focus. Rendition of out of focus areas is thus very important.

I am mostly a 'landscape' shooter. Landscape is a wide field but in many cases landscape shooting involves distant areas often involving tiny detail, like tree tops, that are very unforgiving.

I have five of the Sonnar lenses, 40/4, 50/4, 50/2.8, 120/4 and 150/4. Of the five I would say that the 150/4 is clearly the best one with the 40/4 being tricky.

Best regards
Erik

Zeiss Contax lenses were all very good.

But as long as I get to pick the lenses I'll take the bet.

Phase 150D or Schneider 110LS shot near wide open on a high res back (e.g. 60mp) will show a difference compared to the Contax equivalents. Other lenses like the 35D are less likely to show such an improvement.

Mind you this difference may be entirely unimportant to many styles of image making and for many output purposes. For instance the 150D really excels at corner sharpness wide open, but in a portrait or fashion shot the corners may not have any content which you want to render sharply.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #55 on: November 30, 2013, 05:17:00 am »

Zeiss Contax lenses were all very good.

But as long as I get to pick the lenses I'll take the bet.

Phase 150D or Schneider 110LS shot near wide open on a high res back (e.g. 60mp) will show a difference compared to the Contax equivalents. Other lenses like the 35D are less likely to show such an improvement.

Mind you this difference may be entirely unimportant to many styles of image making and for many output purposes. For instance the 150D really excels at corner sharpness wide open, but in a portrait or fashion shot the corners may not have any content which you want to render sharply.


OK,

I've now reduced myself to the level of a pixel staring crazy.  If I start shooting brick walls of fences, someone call the guys with white jackets and sleepy time hypos.

Anyway, these are real world samples, shot late at night. with a Contax and a Ziess 140mm lens on a p30+

A 7 year old back, a 9 year old camera and lens that was designed 15 years ago which was designed for film, not digital before anyone dreamed of a 30mpx back.

Phase had no imput to contax, contax obviously has no input to anyone anymore, my backs and cameras have never been mated, shimmed, examined or designed solely for each other.

Without editorial comment here are the results.

They were shot handheld, 1/90th of a second, with profoto acutes also handheld.

They were shot fast, probably 30 to 40 frames and on to the next.

For processing the sliders have been moved to add slight softness, not to present sharpening or over-sharpening.

Reduced full frame Full body Length Image


100% screen shot (open image in new window for detail)



Reduced full frame head and shoulders horizontal, more softness added with then noise sliders


100%  screen shot (open image in new window for detail)


Anymore sharpness than this and we're not talking about a photograph, we're talking about a science project.

My point is not negative towards phase, because obviously equipment this old and this viable is a testament to Contax, Zeiss and Phase.

My point is after so many years , lens sharpness hasn't improved, camera usability hasn't improved, if anything it's less useable with stationary prisms.

I haven't shot a df+ or a new iQ series back, except fooling around in a camera store and though they are newer, nothing compels me to ebay what I use today and go to something else.

In fact the only medium format I would add at this point would be a Leica S2 because it works well with my contax lenses, used sells for 10 grand and though the tethering on the S2 is limited, for non tethering work it would be worth 10 grand for the form factor and lcd and honestly what else would I gain with another system?

_______________

But here's the bet.

I'll pick the studio and talent.  My producer/stylist and  partner will cast and wardrobe we'll bring in top level hair and makeup because if we're going to shoot a photograph, might as well produce something worth showing.

Then as a bonus we'll go on location, take some small tungsten and shoot the same comparisons in low light, using the tungsten for keys and accents.

You can use my contax for an hour then your DF and tell me honestly at the end of the session which camera you find more enjoyable.

In post processing you tell me what sensor works better under these conditions.

The bet, My p30+ against your IQ back.  Well let's make it the cash value because on the very small chance I'd lose I'd wouldn't want to give up my p30+.

Sound good?

BC
« Last Edit: November 30, 2013, 05:25:34 am by bcooter »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #56 on: November 30, 2013, 05:56:10 am »

Hi BC,

I will not argue, I have a great respect for your view and your photography, but there is an another vision.

My vision is that a lens should reproduce the subject as faithfully as possible, that is for me the definition of an ideal lens. The lens should neither add nor subtract.

I can see that smoothness is important for the kind of shooting you do, but many of us don't earn our living by shooting stylished ladies and gentlemen for living. Personally I am mostly shooting landscape as a pastime (earning my income in reactor physics). Some people shoot architecture or food. Needs are different.

Best regards
Erik


[quoute]
Anymore sharpness than this and we're not talking about a photograph, we're talking about a science project.
[/quoute]
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

MrSmith

  • Guest
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #57 on: November 30, 2013, 05:57:51 am »

Nice. Looks like provia with an 81a
 ;)
Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #58 on: November 30, 2013, 02:42:37 pm »


I can see that smoothness is important for the kind of shooting you do, but many of us don't earn our living by shooting stylished ladies and gentlemen for living. Personally I am mostly shooting landscape as a pastime (earning my income in reactor physics). Some people shoot architecture or food. Needs are different.

Best regards
Erik




I agree that everyone not only has different expectations and sees different things.

The only point I was trying to make is compared to the contax zeiss the phase (non leaf shutter lenses) are 4 times the price and I'd love to see even equal the performance.

The Phase 80mm is a 2.8 the Contax Zeiss f2.0, which makes a big difference.

The Phase 150 is $3,490 the Contax under a thousand.

Then there is the ergonomics.  It takes any photographer about 10 seconds to get use to a Contax with f stops on the lens and a shutter dial. You can swap finders from prism to waist level  and the contax is smooth and substantial.

After 15 years you expect a leap forward and it's not just the Phase mamiya, dslrs have gone the same route of dials and menus to replace analog functions.

Shoot a contax 80mm close up hand held at 1.30th of a second and you'll know what I mean.

It's the same thing with those little m43 cameras I use for video and stills.   Take the olympus em-5 and use an olympus lens.  It's sharp (over sharp for me) medium fast though not crazy fast though autofocuses immediatley and is easy to use.

Though put a lecia or Voigt manual lens on it with a f stop ring and the camera transforms into analog, shoots like analog, looks like film.  Sometimes I think we're answering questions that nobody is asking.

IMO

BC

P.S.  Once again this isn't a dig a any company and obviously contax is gone, gone, though the camera still live on.

What I'm saying is unless there is  a real leap, something you can't do without or have to have to make a certain image, there is no reason to change.

If I needed leaf shutters, I'd look at the DF, well maybe, but I don't need any sync above 250 and can overpower the sun easily with a contax and 2400 watts.





« Last Edit: November 30, 2013, 03:10:59 pm by bcooter »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica Buys Sinar
« Reply #59 on: November 30, 2013, 03:33:54 pm »

Hi,

The reason I choose the Hasselblad V for my P45+ were the Zeiss lenses. Not because they are good but because they are affordable and pretty good. I started with a Sonnar 150/4, which was a very good lens. It cost me something like 400$, one fifth of the zooms I use on my Sony's but it matches the Sony zooms in performance, on a DSLR. I felt that if could fit an MF equipment inside a budget of 100kSEK (about 150 k$USD) it would be OK, so the low price of used Zeiss lenses was a major attraction.

My experience of the Zeiss lenses is mixed. Knowing them takes some testing and also learning from mistakes.

I like shooting with the stuff, it's not fast but a nice experience.

Rationally, I feel the Sony is the better equipment. There is one area where Hasselblad/Zeiss/P45+ wins at that is resolution.

DR? Sony wins!
Bokeh? Sony wins!
Sharpness? P45+ wins!
Color? Don't know1 If you like yellowish greens P45+ wins, if you like subtle colours Sony wins.


Why I like to work with the 555 ELD/P45+? I don't know! Perhaps it is because it is well made without being perfect.

I normally walk with the Hasselblad 555ELD and five lenses plus a Sony Alpha 99 and two big zooms. Add to that an RRS Versa 3 tripod and an Arca Swiss 4D head. If I need to cut wave, there is no discussion the Sony comes with me and that is the Hassy that stays home! Why? Because the Sony can handle everything!


Best regards
Erik



I agree that everyone not only has different expectations and sees different things.

The only point I was trying to make is compared to the contax zeiss the phase (non leaf shutter lenses) are 4 times the price and I'd love to see even equal the performance.

The Phase 80mm is a 2.8 the Contax Zeiss f2.0, which makes a big difference.

The Phase 150 is $3,490 the Contax under a thousand.

Then there is the ergonomics.  It takes any photographer about 10 seconds to get use to a Contax with f stops on the lens and a shutter dial. You can swap finders from prism to waist level  and the contax is smooth and substantial.

After 15 years you expect a leap forward and it's not just the Phase mamiya, dslrs have gone the same route of dials and menus to replace analog functions.

Shoot a contax 80mm close up hand held at 1.30th of a second and you'll know what I mean.

It's the same thing with those little m43 cameras I use for video and stills.   Take the olympus em-5 and use an olympus lens.  It's sharp (over sharp for me) medium fast though not crazy fast though autofocuses immediatley and is easy to use.

Though put a lecia or Voigt manual lens on it with a f stop ring and the camera transforms into analog, shoots like analog, looks like film.  Sometimes I think we're answering questions that nobody is asking.

IMO

BC
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up