The Chinese are coming

[eronald]

That sounds like a story worth telling over a beer!

BTW you didn't say whether she did it on purpose? 

Ray

I thought only "her" mother did such things

Edmund

[bcooter]

But when you talk about prety skintones,

Is it relatively right-out-the-box, or is it
That you had to dig into crazy settings
And run weeks of testings to
Finaly obtain the skintones ?

I find all digital to be scene dependent when it comes to skintones.

The most detailed my phase backs, the most global (and it a way harder to work my canon 1dx).

The Oly OMD, I find to be neg like, somewhat pastel and muted (but I have it set on standard. )

No I didn't dig through a lot of menus to hit colour but with both the pana and oly 4:3 I learned them both at once so it was a little confusing and they both have deep menus with the Pana being about twice as deep as the oly/.

But bottom line is I think if you took the oly set it at standard, shot you'd like it, but to each his own.

Understand, I didn't buy these little cameras to replace a RED or a 1dx, just like I didn't buy the 1dx to replace my phase and contax.  They all have there place.

But in regards to skintones, the only constant I ever see that is beautiful is that weird little leica M-8 with profoto strobes.  All skin tones with that combination look amazing (which is not what the camera was meant for).

Go figure.

I think colour is all very personal.

The original Canon 1ds I thought was pretty, after that they seemed to be less pretty, more orange.  All Nikon skintones give me fits to be point I haven't tried the d800 (guess I should but . . .).

My phase contax orignally had awful skintones, but c-1 improved and now they're pretty and I still think ccd's offer a deeper richer look.  (once again this is personal).

I do know that I went by a Leica store in London last week and the owner said he can't keep M9's in stock . . . period.  He bought a dozen when the 240 was announced and sold them in a day.

He said it was people wanted the full frame ccd so maybe some others feel the same.

The little 4:3 cameras shoot a good file and when I say film like I mean it's about the same detail and look of 35mm film.  Not over crazy detailed, just pretty . . . but that's my opinion.



IMO

BC

[TMARK]

That sounds like a story worth telling over a beer!

BTW you didn't say whether she did it on purpose? 

Ray

My mother had and still has a tendency to break cameras.  She was a PJ, shot for the Bay Guardian, LA Times, NY Times, UPI, AP, covered Watergate, Nixon's resignation, the Shah when he was in the US, long form documentary projects on mental health facilities in California etc.  She had Nikon F's, but destroyed them one way or another.  She ended up using Nikkormats and FM's because they were cheaper to replace.

In Malta she was shooting a summer fireworks festival and the reaction of Libyan refugees.  I lent her my FE2 for shooting at night, so she could set a 50mm at f2 and fire away.  After shooting, she sets camera on toilet.  Flushes toilet. Camera slides into bowel.  She drys it out and gives it back to me when she gets back, only admitting to the foul after Nippon in NYC tore it apart and found the water damage.

[TMARK]

The FM2 shutter is bullit proof.  It is loud and harsh, but to me its feels solid, like a tractor.  Not nice, but solid.  I always found the FM2 to be sharp as sharp can be. 

I had an FM and then replaced it with an FM2 later - both only for the higher synch. speeds they allowed than did the F or F2.

I disliked both cameras, thinking then far lower quality than the F and F2 and yes, they were lighter, but tinny with it. The shutters sounded very second-class and I always felt that both cheap bodies produced less sharp images. I don't think the backs held the film as flat. As bad, the later version disallowed the use of all of my non-AI'd Nikkors, reducing the useability of my armoury to just a couple of lenses.

Had they not had that synch. advantage I wouldn't have dreamed of buying them, and that trick about lens compatability wasn't known until the purchase had been made and I'd returned to Spain, by which time it would have meant another trip to the UK just to dump the devil.

Shows you how snappers' ideas and shared experiences differ!

Rob C

[bcooter]

The FM2 shutter is bullit proof.  It is loud and harsh, but to me its feels solid, like a tractor.  Not nice, but solid.  I always found the FM2 to be sharp as sharp can be. 

When I started I shot industrial, annual reports, etc.   Would crawl up oil rigs on the Texas Mexico border, go into steal mills in Mexico, shot on a movie for 4 months with rain towers.

I tried olympus om1s and 2s loved them but wore them out.  I had some used F2's didn't like them, they rattled all the time and went to fm's.  My FM's looked like they were dragged behind a car but always worked.

In water, in heat, covered in oil goo, they just worked and the shutters never blew out.  I had three and they were so bulletproof I only really had three so I could carry extra lenses.

Maybe the OMD reminds me of a small 35mm camera and that's probably why I like it. 

New digital dslrs look goofy to me, kind of like a cd player boom box that's meant to look like a future phone or something that I don't really get.

IMO

BC

[Stefan.Steib]

I am not sure what this has to do with medium format cameras and backs. It sounds like yet another very large, very expensive custom sensor for aerial and satellite photography, like ones that companies like Fairchild and Teledyne-Dalsa make. Do we know anything about the size of the sensor or its photosites?

Actually, scratch "expensive": so far it is just an attention-getting university press office blurb about a research prototype, so price is meaningless. Like the recent university PR puff piece suggesting that a new graphene sensor is 1000 times more sensitive than existing CMOS sensors, when in fact it is less sensitive.

P. S. Some 100MP+ Dalsa sensors actually available in products; up to 250MP:
http://www.aerial-survey-base.com/blog/zi-imaging-releases-digital-camera-system-dmc-ii-250/
http://www.intergraph.com/assets/pdf/coverage/GeoInformatics-5-2010-DMCII-page8-11.pdf
http://www.dcviews.com/press/dalsa-140.htm

BJL is that Intergraph the same one which did the workstations (long ago) ?
Looks like they are into Geosystems now. I can remember when we bought our first workstation from them, that was really cool at the time using dual pentium pros (V1).
Don´t ask about the price, I have decided to forget about how much we have sunk into this........... 

[bcooter]

Maybe the Chinese will give us retro, or how about a twin lens digital camera or a rangefinder 645?

Is it just me, or does it bother anyone else that our "professional" cameras look like the same black plastic hunks I see hanging around every tourists neck?

I honestly can't tell what camera any of the people I see walking down sunset, broadway, through Knightsbridge have.  a 5d looks like a 6d, 60 d 70 d (is there a 70 d?) and the same with Nikons until they get tiny, tiny or huge huge.

If there is one thing that is crazy awful about digital is the commonality of the cameras.

If I was Phase One, I'd be building Mamiya rangefinders and twinslens like there was no tomorrow?

Then again, I'm not Phase One.


IMO

BC

[TMARK]

The FM2 I still have went to subsaharan Africa, Eastern Europe, through Mojave, DC crack houses.  I had it CLA'd once, when the string that advances the aperture broke and the light seals were just too fargone.  I could still shoot it by stopping down to meter and shoot, and, in front of the Ku'Dam, outside, on the street, I took the mount apart and tied the string back together which sort of worked for a month or so.  Just bullet proof, simple, repairable.  I would not try this with a D800, or any digital for that matter.  Maybe the Leica M, maybe not.

Speaking of Leica, I might start a blog called "Strange Shit My Digital Leicas Do" detailing the odd, odd "quirks" of the M8 and M9.

When I started I shot industrial, annual reports, etc.   Would crawl up oil rigs on the Texas Mexico border, go into steal mills in Mexico, shot on a movie for 4 months with rain towers.

I tried olympus om1s and 2s loved them but wore them out.  I had some used F2's didn't like them, they rattled all the time and went to fm's.  My FM's looked like they were dragged behind a car but always worked.

In water, in heat, covered in oil goo, they just worked and the shutters never blew out.  I had three and they were so bulletproof I only really had three so I could carry extra lenses.

Maybe the OMD reminds me of a small 35mm camera and that's probably why I like it. 

New digital dslrs look goofy to me, kind of like a cd player boom box that's meant to look like a future phone or something that I don't really get.

IMO

BC

[bcooter]

Speaking of Leica, I might start a blog called "Strange Shit My Digital Leicas Do" detailing the odd, odd "quirks" of the M8 and M9.

I can add at least 20 things, thank god because at least they look and work like a camera not a iPhone,pod,pad.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Most things are made in China anyway. First we had made in Germany, later made in Japan and now made in China. I guess this is evolution.

Regarding cameras and stuff, I don't care where they are made, I don't care about the name, but I care a lot if they do what they are supposed to do.

Best regards
Erik

Maybe the Chinese will give us retro, or how about a twin lens digital camera or a rangefinder 645?

Is it just me, or does it bother anyone else that our "professional" cameras look like the same black plastic hunks I see hanging around every tourists neck?

I honestly can't tell what camera any of the people I see walking down sunset, broadway, through Knightsbridge have.  a 5d looks like a 6d, 60 d 70 d (is there a 70 d?) and the same with Nikons until they get tiny, tiny or huge huge.

If there is one thing that is crazy awful about digital is the commonality of the cameras.

If I was Phase One, I'd be building Mamiya rangefinders and twinslens like there was no tomorrow?

Then again, I'm not Phase One.


IMO

BC

[bcooter]

Hi, I don't care where they are made, I don't care about the name, but I care a lot if they do what they are supposed to do.

Best regards
Erik

But don't you like stuff that's different? 

When Terry Richardson shot that little toy Yashica it was different for the genre and caused a stir.  I liked that.

Now that he uses all kind of digitals,  it looks . . . .I dunno,  too normal.  http://hvc3.tumblr.com/post/365815707/terry-richardson-and-his-digital-cameras

Normal isn't that good.

IMO

BC

P.S.  Normal and TR really don't go together in the same sentence.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

To be more precise, right now I am playing with a Hasselblad 555 ELD and a P45+ which I like a lot. But, could I make he same pictures with a Holga digital, I may have gone with the Holga digital. Why I choose the Hasselblad 555ELD instead of a PhaseOne or a Hasselblad H-series? Because the lenses are dirt cheap! I bought a few lenses and found them good, but wanted to have a sensor making them justice.

I could have a Leica with a single lens for the same price, makes little sense to me. On the other hand I could also bought a Nikon D800E and a few Zeiss lenses for the same price. Now, I wanted to find out about MFD. I actually like MFD! Was it a sane decision to go Hasselblad V-series? Maybe or may be not! I don't actually know.

In essence, I think photography is about results. On the other hand, there is also joy. It's nice to work with good stuff.

An interesting question. In four weeks I will go to a place in the Dolomites I love, Drei Zinnen. Will I carry my Hasselblad 555 ELD with my P45+ or my Sony Alpha 99 with two lenses? I don't know! What I do know is that my RRS tripod and Arca Swiss D4 head will go with me. That is really right stuff! Ten years ago I made two visits, one with my Penatx 67 and one with my 135 equipment.

The shot I made with the Pentax 67 at that time happens to be my most popular image:

Best regards
Erik

But don't you like stuff that's different? 

When Terry Richardson shot that little toy Yashica it was different for the genre and caused a stir.  I liked that.

Now that he uses all kind of digitals,  it looks . . . .I dunno,  too normal.  http://hvc3.tumblr.com/post/365815707/terry-richardson-and-his-digital-cameras

Normal isn't that good.

IMO

BC

P.S.  Normal and TR really don't go together in the same sentence.

[TMARK]

Does falling in love count?

That's the problem.  If a Canon or Nikon exhibited 25% of the oddities of an M8/M9 they would all be in the trash. But not the Leica. 

[TMARK]

Its a bitch but worth it, as long as you have a backup.

I can add at least 20 things, thank god because at least they look and work like a camera not a iPhone,pod,pad.

[Rob C]

Maybe the Chinese will give us retro, or how about a twin lens digital camera or a rangefinder 645?

Is it just me, or does it bother anyone else that our "professional" cameras look like the same black plastic hunks I see hanging around every tourists neck?I honestly can't tell what camera any of the people I see walking down sunset, broadway, through Knightsbridge have.  a 5d looks like a 6d, 60 d 70 d (is there a 70 d?) and the same with Nikons until they get tiny, tiny or huge huge.

If there is one thing that is crazy awful about digital is the commonality of the cameras.

If I was Phase One, I'd be building Mamiya rangefinders and twinslens like there was no tomorrow?

Then again, I'm not Phase One.


IMO

BC

Cooter,

Yes, I do regret the lack of professional look or image that contemporary camera stuff displays. I definitely did enjoy being at work with the pair of 500 series cameras as well as with the F and F2 Photomic. It was a type of branding, I suppose, like driving your own Aston Martin instead of a Jaguar. Made you feel that you’d arrived, and what’s wrong with that when it took so many years of hard to buy into that stuff?

I didn’t buy an M Leica because I grew up with WYSIWYG and rangefinders were not that. The same fault kept me from the Mamiya 67 RF which seems to have had the best glass around. Okay, I write fault, but I understand that for others that’s an asset.

However, age comes into the equation too. Where carrying film ‘blads then wasn’t that bad, after a few years it would have become too much for me; I dislike carrying even the D700 around unless there’s a set reason for the effort. I’m also starting to believe that it isn’t only the years, but heat (climate) that makes it unpleasant carrying such stuff. In truth, I think heavy cameras are great, as long as you can drive to the location and will be using a tripod anyway…

M9 cameras in stock in London. If I were about to make another poor joke, I’d write that the reason is that dentists there make a helluva lot of moolah. So much, that it is a British thing nowadays that finding a dentist who’ll take you onto his books is pretty damned difficult! But could I have enjoyed a lifetime of other people’s bad breath? Is a Leica worth that?

;-)

Rob C

[fredjeang2]

James, thanks to share your experience
On the OM digital.
Highly apreciated.

TMark (gosh, i can't help to think
Of Mark Tucker with this pseudo)
The Fm2 shutter is bullet proof
But frankly very harsh and i'm with
Rob on that, it sounds cheap (but
Isn't). A part from that, i loved the fm2.

Everybody talks about the M, but I'm
Very surprised to hear very little regrets
On the R.
The digital back of the R delivered
Incredible imagery, that could still smoke
A lot of today's new equipment.
I would have loved Leica doing a real R digital
Instead of this S that looks like a dead-end road.

[ondebanks]

After shooting, she sets camera on toilet.  Flushes toilet. Camera slides into bowel.  She drys it out and gives it back to me when she gets back, only admitting to the foul after Nippon in NYC tore it apart and found the water damage.

Sounds absolutely excruciating! 

[Some typos are just amazingly apposite to the text they occur in!]

Ray

[TMARK]

The R was never big over here, nor was the Rollei 6008. Both excellent systems.

James, thanks to share your experience
On the OM digital.
Highly apreciated.

TMark (gosh, i can't help to think
Of Mark Tucker with this pseudo)
The Fm2 shutter is bullet proof
But frankly very harsh and i'm with
Rob on that, it sounds cheap (but
Isn't). A part from that, i loved the fm2.

Everybody talks about the M, but I'm
Very surprised to hear very little regrets
On the R.
The digital back of the R delivered
Incredible imagery, that could still smoke
A lot of today's new equipment.
I would have loved Leica doing a real R digital
Instead of this S that looks like a dead-end road.

[TMARK]

Freudian dyslexic slip!

Sounds absolutely excruciating! 

[Some typos are just amazingly apposite to the text they occur in!]

Ray

[Rob C]

Rob, don't knock the dentists, doctors and lawyers... Bless 'em, they keep the likes of Leica, Hasselblad, Leaf/Phase and Alpa in business. Without their support we'd all be stuck with the plastic fantastic.

Knock them Keith? I positvely envy them their fiscal muscle!

I'm delighted to score soon-to-be-doc and lawyer as granddaughters!

;-)

Rob C