Jump to content
IGNORED

ok, camera nuts...


Recommended Posts

yes, film is obsolete

 

now, what speaker is analogous to my Hasselblad 500 C/M ??

 

and what speaker is is analogous to my Nikon F3?? *which I don't shoot but you will still have to "pry it from my cold, dead fingers")

Link to comment

The Zone System - I think everyone with a camera should read it

 

 

it is a way to think about, and characterize, the Dynamic Range of a scene, as rendered on film or a sensor - it is needed (for one reason) because the eye has a DR that greatly exceeds that of any film or sensor, much less a print

 

 

Link to comment

I do think it is possible, but to use esldude's patented phrase it would be irrelevantware.

 

 

I keep over-exposing things with my Hasselblad (using a m43 camera as a light meter) so my relevant question now is which 120 roll print film has the greatest DR, and how many stops off am I...

Link to comment

Let me recommend a book.  Tho old, it is not at all dated:

https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9781468420395

 

As someone interested in organismal performance, I found this revelatory even tho it was not part of a core research interest (at least when I read it).  If you are on the biology (or robotics, or AI, etc.) faculty at Deep State Univ. it will serve you well.

 

 

Well back to HDR merging of exposure bracketed pics I took with my puny m43 sensor...

Link to comment

https://petapixel.com/2015/05/26/film-vs-digital-a-comparison-of-the-advantages-and-disadvantages/

 

13 for most film (Kodak) vs. 14 for most digital sensors; D850 is likely at 15

 

OTOH, grain in film is more 'euphonic' than digital noise...

 

the human eye can have about 26 stops of DR, depending upon how measured & what NI tricks are allowed...

 

there is a quantum limit to imaging devices, no matter what they are - retinas, film or digital but as you approach that for biological organisms you begin to see tricks applied

Link to comment
5 hours ago, daverich4 said:

 

If your camera is made by Panasonic, those lenses are licensed from Leica, not made by them. I have the 12-60 “Leica” lens for my GX8 but it’s nowhere close in price or image quality compared to an actual Leica lens. 

 

that is why I put Leica in italics above - AFAIK, the lenses are designed by Leica, manf. by Panny, and then checked by a Leica team inside the factory

 

if you have any lens test data, or side by side imaging comparisons on L vs. P-L lenses, I'd be interested in seeing it

Link to comment

Yes, I know about the replace only thing - one factor keeping Panasonic from being a viable replacement for a pro co. like Nicanon.

 

I like m43 as it is a LOT smaller & lighter, so I am more likely to carry it with me and consequently get certain landscape shots.

 

I still have the Hassy film camera (mostly just to hear the mirror thunk, which I find very euphonic) and recently spent a kilobuck to get it CLA'd.

 

I also kept some Nikon stuff, mostly old MF lenses and 2-3 bodies - micro lenses, and the famed "nice old fashioned glow" of bokeh from the 50/1.2 and 45/1.4

 

I do think the PL 12-60 is a good replacement for the 24-70 Nikkor, and some other adv. amateurs have also sold their Nikons.  One is a  friend and colleague whom I follow in photographic matters - via the "you first principle."  For example, I let him buy the Series 1 Nikon gear then watched as he dumped it after Nikon dumped the system - many $$$ down the rat hole.

Link to comment

sadly, I made a typo - it is the 35/1.4 MF Nikkor

 

https://www.casualphotophile.com/2017/01/16/nikon-nikkor-35mm-f1-4-the-fastest-35mm-nikon-lens-ever/

 

 

the Micro Nikkors I kept are MF 55mm - one compensating & one not:

 

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55256540

 

 

I also have a kit zoom 24-85 AF-S, a screw drive 100mm micro, pre-Ai 24mm, and 2-3 50mm lenses.  I have the 80-400 AF-S tele zoom also, but will try to sell it and get the 100-400 (200-800mm equiv.) Panny-Leica.

 

Link to comment

both negative posts above relate to Leica being a small manf.  - once you leave Mechano-land and move into the world of electronics, big co.s are able to deploy teams o engineers to create fast focus motors (not to mention CAE optical designs)

 

both Zeiss & Leica have teamed up with large co.s to help address this

 

the same thing applies to cars: Porsche got along for several decades by generating income for their engineering staff to design for other car co.s - only about half the income of P AG was from the car division, with the rest from the design firm staff

 

Today, large co.s in Japan are eating away VWAG, MD, and even BMW who used to won the luxury market - but what is a luxury car today?

Link to comment

one issue w.r.to lens 'quality' is that people often focus on a single factor - sharpness

 

today, people expect super sharpness corner to corner; in ye olden daze only center sharpness was the ... ah... focus

 

but many other factors are involved, including chromatic aberration, contrast & etc.  Leica lenses are said to have xlnt. contrast

 

there is also bokeh and other aspects of 'rendering' (the reason I kept my old MF Nikkors, and covet a 'feather bokeh' Olympus portrait lens - despite the fact that all my female friends are too old to be subjects for one...)

 

Finally, there is the use of the lens in the field - nano-coating is a key factor for reduction in flare, as was multi-coating soe years ago

 

then there is the 'flocking' inside the lens - IIRC, the later Zeiss/Hassy lenses (maybe the CF series?) had an upgraded flocking to reduce flare from diffuse sunlight (not just a beam in the field of view) - this is something that would apply for outdoors use, not indoors

Link to comment

the new small Hassy is getting news & reviews all over the internet

 

That said, I just got back from some pic-taking adjacent to a lava flow and only took my m43 gear...  also had to listen to crummy Subaru car stereo on the trip.

Link to comment

There are a lot of parallels between cameras and HiFi sound...

 

both are distance sensory systems & use a fair degree of neural processing, require amplification...

 

both technologies have undergone a rapid change, approximating a step function, from digital techniques

 

both tend to be hobbies but both have a pro component

 

 

Link to comment

True, but what about all the talk I see about micro-contrast?

 

It never seems to be described, much less defined...  is it crazy talk?

 

But I won't argue against your point, as that's the only possible example I can think of.

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, charlesphoto said:

Eyes and ears are different in their sensitivities - but we all know that, don't we? ...

 

 

No, I don't know that.

 

First, is the issue of how different sensory modalities can even be compared.

 

Second, one valid answer is that one could compare how close they come (how close they have evolved) to a perfect sensor that is limited only by physics, no matter how constructed.

 

The human ear is so close that it is noise limited (by air molecules bouncing off the ear drum - according to some older research).

 

The human eye is also very close to a perfect quantum device (IIRC, I posted a cite to Albert Rose's book above or in another thread).  He considered film cameras, video cameras and the vertebrate eye, comparing them all as only a Bell labs research scientist could do.

 

So, this means they are quite close in sensitivity, using evolution to a limit of the physical universe as a metric.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...