|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
14 Hours Ago
|
| |
Given the significant cost of film stock and processing I honestly think film will just be a other fad that will pass it's sell by date in due course. There's no logic for it being a long term thing.
---------- Post added 04-18-24 at 02:44 PM ----------
Let's remind ourselves that Hasselblad could well have been in the toilet now were it not for a Chinese drone manufacturer.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
17 Hours Ago
|
| |
I think the market - a lot of which comprises an ageing demographic - for higher resolution cameras, if not cameras generally, is shrinking fast...there will always be a professional market and higher end hobbyists, but I've said elsewhere, I suspect that more than 90% of current photographic output is viewed on smartphone screens ( and a large chunk of that will originate from the same source), which begs the question, how broadly relevant are complicated and higher resolution cameras to the demographic that's coming up behind us?
And the big killer will be AI which continues to improve in leaps and bounds. Phone cameras will continue to improve and as far as I can see from the current high end crop, the big missing function is optical zoom...we've already got devices with 3-5x optical zoom capability but imagine, when the basic image already exists, what AI will be capable of in that respect in the future...longer optical zoom might not even be needed.
All of which just says the future is very much smartphone based except for the relatively small market I described above, and how sustainable is that without significant price increases to maintain margin?
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
1 Day Ago
|
| |
Does it have a filter ring? if it does then seriously what's the point in selling filters? There are hundreds of thousands out there floating around, mostly useless on digital cameras, to be had for pennies.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-30-2023, 03:25 PM
|
| |
I suspect that's probably not so true...I have a ton of cameras ranging from Pentax Q-sized sensors to APSC to full frame and lately full frame mirrorless and frankly, now that EVF tech is so good, the portability and generally lower weight penalty of mirrorless wins nearly every time for me.
And if course, as usual it's smartphones that are the problem, not just because their capabilities and resolution are constantly improving, but because that's where 99% of photos are ultimately viewed, so it's tempting to ask why bother with 'proper' cameras when all those megapixels are for nothing at the end of the day except that painfully small screen?
For most of us hobbyists it's pretty much for our own pleasure rather than anything else.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-10-2023, 05:10 AM
|
| |
This thread raises a few recurring issues that for me go to the heart of amateur photography and it's enjoyment (I specifically exclude professional requirements for obvious reasons).
I've owned, and still own, a ton of cameras of all types and formats and my own experience is that there's always a point in the endless search for IQ especially, when you have to stop and ask yourself what's the point here?
My first comment on moving to FF, apart from the obvious question of do you really need a lot of what FF offers compared to APSC or even M4/3, is are you going to be happy humping a camera around that's the size and weight of the average house brick, because that's the reality for most FF DSLRs.
Secondly, don't be constrained by a large legacy lens collection - and how many goddam lenses do you need anyway. Modern standards mean most amateurs can meet nearly all their needs with a single body and a couple of lenses (and maybe a couple of 'specials' that stay at home most of the time), so why not consider *gasp* rationalising and selling anything that isn't an out and out collectors item that you might want to keep. I'm in the process of doing just that - including selling an expensive FF I've just bought and hardly used - and I can tell you it's liberating. I know we can't all afford to do that but I wouldnt mind betting that a lot of GAS sufferers could sell just part of their collection and find themselves with the money to get into a completely new, stripped down system that does everything they need with much less hassle. I took the view that it was all water under the bridge and I would be a lot happier buying a smaller kit that all fitted into a large camera bag or backpack - but that's just me.
My point is, don't spend good money moving to a different format unless you have analysed your requirements carefully and are sure it's what you need. There are always better ways to spend your money 🤑
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-27-2023, 12:10 AM
|
| |
My comment was really aimed at the mention by someone of an 85mm lens option - that I can't see the point of if one is trying minimise weight - feet or a judicious crop will do the job much better. The same applies to some extent to a 35mm - I'd be looking at 28mm minimum personally but I'm not so hung up on that one.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-25-2023, 05:00 AM
|
| |
It also depends on what kind of trip it is. If it's a dedicated photography outing, well the three lens maximum advice still holds good but it doesn't matter if you take a few more just in case does it? But even then, you risk lumbering yourself with a heavy weight of kit and the drag of constant lens changing.
And a holiday is even worse. I've long since, even on exotic one-off trips, dumped all the DSLR hardware and taken just a small bit decent M4/3 mirrorless with its (decent) standard zoom plus perhaps one wide angle prime. That for me does everything and with today's M4/3 sensor resolution you'd be hard put most of the time to tell the difference in output IQ.
To me, dragging all that crap around just spoils the experience.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 III Monochrome
08-22-2023, 09:48 AM
|
| |
Your last comment absolutely hit the nail on the head for me. And keep the money you would have peed away on another camera body and use it to upgrade to FF instead where ISO and IQ issues will get sorted.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
08-27-2023, 12:17 AM
|
| |
So what if this is a "zombie thread"? Don't read it and don't comment - there are always people interested to read this stuff even if you aren't.
If it was a same old, same old that was cropping every six months then fine, but for a mod to threaten to bin a thread that was apparently last given a work out 9-10 years ago is frankly ridiculous. If you were trying to save server space then say so but I'm pretty sure a text-only thread isn't a burden in that way, so what's the actual issue??
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-26-2023, 02:16 AM
|
| |
My last film cameras were a Konica Autoreflex TC which I loved and have recently bought several variations of, and finally a Nikon FE ..my carry-about kit for photographic trips in the 80s/90s was an early Vivitar Series 1 70-210 (which was great but didn't get that much use), the usual Nikkor 50/1.8 and a Tamron 17mm which I loved. Sharp as a tack in the centre, and although soft in the corners much of the time, who cares at 17mm? I later dropped the Vivitar and the 50mm in favour of a Nikkor 55/3.5 macro, a stunningly good lens.
I personally don't see the point in humping around an 85mm or, to a lesser extent a 35mm, as I'm a great believer in getting up off my arse and walking closer to, or further away from, the subject...or in extreme cases use a good lens and sensor and crop.
And despite owning a ton of kit of all shapes and sizes, I've recently been drooling over the newest iteration (ok 2022!) of the OM Systems OM1...an M4/3 sensor that knocks spots off many an expensive DSLR, weather sealed , stacked sensor, 50mp (hand held!) and 80mp hi-res options and a raft of other great stuff. Given its size and weight and the great range of M4/3 glass, for me it's got to be the go-to light(er) weight travel option.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-25-2023, 05:10 AM
|
| |
Assuming he can find anyone dumb enough to buy it...
---------- Post added 08-25-23 at 05:13 AM ----------
I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole. It's one thing buying lenses with a few tiny marks or scratches for a few $$/€€/££ just to have some fun, and I mean A FEW!, but half the usual price for any lens with damage is a nonsense, and that one is seriously bolloxed.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
08-25-2023, 05:08 AM
|
| |
Q7 or QS-1 all day long - they have slightly larger sensors (and being backlit they punch above their weight anyway) than the Q and Q10. The optics in particular can be outstanding, especially if you get hold of a prime or the elusive 08 lens which is a stonker.
And frankly they are sufficiently cheap (08 lens excepted!) that if you decide you don't like it, resale is a breeze.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
08-16-2023, 10:31 PM
|
| |
I've never seen so much OCD on one thread....
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
08-16-2023, 04:12 AM
|
| |
I could not agree more. And I speak as someone who worked in IT management at senior level for 25 years and once looked after what was then the largest Mac estate in Europe.
There was once a time - and I'm harking back to the glory days of Quark Express - when Mac definitely had the edge as regards graphics and media software, but those days are long gone. People will pursue the Mac/PC argument all day but for me there are three basic issues (four of you include the obnoxious way that Apple operates) that keep me with Windows hardware.
(1) People like to pretend the transition from PC to Mac is painless..it's not, it's a medium PITA, not to mention having to repurchase all your software at considerable expense.
(2) You will get FAR MORE bang for your buck with PC hardware. Apple doesn't fundamentally use many components that are radically different, you just pay a lot more for them - peripherals included. Hipsters love to quite the design argument...really? Who cares what your computer looks like? Remember all those iPhones in the very early (and expensive!) days of wireless earbuds? Or the absence of a memory add-on socket to make you buy the more expensive model with extra storage? Very customer friendly.
(3) Apple's mission in life is to trap you in their software universe - once you're in and using their services it's not that easy to get out again.
And for the record I couldn't care less what people's thoughts are on these things; my views are born of extensive commercial experience.
And if you want to understand what I mean by my earlier comment about the obnoxious way Apple operates, I commend Walter Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs to you. Its an eye opening and excellent read and if you think much has changed since his heyday you're mistaken.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
08-14-2023, 04:18 AM
|
| |
Nah typo...theres like two extra digits in that price
---------- Post added 08-14-23 at 04:25 AM ----------
Same here...I bought a Konica Auto S2 recently for a very reasonable £30, even if it was just for spares. Listed as untested and I just put a bid on and forgot about it.
But I won and while the camera is in very decent condition, the shutter is cocked and won't fire. Now I get some people haven't run a film through a camera, or don't know even roughly what individual shutter speeds should sound like, but even a moron wants to cock the shutter and fire it when you put a camera in their hands so it's abundantly clearly these sellers know what they're doing.
For £30 I couldn't be bothered to return it and I'm sure I'll have fun unsticking it but when I put up feedback saying it's clear the seller knew the shutter was f*cked and to steer clear of them, they were not happy 😁😁😁. I even got a request asking me to retract the feedback? Seriously ?? In your dreams scammer...
---------- Post added 08-14-23 at 04:27 AM ----------
Why would you even own that stuff, never mind thinking someone wants to buy it 🤣🤣🤣
---------- Post added 08-14-23 at 04:30 AM ----------
Definitely re-covered I'd say...zoom in on the photo of the back and the poor "straight edge" knife cut is all too visible.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 III
08-14-2023, 04:33 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
07-27-2023, 12:40 PM
|
| |
Apart from the fact that quite a few old SLRs have bridge circuitry that compensates automatically, even without that, I believe that the practical difference is some not very significant fraction of a stop, which can either be compensated for by changing the ASA settings slightly or ignored because of the more forgiving nature of film, which makes these more expensive batteries with compensating circuitry in unnecessary in most cases.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-07-2022, 07:56 AM
|
| |
I hate EVFs with a passion. There's no substitute for a decent optical TTL viewfinder. None.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
06-16-2022, 04:21 AM
|
| |
Indubitably, unequivocally yes as far as I'm concerned and I'll happily explain why.
I've been taking photos for 50+ years and this (to me) incredibly annoying phenomenon has only been a thing for the last few years, especially since the new generation of Instagram/Lomography fans decided that buying cheap nasty plastic cameras, or spending 50 of whatever your local currency is on a prime lens for a £$€1000+ camera body were good ideas.
Now I wouldn't especially argue with the second one since it helps with the budget and gives new life to old otherwise redundant kit, but please e don't think you need an excuse to do it.
So that's the annoyance factor, exacerbated by an onslaught of social media postings on the subject.
The second factor is also about annoyance... According to traditional photographic wisdom, background - especially out of focus - features in one of two ways; either not at all (as in fill the frame with your subject), or as a contrast to an isolated subject sitting, for example, on a rule of thirds intersection, in which case the background should not be distracting.
It's my experience that people all too frequently go out of their way to feature a background that's (1) overwhelmingly disproportionately large, and (2) full of these dreadful, annoying and distracting 'bokeh balls' cos they're a thing innit.
Seriously people, unless your specialism is night-time urban photography, or recording winsome waifs in dappled woodland settings then please give it a rest. I for one couldn't care less about your balls. Indeed I would say that anyone trumpeting "look at the bokeh in my photo!" is as likely as not to be taking substandard photos with poorly considered composition. An out of focus background (to give it it's proper English description) has it's time, place and function but these days it's vastly overused and misunderstood in my opinion.
Rant over.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
06-17-2022, 12:56 AM
|
| |
I read an interesting quote on Adorama this morning as follows:
"Photographers can run out of creative juices due to their obsession with the quality of their gear and photos.".
.... I'll just leave that with you for now :)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
06-14-2022, 07:58 AM
|
| |
Probably one of those people like my wife, who insists on wrapping the cable around the plug as tightly as she can.
---------- Post added 06-14-22 at 08:01 AM ----------
You obviously missed the bit about "one of the largest markets in the world"....
|
|
Forum: General Photography
06-14-2022, 07:52 AM
|
| |
25-30% of hammer price is what the BUYER pays - the seller typically gets charged 15-20% as well. So the poor auction house is typically getting around 50% markup on the total sale fees for an auction.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
06-07-2022, 07:47 AM
|
| |
The 'quality' of your bokeh is neither here nor there - what you've done is allow it to overwhelm the shot by not filling the frame with your subject. Basic error.
---------- Post added 06-07-22 at 07:50 AM ----------
Name me a single great photographer who was interested in 'bokeh'?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-31-2022, 08:03 AM
|
| |
Last of the big spenders.:cool:
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-31-2022, 07:43 AM
|
| |
Why? Not to be too blunt about it, its about the image, not you. Nobody really cares who took it, or how, except that that person was in the right place at the right time, with the right vision to capture an image that makes someone want to look twice. The image is what people look at, not you.
Fact is 99.9% of images aren't like that. They're yet another version of the same tired old tourist shot, or someone's kids that only they are bothered about, or some flowers, birds, scenery etc.. of actually little or no artistic value whatsoever. Same old same old. I couldn't care less if my image was taken with my full frame or my tatty Samsung smartphone - if its an image that makes me, or someone, go 'Wow!' then thats all thats needed.
|
