View Full Version : I want this camera!!
The Vinyl Adventure
17-06-2009, 22:17
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusep1/
really badly!
Dave Cawley
17-06-2009, 22:22
I'm about to sell a D200 and 17-55 f2.8 for peanuts?
Dave
The Vinyl Adventure
17-06-2009, 22:32
is that an offer?
im all good for nikon my main camera is the one my little avatar has, but cheers anyway
i used to shoot with a d300 and the 17-55 2.8 i used to love that lens and even now 6 months on still find my 24-70 a little short on the tele end... it is made up for by the wider end though
its the size of the olympus in combination with the larger sensor... i can even put my leica and voightlander m/ltm lens on with an adapter!!
The Vinyl Adventure
17-06-2009, 22:33
why do you think you will be selling it so cheep?
you should still get £900-£1000 for that combo i would have thought!
StanleyB
17-06-2009, 23:22
I still prefer the Lumix range. Mind you, I nearly choked on the price of the FZ50 external flash, the DMW-FL500.
The Vinyl Adventure
18-06-2009, 10:12
i have me a lumix lx3
if you want a flash for any digital hybrid the best way to do it is get an old manual flash
i use a nikon sb-20 on all my old manual cameras and on all the digitals that have 1 or more flash pins on the shoe
you only need the centre pin to fire the flash anyway so you can unscrew the bottom part of the sb-20 and remove all but the centre pin! the sb-20 is also iso(somthing) compliant so it wont blow up your digi with a high voltage return(? im a bit hazy on this but i know this model is safe with digis) it also has an auto mode so if you dont know how to set a flash manually you can use that!
oh and you can pick them up mint for £20... how much is the fl500? £150? £250? i cant remember.. a lot though as you say
StanleyB
19-06-2009, 21:16
The FL500 cost £499. Got it in the end together with a BOWER ring flash this week.
I might buy the IXOS 100 for my son for him to take on holiday. Hi sister refuses to lend him her G9 (well I think it is a G9 I got her). Good camera, but it is costing me a fortune in Lithium batteries.
Stan
niklasthedolphin
19-06-2009, 21:33
I'll keep my K20D.
But the new Oly.... really looks charming like the new Fiat 500.
And then you can get it in pink.
Wauw.
"dolph"
The Vinyl Adventure
20-06-2009, 09:21
if that had managed to sqeeze a optical vf on to it it wold be almost perfect
The Vinyl Adventure
20-06-2009, 09:23
my missis keeps jabbing me with her elbow every time we see a fiat 500 like im just going to pull £8k out my pocket and say "get it in a nice colour wont you dear"
niklasthedolphin
20-06-2009, 09:35
my missis keeps jabbing me with her elbow every time we see a fiat 500 like im just going to pull £8k out my pocket and say "get it in a nice colour wont you dear"
You can fit the range VF in the hotshoe on the Oly....
The K20D has one of the very best optical VF's on the market today.
If it ends up like your missis wants it to, make sure she get's the Abarth version.
:smoking:
"dolph"
Haselsh1
24-06-2009, 08:15
I love the Fiat 500 especially the retro interior...!
And yes, the Abarth version is truly stunning
Haselsh1
24-06-2009, 08:18
I think I'll stick with my Nikon F5 and Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 aspherical zoom with Fuji Velvia 50. Digital comes nowhere near.
The Vinyl Adventure
23-07-2009, 22:57
hmm.. open to debate.. im not saying im one way or the oter ... but thats a bold statremnt
Haselsh1
24-07-2009, 08:27
Try getting a twenty by sixteen inch print onto cotton fibre paper from a digital camera without interpolation...? The CCD noise at that size is awful and is made even worse by the interpolation software. Fuji Velvia 50 produces a stunning print to that size as does Ilford Pan F with no interpolation. All you have to do is scan to a bigger size and a higher dpi. Simple.
Haselsh1
24-07-2009, 08:36
Try producing a photograph at 20 by 16 from a digital camera that shows the depth of quality that a negative shows. As most of my commercial pieces are produced in monochrome and not colour, digital is a joke. I have not yet found a digital camera that can produce a black and white image with any form of depth and quality. All digital does is produce and awful flat, grey photograph that is simply too sharp. You cannot crank up the contrast as you then lose the highlight details and so you are left with this dreadful, flat image. At 20 by 16 you have to deal with the dreaded CCD noise as well as the total lack of quality.
Of course digital cameras have their place. If you want to go down to the pub and photograph your mates dropping their pants and acting fools then digital has no competition. If your teenage daughter or son wants to put 'photographs' on Facebook it is a winner but, if your priority is to create 'art' you simply cannot use digital. Yet...!
I like it Shaun. Even though I'm not 'into' photography, I'm certainly interested in art, so I can relate exactly to what you're saying.
All digital does is produce and awful flat, grey photograph that is simply too sharp. You cannot crank up the contrast as you then lose the highlight details and so you are left with this dreadful, flat image.
Hey, you could be talking about hi-fi, in terms of 'analogue vs. digital' or 'solid-state vs. valves'! :eyebrows:
;)
Marco.
P.S Any chance you could drop some nice examples of your work into the Abstract Gallery - whatever you like - you choose :)
The Vinyl Adventure
24-07-2009, 11:23
hmm, im not sure i entierly agree but i dont have the experience in film to back up my argument enough
have you ever shot in raw using a camera like the d3? you may be suprised at the dynamic range and lack of noise! it is quite amazing the results the can be obtained with the 1.4 mp per cm2 pixel density 12.1mp sensor.
sharpness or lack of sharpness is a matter of taste i agree that some digi do produce overly sharpened images but if you shoot in raw you have a certain level of control over that sort of thing.. also, surely, the "feel" of an image eg sharpness bokeh etc is a lot down to the lens!
i would certainly say that there may be 1 or 2 photographers out there using digital that would fervently disagree with comments on digital only being good enough for children and drunks!
unfortunatly you do have to spend 2-4k on a digital slr to get that sort of quality whereas a comparable quality can be got out of a film slr for a few hundred
i cant belive im actually arguing FOR digital its normally the other way round to people who have writen off film for dead
i just do belive that as i have said in regards to both cameras and hifi there is a place for both digi and analog!
The Vinyl Adventure
24-07-2009, 11:25
have a look at this shaun
http://hamishgill.blogspot.com/
i have been using some really old kit and getting some v interesting results..
the next set il be uploading is from a ziess nettar
just to prove i havent writen off film my self like!
Haselsh1
25-07-2009, 12:30
Marco, I agree with everything you have said. One could certainly draw similarities with Hi-Fi.
For the record here, I use a Nikon D1X digital camera with a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 zoom for my digital photography and only ever shoot RAW files. I use Fractal Five software for interpolation of the images so that I can easily get a 2016 print but there is simply no way that a digital black and white can compare with one made using film, especially on 120 rollfilm.
For film I use a Nikon F5 and a Nikon F100 with a few lenses but prefer to use a vintage Olympus OM2N with an Olympus 50mm f1.4, 28mm f2.8 and a 135mm f3.5. I also use a Tokina 17mm ultra wide angle as well. Most of my work makes it into my gallery here in Pickering town centre but framing is just so damn expensive.
Please check out: www.pickeringphotography.co.uk
Feedback is always welcome.
Please be aware, I am specifically looking for a certain effect. My photography always looks a certain way and that is my way. I am not interested in technology for the sake of technology.
Hi Shaun,
Just trawled through your pics on the link you provided - stunning many of them and a few subjects that it would not have occurred to me to shoot. Don't get me wrong, nothing wrong with the quality of any of the photos, all excellent IMO but not the sort of thing I'd put in my album. :)
BTW, which pillock of a 'jobsworth' at HSE decided that Sir Nigel Gresley must be defaced with the notice warning of live overhead wires :steam: - he should be shot on the evidence of that fact alone.
Next time I'm in your area I'll definitely call in and visit the gallery - I live in Sheffield so not too far to come.
Cheers,
Love your stuff, Shaun. It's quite 'deep' and slightly dark. There's a thought-provoking, 'eerie' quality about your work which appeals to my slightly sinister mind ;)
Framing? Give me a shout. I'll beat anyone's prices! :cool:
Marco.
Haselsh1
25-07-2009, 16:25
Love your stuff, Shaun. It's quite 'deep' and slightly dark. There's a thought-provoking, 'eerie' quality about your work which appeals to my slightly sinister mind ;)
Framing? Give me a shout. I'll beat anyone's prices! :cool:
Marco.
My work is purely about loneliness and solitude. All of my serious artwork portrays this but there is a dark and meaningfull reason for this. I suffer from a slight mental disorder which gives me this insight in the same way that Beethoven and Elgar had insight. Fortunately for me, I have medication.
Haselsh1
25-07-2009, 16:26
BTW, which pillock of a 'jobsworth' at HSE decided that Sir Nigel Gresley must be defaced with the notice warning of live overhead wires :steam: - he should be shot on the evidence of that fact alone.
Cheers,
I couldn't agree more...!!!
Hi Shaun,
My work is purely about loneliness and solitude.
I can detect this in your work, and you portray it very well. In art, loneliness and solitude appeals to me; with photography or paintings. How about doing some disused railway stations to compliment your airfield work?
All of my serious artwork portrays this but there is a dark and meaningfull reason for this. I suffer from a slight mental disorder which gives me this insight in the same way that Beethoven and Elgar had insight.
LOL. I'm not sure if you meant for it to come across like this, but that smacked of 'look out behind you... MUHAHAHAHA', if you see what I mean :eyebrows:
Hope it's nothing too serious though and that you're managing to deal with it. In my experience, all the best artists (of any description) are a bit 'out there', so I'm sure you can use this to your advantage.
Keep up the good work! I’d like to see some examples posted in the Abstract Gallery section of the forum, rather than having to view them through your website.
Marco.
Hi Shaun,
In my experience, all the best artists (of any description) are a bit 'out there', so I'm sure you can use this to your advantage.
Marco.
Hi Guys,
Just been listening to Leonard Cohen all night - his Live in London DVD seems to go on for ever but every minuteof it is brilliant IMHO - and was reminded of the above post of your's. The man's a genius poet with a 'Golden Voice' (his opinion and I wouldn't argue) but perhaps not the best singer in the world and lots of his songs sound 'same-ish', but oh, is he, or was he, a tortured soul. Some of his lyrics can only have come from deep down in the far dark recesses of his psyche. I could listen to him just speaking his lines all night, which he does often in the DVD.
Shaun,
Don't know nor want to know any more details but I can speak from personal experience - the person who invented Prozac deserves a medal as big as the moon (and my wife would willingly present it to them !! :lolsign: )
Cheers,
PS
Hope this post is not too far off topic.
i have me a lumix lx3
if you want a flash for any digital hybrid the best way to do it is get an old manual flash
i use a nikon sb-20 on all my old manual cameras and on all the digitals that have 1 or more flash pins on the shoe
you only need the centre pin to fire the flash anyway so you can unscrew the bottom part of the sb-20 and remove all but the centre pin! the sb-20 is also iso(somthing) compliant so it wont blow up your digi with a high voltage return(? im a bit hazy on this but i know this model is safe with digis) it also has an auto mode so if you dont know how to set a flash manually you can use that!
oh and you can pick them up mint for £20... how much is the fl500? £150? £250? i cant remember.. a lot though as you say
Those LX3's any good? We was looking around at camera's, mainly wanted something to take away on holiday which isn't huge but capable of taking decent pics
The Vinyl Adventure
26-07-2009, 21:56
for a compact digi it is very good indeed
its worth baring in mine though it only has a 24mm-60mm equiv lens (2.5x zoom) for what i use it for i have never found this an issue but compared to a lot of cameras on the market at even a third of the price this is not a huge zoom range! the upshot is, for such a small camera, this lens is very good - f2 at the wide end (almost unheard of on modern compacts)
day time shots are some of the best out of a compact digi i have seen and the lower light stuff is in a differnt league to most ... thats not saying to much though, most compact digis are awfull in low light!
its well speced as far as its feature set goes too, although the controls are a bit baffling - im still not familiar with them in the same way as i am with most my cameras, its just not as intuetive as it could be!
the biggest feature and the thing that swung it for me is raw shooting!
if your looking for a high end bit of kit that works for the most part like a proper camera ie manual controls then this is the best option in my view.
if you arnt to fussed about manual controls and just want a versitile camera for most situations then some of the big zoom compacts are now pretty good and about the same size in your pocket as thee lx3. the tz7 for eg... just dont expect the same level of image quality as the lx3
hope that helps.. if it doesnt this site is about as good as it gets for camera info www.dpreview.com ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/ )
Haselsh1
26-07-2009, 23:35
Hey, sorry for not getting back to this earlier but I've been really busy over the weekend with guests and visitors. I guess that's the price you pay when you live in a tourist area.
My only intention for mentioning my mental condition was to make you all aware that there is around 4% of the population with this disorder. Nothing else was intended. It also explains where my strange view on things comes from. I consider myself very lucky.
Regarding analogue and digital; I never take things as convenient. I do not do things because they are easy. CD is easy. It is convenient. Digital photography is easy and it is convenient. It therefore follows that I don't like it. All of the qualities that a true vintage print has are absent from a digital camera shot. I shoot film and then scan using an Epson V700. This way I still capture the very essence of the film. I then print onto cotton fibre paper to retain the soul of a true fine art print. I guess this is why people still use Koetsu's.
for a compact digi it is very good indeed
its worth baring in mine though it only has a 24mm-60mm equiv lens (2.5x zoom) for what i use it for i have never found this an issue but compared to a lot of cameras on the market at even a third of the price this is not a huge zoom range! the upshot is, for such a small camera, this lens is very good - f2 at the wide end (almost unheard of on modern compacts)
day time shots are some of the best out of a compact digi i have seen and the lower light stuff is in a differnt league to most ... thats not saying to much though, most compact digis are awfull in low light!
its well speced as far as its feature set goes too, although the controls are a bit baffling - im still not familiar with them in the same way as i am with most my cameras, its just not as intuetive as it could be!
the biggest feature and the thing that swung it for me is raw shooting!
if your looking for a high end bit of kit that works for the most part like a proper camera ie manual controls then this is the best option in my view.
if you arnt to fussed about manual controls and just want a versitile camera for most situations then some of the big zoom compacts are now pretty good and about the same size in your pocket as thee lx3. the tz7 for eg... just dont expect the same level of image quality as the lx3
hope that helps.. if it doesnt this site is about as good as it gets for camera info www.dpreview.com ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/ )
Thanks mate ! thats a great help ;)
I think we'll go for the LX3, we wanted something compact, problem was finding something half decent, it sounds like this one will be fine for our needs:)
Dave Cawley
27-07-2009, 07:13
Hi Leo
To back up my Nikon D300 (D700 on order) I use a Canon Ixus 960 for two reasons. The most important is that it has a good optical viewfinder that I use "all" the time, second is the lens and generally easy ergonomics. In the States it is the SD950 reviewed here http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082003canonsd950is.asp
I dare say there is an updated model, but the main concern for me is the optical viewfinder. Much faster than LCD (switch it off) works in all light conditions, and doesn't make you look like a "snapshot" photographer like those holding their LCD's 2 feet away do! And for a lot of social functions you can turn the flash off and inconspicuously hold it to your eye, no one notices, and that is the big advantage.
A lot of these 300 pages were taken with it and it's earlier brother http://www.dartmouth.tv/News/news%20index.htm
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0708/Canon/canon_sd950is_3q-001.jpg
Regards
Dave
Regarding analogue and digital; I never take things as convenient. I do not do things because they are easy. CD is easy. It is convenient. Digital photography is easy and it is convenient. It therefore follows that I don't like it.
:lol:
Feckin' yee-hah! I'm liking you more each day, Shaun - a man after my own heart! :respect:
Marco.
Dave Cawley
27-07-2009, 08:28
Guys
If something is old and not convenient but the quality is good, then of course I will embrace it fully. But if something is easy and convenient and the quality is good, I'll embrace that too.
I could say that vinyl is easy and convenient and therefore we should use the old cylinders.
The deciding factor for anyone should be quality and nothing else. And of course listening to music, it's all about the music isn't it?
Regards
Dave
I completely agree, Dave :)
What gets me is when quality is sacrificed for convenience - I will NEVER EVER do that when it comes to hi-fi, or pretty much anything else in life.
I also hate the general public's (and sadly some enthusiasts') predilection for the notion that newest is always best with hi-fi (when the truth is far from that), and the craving to always have the 'latest and greatest' new gizmo just to be 'cool', even when in reality it isn't any better than what preceded it!
And don't get me started on our disposable, throw-away society in all aspects of life... :steam:
I use whatever I consider is the best, whether it's brand new or 40 years old; I couldn't give a damn. However, if something old takes a bit more effort to use for superior results to be obtained (such as Shaun describes with photography, and I often relate to with hi-fi) I will do whatever it takes to obtain those results, no matter how 'inconvenient' the process is.
Quality always comes before quantity or convenience - with anything!!! :cool:
Marco.
Dave Cawley
27-07-2009, 08:48
Me too, but sometimes you can get qualityand convenience in something new. To dismiss that would be silly!
Regards
Dave
Yep - which is why I said:
I use whatever I consider is the best, whether it's brand new or 40 years old; I couldn't give a damn.
New or old is cool - *whatever* does the job best, end of :)
Marco.
The Vinyl Adventure
27-07-2009, 10:30
leo
dave has a very fine point about the lack of vf, somthing i completely forgot about
i am the fortunate enough position to have a range of hot shoe vfs from my rangefinder kit that i use with the lx3 in bright conditions
that said it is definately worth pointing out that lcds are much better than they used to be, i used the lx3 in bright sunlight in kenya earlier this year and it was still just about useable ... only just mind
Haselsh1
27-07-2009, 13:19
Me too, but sometimes you can get quantity and convenience in something new. To dismiss that would be silly!
Regards
Dave
I am not interested in quantity only quality. That's why I still use film and silver based imaging.
Haselsh1
27-07-2009, 13:25
If I want a 30 by 20 inch print to have framed and put in my gallery I scan a 6 by 7 cm negative to a final size of 3020 at 300 dpi. That gives me true photo quality onto Hahnemuhle Albrect Durer cotton fibre paper printed by a professional print agency. The print captures the purity and essence of the film and the way the film was processed. What do you have with digital...? A load of CCD noise and nothing else. What do you have with CD...? Whatever the CD player gives you...!!!
Dave Cawley
27-07-2009, 13:31
Opps, I meant quality!! For your film use, and having seen what you do, film is very clearly the best for you! But not because it is "not convenient" or beacuse it "not easy", but because for your application it is better.
I have just had another front page Magazine cover taken with my Nikon D300 ariive in the post this morning, I could not have shot it with film.
I understand your needs are different from mine, both equally valid. I like easy and convenient, I have to for the sort of photography that I do. But just because something is easy and convenient doesn't make it bad or inferior, it is different.
Regards
Dave
Haselsh1
27-07-2009, 13:46
DC, I have to agree with you. I shoot a lot of stuff locally to me for newspapers or websites etc and for that, it really has to be digital. As already said I use an old Nikon D1X for that. As for Hi-Fi, CD is very convenient and has a definite place within our sonic community. I have moments when I simply can't be bothered with the hassle of vinyl and I DO NOT any longer do darkroom printing as I just do not have the bloody patience. Photographic prints these days printed the way I have mine printed are absolutely stunning but part of my 'art' is to capture the very thing that made photography art... every single nuance. I am indeed a purist and I will only have my work look a certain way. It is my work after all.
I love progress but that doesn't mean it has to be the best thing since...
Dave Cawley
27-07-2009, 14:16
I wish I could do what you do! I was inspired by Ansel Adams when I first saw his work actually at Yosemite in 1991. However I'm a part time event/social/tourism photographer, the days of two Canon FD MF cameras are gone for me. But people like what I do, so I should be grateful!
Regards
Dave
Haselsh1
27-07-2009, 14:43
You know I still find it rather odd but sincerely flattering that folk will part with a couple of hundred pounds for a framed piece of photography. OK I know that in the U.S. photography is viewed in a different way to the UK but we are catching up albeit rather slowly. I am also rather grateful that I now live in a small tourist haven that is often teeming with visitors that just want to walk around and spend money. I guess for that I have to thank the North Yorkshire Moors Steam Railway. It's all very humbling...
Haselsh1
27-07-2009, 14:49
By the way; it's not all I do. Part of our business is an Interflora based florist so my partner Janet designs and arranges flowers whilst I get to drive all over the North Yorkshire Moors delivering flowers. Of course that has its benefits... I always have a camera with me so that I can take advantage of the weather conditions. It's a helluva life but as they say, someone has to do it...!!!
The Vinyl Adventure
27-07-2009, 15:36
blimey shaun .. sounds like it really sucks to be you!... obviously i jest.. i would love to make money out of only the photography that i enjoy. Today i have done a corporate mugshot for a fussy german, and under charged him!
no fun!
in fact there is a good example of how i couldnt have used film today, he was on a deadline for a aplication form and needed the image 45mins after he phoned me, he nipped round the house in 15 mins giving us 30 mins to get a photo taken, on to the computer, tweaked, and onto a disk in 3 different sizes.
impossible with film
Hi Leo
To back up my Nikon D300 (D700 on order) I use a Canon Ixus 960 for two reasons. The most important is that it has a good optical viewfinder that I use "all" the time, second is the lens and generally easy ergonomics. In the States it is the SD950 reviewed here http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082003canonsd950is.asp
I dare say there is an updated model, but the main concern for me is the optical viewfinder. Much faster than LCD (switch it off) works in all light conditions, and doesn't make you look like a "snapshot" photographer like those holding their LCD's 2 feet away do! And for a lot of social functions you can turn the flash off and inconspicuously hold it to your eye, no one notices, and that is the big advantage.
A lot of these 300 pages were taken with it and it's earlier brother http://www.dartmouth.tv/News/news%20index.htm
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0708/Canon/canon_sd950is_3q-001.jpg
Regards
Dave
Hi Dave,
Thanks a lot for that, nice to have a couple of decent choices to look at.
I never thought of the optical VF in all honesty, certainly does make a lot of sense
Its obvious I know nothing and FA about camera's:lol: so all this advice does help and is much appreciated
Nice pics btw:)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.