Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Been out in the sunshine - shooting all day, ( digital - ISO 64 ) just came in and had a quick ( VERY! ) look through this thread.......thank god I've been out all day! 🙄
The Digital Compacts Achilles Heel
- Thread starter ruben
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 48
- Views 5K
R
ruben
Guest
🙂
Seldom I use smileys in my paragraphs, as I count with the intelligence of the reader, despite English not beeing my momy language. But this one is to express the broad smile you drawed on my face, which I'll take to my first working day of the week.
Because I hardly can imagine, how among all the hundreds of threads ongoing at RFF you happen to select the only one to make you appreciate your fantastic shooting day. Great instincts !
BTW, one of the great advantages of the compact digitals is that since I got one, due to their small size, light weight and multiple features, I find myself shooting 7 days a weeks, and sometimes for some moments at my job hours too ! Hence how important they are for me, and I asume, in the world of photography, and why they do deserve so much attention, including this week-end thread.
This indicates to me that the quality top compacts is a breed to stay and continue to develope, not a passing by trend - I owe you this last tought to you too, Dave - thank you.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
VladimirV
Member
Ruben, I think this says it al. Take the digital compacts and use them for their advantages and also make use of their 'disadvantages'. If you want the Neopan 1600 look, shoot with Neopan 1600 film, it's that simple.
Think of digital compacts as a different 'film' or medium, it will look different but you can use it at ISO 1600 but have to use it within the limits. No dSLR will come close to Neopan 1600 either because the files are much cleaner so just use the equipment you have and use it's strengths instead of looking to find faults with it.
Also looking at pictures on a screen on the internet is not really the answer, you should print images and then compare if you really have to compare.
Why don't you post a Neopan 1600 picture that you would lwant to take with a digital compact and see if anyone has something similar taken with a compact?
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I think one of the very small high tech retractable lens film compacts would be nice ... there's a couple that have caught my eye in the classifieds of late.
I have a little digital point and shoot (A620) and I've used it more for posting adds here and eBay than anything else. I reckon it's achilles heel extends right up to it's knee! 😛
I have a little digital point and shoot (A620) and I've used it more for posting adds here and eBay than anything else. I reckon it's achilles heel extends right up to it's knee! 😛
R
ruben
Guest
Dear dacaccia,
After re-reading the concerned post I find you are right in that I have been rude towards you. It happens to me some times and there is no justification. I myself am quite touchy when treated as I treated you - therefore this adds to my guilt. I think you have proceeded right in pointing this and therefore I sincerely apologize.
As for the issues in debate, I will pass by this time, since they are by far substantially less important than friendly and politely comunication between RFF members.
Thank you again for pointing it.
Ruben
After re-reading the concerned post I find you are right in that I have been rude towards you. It happens to me some times and there is no justification. I myself am quite touchy when treated as I treated you - therefore this adds to my guilt. I think you have proceeded right in pointing this and therefore I sincerely apologize.
As for the issues in debate, I will pass by this time, since they are by far substantially less important than friendly and politely comunication between RFF members.
Thank you again for pointing it.
Ruben
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
I DO occasionaly use 'smileys' in my paragraphs, as I too "count with the inteligence of the reader" - ( based on the thread I am replying to! ). I appreciate that English is not your "momy language" and am pleased that I "drawed a broad smile on your face" - as this was the reason I chose this thread "among all the hundreds ongoing at RFF", I thought it might draw a broad smile on my face - as usual, this time I was disappointed!.
I did'nt report a "fantastic shooting day" - but in my opinion, my stroll in the countryside taking a few record shots here and there, was preferable to spending this beautiful day staring at a screen, and trying to think of interesting things to write!. Regarding your shooting "seven days a week, and sometimes during job hours too", ( you must have a very tolerant employer! ) I am afraid that my photographic output ( or interest ) has never been so prolific, as there is too much else in my life that claims my interest and attention!.
In closing, I'll express my surprise that yourself, and quite a few others have time to shoot much at all, given the amount of time and effort afforded to internet forums, ( my observations are based on the unusually large amount of my own time spent here, as I recover from illness ). But I do note, that the ones who do the most writing here, usually offer the least - in the way of worthwhile picture contribution! - as our U.S. friends say -"go figure!" 🙂 (oops!...sorry! )
Regards, Dave.
R
ruben
Guest
Dave,
To counterpose writing to photographing is to my understanding too a big generalization, i,e, not reflecting the facts. To be more accurate you are counterposing the participation at the threads to what you call, the "worthwile picture contribution". Check RFF.
Nevertheless if there is here, according to you some inner logics it will be interesing if you could go deeper, and explain the mechanics of the phenomena you imply.
Not only "worthwile picture contribution" is a is in the eye of the beholder, but Photography itself is a lot of things besides picture taking. It is almost everywhere and done at very different levels. Thus for a minimum of examples, there is the camera collecting, the image processing, the editing, the exhibition, the scientific use of photography both in Astronomy as well as microscopic, the technological development of the tools, the hystory of it, the phylosophy behind it, etc, etc - all these making photography such a broad field in which everyone has a place of honor.
If you reduce it all to your own picture taking, well, I think you yourself will not agree with it.
RFF is a forum of discussion and to a lesser extent picture display. I myself would like more facilities to be available to the picture display, such as a slide show, since I am very aware a lot of high quality images is being missed because of the lack of such facility.
But to displace the richness of discussion and analisys we have, or the friendship relations forged through the virtual among people from much of the world - it doesn't sound to me.
You could argue instead that this specific thread is not worth, but with explanation attached about what makes it less legitimate or less interesting than others. You could have choosen too to ignore this thread and pass by. Or you could have opened a new thread to share your day of picture making with us, a type of threads that is not uncommon and welcome.
But instead of all these you have chosen, to my opinion, an unclear attitude. at the wrong place.
Cheers,
Ruben
To counterpose writing to photographing is to my understanding too a big generalization, i,e, not reflecting the facts. To be more accurate you are counterposing the participation at the threads to what you call, the "worthwile picture contribution". Check RFF.
Nevertheless if there is here, according to you some inner logics it will be interesing if you could go deeper, and explain the mechanics of the phenomena you imply.
Not only "worthwile picture contribution" is a is in the eye of the beholder, but Photography itself is a lot of things besides picture taking. It is almost everywhere and done at very different levels. Thus for a minimum of examples, there is the camera collecting, the image processing, the editing, the exhibition, the scientific use of photography both in Astronomy as well as microscopic, the technological development of the tools, the hystory of it, the phylosophy behind it, etc, etc - all these making photography such a broad field in which everyone has a place of honor.
If you reduce it all to your own picture taking, well, I think you yourself will not agree with it.
RFF is a forum of discussion and to a lesser extent picture display. I myself would like more facilities to be available to the picture display, such as a slide show, since I am very aware a lot of high quality images is being missed because of the lack of such facility.
But to displace the richness of discussion and analisys we have, or the friendship relations forged through the virtual among people from much of the world - it doesn't sound to me.
You could argue instead that this specific thread is not worth, but with explanation attached about what makes it less legitimate or less interesting than others. You could have choosen too to ignore this thread and pass by. Or you could have opened a new thread to share your day of picture making with us, a type of threads that is not uncommon and welcome.
But instead of all these you have chosen, to my opinion, an unclear attitude. at the wrong place.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
emraphoto
Veteran
i am surprised this one was overlooked? i was once a big neopan 1600 fan (well still am i suppose) and reckon i know it intimately as well. i second the comment that it is a film that produces very, very deep blacks (and i was fond of that).
squeezing landscape like details out of it would be an exercise in frustration. for deep, long shadows and beautiful grain it was well suited. i find it quite comparable to a g10 or dp1 at 800.
NickTrop
Veteran
Hi Ruben! I agree with you on many counts. I LOVE Fuji Neopan 1600 - great, great film. My newly re-acquired (sold it, regretted it, bought another...) Lynx 14 is devoted to this film - 1.4 lens on a RF + 1600 speed film, can't beat it... However, I also like the Fuji Finepix F20. Though the line is discontinued, the Fuji F10, 11, 20, 30, and 31 line remains in the minds of many as the kings of digital compact low light. At 1600 it needs a little Neat Image but to my eyes it's usable. This is the only camera I own that I can slip into my pocket. It has a black and white mode that - to my eye, resembles the curves of Neopan. I'm serious. Not "as good" but I think that's what Fuji was going for.
To me the real achilles heel of compacts - all non-DSLR digitals, really, is bokeh. That's what really drove me back to film.
To me the real achilles heel of compacts - all non-DSLR digitals, really, is bokeh. That's what really drove me back to film.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Article