Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
I'm still trying to decide between the GF-1 and EPL-1. I'll likely go m4/3 for my next digicam, which will replace an old Sony P&S.
My Canon A-1s both need work, so I'll likely need to sell or trade both to get one very good to excellent one, and I'll definitely keep a Yashica GSN, Canon QL17 and the Leica CL, but I'm moving more digital as we move further into the new century...
My Canon A-1s both need work, so I'll likely need to sell or trade both to get one very good to excellent one, and I'll definitely keep a Yashica GSN, Canon QL17 and the Leica CL, but I'm moving more digital as we move further into the new century...
NickTrop
Veteran
Gotta tellya Joe... I fooled with the Oly 4/3rds and the D5000 at a Ritz camera store this weekend. The Oly is surprisingly larger than I expected and the D5000 smaller than I expected. I also like the way the Nikon handled better and I really hate not having a viewfinder, though admitedly it's dimmer and smaller than my film SLR. Also, and no offense to the 4/3rd's users, and they're fine cameras and all? From a pure spec standpoint a full APSC is just better imo. Not by leaps perhaps, but they are. I also like the swivel LCD. The D5000 won the DIWA "Gold" award in 2009. http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/info/news091009.htm
And its specs in low light, sensor, dynamic range are pretty impressive:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...rk-reviews/DxOMark-review-for-the-Nikon-D5000
Refurbed by Nikon, if you can find one, is a steal. Got a refurbed body from B&H for less than $500.
NickTrop
Veteran
Hi Al... How ya doin'?
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
On my way to Clearwater Florida next month for an IT gig.
Still surprised you didn't get the NX-10, but those Nikons are compelling...
BTW, which Oly were you looking at? I almost bought an E-420 or E-520 when I bought the Samsung DSLR, which was cheaper as it was last year's model on closeout when I bought it.
denmark.yuzon
Streetographer
That gear is actually what im saving up for, actually the 35mm f/1.8 AF-S only. I have the d40, and that 35 is what im after. for a street camera, it is enough for me. I might upgrade soon to a d5000, but the d40 would suffice for now.
looking forward to your work. congrats on the new camera.
looking forward to your work. congrats on the new camera.
charjohncarter
Veteran
It's pretty easy to achieve the decisive moment when you can fire hose a digital SLR at any scene, and have 50 images to choose from. And yes, the new 'evil' cameras will make it easier if they get their frames per second up. Enjoy, but I think the DM is over it is too easy now, so the impact is dead.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Then of course there's the Casio EX-F1 which can shoot sixty 6mp frames per second .. and if you drop the resolution up to twelve hundred FPS from memory.
Don't seem to read much about this camera though so maybe it hasn't caught the attention I thought it would have deserved due to some other problems I'm not aware of?
Don't seem to read much about this camera though so maybe it hasn't caught the attention I thought it would have deserved due to some other problems I'm not aware of?
NickTrop
Veteran
Yes... that was kinda the "DM" too. Primes were definitely lacking - the DSLRS were all about blech-y zooms. I got the body only with 35mm f/1.8 AF-S, not the kit zoom. I didn't even know this lens existed, and it's a fairly recent development - think this lens is less than a year old. Sad to think that this line of cameras from Nikon has been around for a while and there haven't put out a 50mm equiv prime until a year ago. It's supposed to be a fine performer - should be, it's a Nikon lens and it's a standard "50"-equiv. prime.
I would not have purchased this camera if this prime was not available.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Troll troll troll alert.
NickTrop
Veteran
Keith - the Casios, in general, are very innovative and underrated digitals. I'm looking at a banged up beater on the big auction site now... if I can get it for $10-$20 US? Why not?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I definitely call 60 frames per second at 6 megapixels innovative ... that thing must have more processing power than your average shopful of digicams.
Pity it's fixed lens!
dwmosman
Member
Nick, you're obviously thinking this through very systematically. How are you planning to present your results? Do you intend to strip out still pictures, i.e., edit to freeze the dm in time, or are you planning to retain video to show the transition of moment? I can see that this concept not only challenges the approach to image capture but also the concept of presentation.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
haha.. good one Frank! I'm going to read on now and see what Nick sez!
;D
__________________
updating edit
I've read all the posts and I'm up to speed. I think you should go back and watch that movie again then think about still photography then 'movies' and the next level to this game. Hopefully you will come to a conclusion that I think you will.
I hate being cryptic but I've gone abstract here before and people usually go silent so I don't want to be a thread killer.
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Nick,
One thing that stands out a mile here is that numerous conservative minds and outlooks are going to tell you you're heading in the wrong direction and will suggest you get back on the path of true righteousness. That path being a rangefinder with a roll of black and white film in it ... and better still one without a meter!
Frankly I don't know why you're even bothering to discuss your aspirations here ... few are actually going to listen!
(some of that was a little tongue in cheek ... but not all)
One thing that stands out a mile here is that numerous conservative minds and outlooks are going to tell you you're heading in the wrong direction and will suggest you get back on the path of true righteousness. That path being a rangefinder with a roll of black and white film in it ... and better still one without a meter!
Frankly I don't know why you're even bothering to discuss your aspirations here ... few are actually going to listen!
(some of that was a little tongue in cheek ... but not all)
Last edited:
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
I just want to know why he didn't get the Samsung. Nick is an excellent writer, and yes, is a very opinionated fellow. I'm doing more stuff on digital these days, but I'm also doing more film with rangefinders than I used to...
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Did you see American Beauty the movie with Kevin Spacey? I thought the short of the plastic bag shot by that creepy guy in the movie was pretty cool.
Chris101
summicronia
That scene has been an inspiration for many years. I have an entire series-in-progress of stills of plastic bags in motion, and a belief that they are alive somehow.
Sparrow
Veteran
That’s a coincidence, I’m collecting shots of bags caught it trees, power lines and such like believing them to be the dead ones. Have you noticed it’s always the cheap convenience-shop or MacDonald’s bags that end up in trees, never those from M&S or Waitrose
NickTrop
Veteran
Thanks... Short answer? I'm not sure... But figuring that out is part of the fun.
@Jan - be abstract! By all means, please! I'll always listen to you abstract discussions... and participate.
@JoeV - Not a micro 4/3rd's guy. To me, - and this is certainly debatable, the primary spec as it pertains to overall image quality is the size of the plane the lens focuses the image on be it film or digital... I think larger format yields images that are somehow more "sophisticated" (for lack of a better word). The trade-off in film (and digital) is portability. You gotta "draw the line" somewhere regarding format size and what you're willing to trade off for other benefits, and where that line is drawn (and begrudgingly at that...) is APS-C sized sensors for me. I also don't think that the 4/3rds cameras (And I only handled one, the Oly EP2) - having compared them side-by-side, really buys you much over the newer compact DSLRs in terms of portability or discreetness. Older behemoths? Yes - absolutely. But not the newer compacts or "baby DSLRs" - or at least not enough for the trade-off of a significantly (imo) smaller sensor to be worth it. I actually think the Nikon handled better than the Oly when I compared them. I also don't like framing with an LCD with a "serious" camera (point and shoots are another matter. I'll trade that feature for "pocketability".) Plus, straight up, they're more expensive.
If interested, another interesting film that is kinda the opposite of Man with a Movie Camera (the film that made me rethink "imaging" as it pertains to this thread...) that makes a film from what was traditionally still photography domain, is a 1962 French science fiction by Chris Marker called La Jetee. It's a 1/2-hour long science fiction film made entirely from black and white still stills with narration. It's about a post-apocalyptic experiments in time travel. It takes stills and makes it into a movie.
Anyone interested in photography should check this film out. Also available streaming (I think) on Netflix (no I don't work for Netflix
)
charjohncarter
Veteran
What...................................................? You usually don't lose me, but you have this time. Please stick to 'grunge' something I can understand.
Carter:
This is a negative rubbed with isopropyl (sp?) alcohol for about 5 minute. And it was taken with a disposable camera (taken by my 3.5 year old grandson). This is grunge!
