Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Show your photos > Looking for improvement

Looking for improvement This is the e-group critique board. If you post a picture here it will be assumed that you are looking for comprehensive technical feedback - both good and bad, but always respectful. Only post pictures here if you can deal with potentially negative constructive criticism. Anyone is qualified to comment and post feedback, and everyone is encouraged to do so. NB: "Looking for Improvement" is the place to post any pictures you would like advice on improving, no matter how bad you might think they are.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 1 Week Ago
Ricoh Ricoh is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 3,685
Thanks: 409
Thanked 307 Times in 275 Posts
Likes: 477
Liked 991 Times in 602 Posts
Re: Akureyri 1

Not tried the Pen F, but I had, then sold, an EP5. Nice sturdy camera, 1/8000th SS but exactly the same issues as the EM5. The thing is, if you know the limitations of a camera, you learn to work with issues and maximise result. Just need to work harder to get the looks you want. My 4th camera is a Leica M240, nice but all cameras have issues, you just learn to live with them. My 5th camera is a Leica M6, so if I don't like the sensor, or the processing engine, I use a different brand of film, and or try different chemicals. The thing I like about a film camera is that its ageless, as long as they keep making film there's never a need to upgrade the camera. Unless I succumb to the pull of the MP or MA (the latter has no electronics whatsoever, so the only things to go wrong are the springs and cogs, but it's fully serviceable - in fact Leica are still manufacturing the MP and MA, why not join the club!)
__________________
Steve

on flickr
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 1 Week Ago
KeithL KeithL is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 2,683
Thanks: 228
Thanked 366 Times in 349 Posts
Likes: 594
Liked 798 Times in 459 Posts
Re: Akureyri 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricoh View Post
Not tried the Pen F, but I had, then sold, an EP5. Nice sturdy camera, 1/8000th SS but exactly the same issues as the EM5. The thing is, if you know the limitations of a camera, you learn to work with issues and maximise result. Just need to work harder to get the looks you want. My 4th camera is a Leica M240, nice but all cameras have issues, you just learn to live with them. My 5th camera is a Leica M6, so if I don't like the sensor, or the processing engine, I use a different brand of film, and or try different chemicals. The thing I like about a film camera is that its ageless, as long as they keep making film there's never a need to upgrade the camera. Unless I succumb to the pull of the MP or MA (the latter has no electronics whatsoever, so the only things to go wrong are the springs and cogs, but it's fully serviceable - in fact Leica are still manufacturing the MP and MA, why not join the club!)
You may be surprised to hear that I have a Leica IIIB, 1938, full working order, plus lenses (some Leica, some Russian), prewar Vidom in its original box, and Leicameter with low light sensor. I used to have an R-E. However, I still have my Pentax S1 that I bought in 1963 (still works fine), Weston meter, and lenses; and a Zeiss Ikon Contaflex with full set of lenses. I think I have one or two other film cameras still, too. But though I like using film cameras, digital is just too easy now. And of course cheap.

In the fridge I have five 120 Kodak Portra 800ASA films. Expired 2006..... I used to have a Rolleiflex T. Perhaps I should buy a 120 film camera again.

Whilst i agree with your sentiments, all cameras have limitations. I used to use mainly slide film, and process it myself. Did that for about 30 years. For mono I used Tri X Pan; and I still have a roll or three of that too. The big advantage of film is latitude; there is virtually no latitude to digital, but with the excellent metering around now, and a bit of common sense/experience, you can't go far wrong exposure wise. i think it's a totally different challenge to film photography.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 1 Week Ago
Ricoh Ricoh is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 3,685
Thanks: 409
Thanked 307 Times in 275 Posts
Likes: 477
Liked 991 Times in 602 Posts
Re: Akureyri 1

Yes, MF is the way to go for image quality, however 35mm is also good for it's negative size especially with good optics, and of course those Germans knew a thing or two back in the day of the IIIB. You should load the IIIG and check it out. There's no point comparing output with modern high spec digital, instead celebrate the way film looks which is entirely different with nice soft edges and lovely grain, not nasty geometric noise.

A short while ago I started a thread linking a Petapixel article on film latitude. Check it out. Very hard to over expose colour film.
__________________
Steve

on flickr
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 1 Week Ago
KeithL KeithL is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 2,683
Thanks: 228
Thanked 366 Times in 349 Posts
Likes: 594
Liked 798 Times in 459 Posts
Re: Akureyri 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricoh View Post
Yes, MF is the way to go for image quality, however 35mm is also good for it's negative size especially with good optics, and of course those Germans knew a thing or two back in the day of the IIIB. You should load the IIIG and check it out. There's no point comparing output with modern high spec digital, instead celebrate the way film looks which is entirely different with nice soft edges and lovely grain, not nasty geometric noise.

A short while ago I started a thread linking a Petapixel article on film latitude. Check it out. Very hard to over expose colour film.
Quite honestly, Steve, I wouldn't go back to film now. I don't have either the time or motivation. I think not only digital sensors, but also processing engines have a long way to go. Just as a comparison, try comparing a DAB radio with an FM good quality radio; I've found that DAB radios have a 'plastic' sound quality that doesn't appeal to me. I bought a new 'hifi' system when my old one's CD player developed a problem. The new one sounded odd not on just the DAB radio, but also on CD; yet it had FM radio, and that sounded normal. The only conclusion I could draw was that the digital processing was shared between DAB radio and CD, and wasn't good. I suspect that is what we're seeing with digital cameras too. If the makers spent less energy and money on adding bells and whistles that we don't use, and more on getting processing engines to perform better, us photographers would benefit greatly!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:07 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2017, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger