can someone fill me in regarding ken rockwell? i had no idea that nikon compensated him, financially. i found ken's site useful but bombarded with ads. lol
Like Mr. Rockwell said in this video, "First, I apologize for saying this but you are an idiot for not reading the AboutMe section on my website where 90% of the information I gave is a joke."
So, I suggest you read his About page and don't take his website seriously.
Btw friend of mine who bought Canon 1000d said to me: Dude I tried to do anything to turn off that noise when I press shutter realese and I can't manage to do it.
Well, thank god because Ritz Camera (walk-in stores, not online) is going out of business. Why are they going out of business? Because they have NO idea how to sell cameras to customers who have "real" money (such as on debit card, check, or cash).
Real working photographers never bother shopping in Ritz Camera because no one knows what you're talking about. Try for yourself, tell them "Hey, I want to see the 24mm Perspective Control" they will stutter on you.
Well, you could technically consider Some of Ansel Adams photography to be HDR. His shots covered up to a 10 stop range of exposure. His stuff has been in galleries, exhibitions and Museums. If we take HDR for what it actually is "HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE", and not for what a majority of people perceive it to be (Over saturated, multi-colored vomit), then can we say HDR is an art form. Squeezing the maximum exposure range into a single photograph can yield outstanding results when done PROPERLY.
Ansel Adams didn't invent HDR because he used his own techniques in making images with proper exposure with the camera and making prints with proper development in the darkroom.
I already know this. I never stated he invented HDR. I simply stated that he was one of the earlier users of HDR method. Using his own techniques in the darkroom to squeeze more range into his photography. I only stated this because you said in your video there were no HDR in museums or art galleries. When in fact this isn't true. But I do agree with you on the current state of what most people perceive to be HDR. There is some UGLY stuff out there. But, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
Ah, yeah, I got your drift. Ansel Adams surely knows how to match his images to how he saw with his eyes... which today's Photomatix HDR violently mess it up big time.
Sorry to disappoint this guy... Digital can NEVER meet the resolution of film because film equals to infinity resolution while digital have limitations.
But we will see about that in, what, 200 years later where digital finally beats film.
More like 10 years. The last 10 years we have seen digital leap up to near film quality. If we keep the current trend with camera technology, I foresee another 10 years or maybe even less by the time digital imaging will surpass film. It will eventually become like Vinyl records and Mp3 players. People will only used vinyl for the vintage quality sound while people will only use film cameras for vintage quality photos. Just my opinion though lol :D .
We doubt it will happen. Look into medium format digital backs in past 10 years. Hasselblad, Mamiya, and Phase-One still haven't reached film's quality.
Yeah you have a good point. I believe film still has an edge quality wise. But I think if we think realistically, The technology probably already exists but isnt available to consumers and is also extremely expensive to manufacture or for the public to afford. Also, realistically thinking, The convenience of digital will leave film camera manufacturers will little desire to further produce film based cameras. Either that or they will eventually end up being more expensive. Which would be Sad :*(
I agree, there's smoothness and texture in it....once they developpe an engine that produce this tonality and most importantly the colours etc...(eg skin tones...) then digital will be good...not yet. I guess 5 years from now.
Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 AIS Noctilux?
fUzErR 1 year ago
Nikkor 58mm ƒ/1.2 AIS Noctilux. Your turn.
Lilkiwiguy87 1 year ago
@Lilkiwiguy87 rofl. you think fast xD
chaosrealm93 1 year ago
can someone fill me in regarding ken rockwell? i had no idea that nikon compensated him, financially. i found ken's site useful but bombarded with ads. lol
ValueMSW 2 years ago
Like Mr. Rockwell said in this video, "First, I apologize for saying this but you are an idiot for not reading the AboutMe section on my website where 90% of the information I gave is a joke."
So, I suggest you read his About page and don't take his website seriously.
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
"A million SB-900s on pocketwizards"
Sounds like fun
newdimensionfilms 2 years ago
heh i wonder from that hitler scene, what guy is joseph?? : P
panzarw 2 years ago
These aren't............ real? I used to work in RTV store and I tell you ppl ask for a realy crazy shit when it comes for choosing p&s.
For instance guy ask me ohh this is LEICA! (it was panasonic p&s). YEAH it is! Sir you got to buy it great camera for 150$!
sadamisko 2 years ago
Those quotes are real because Cameron and I was right there when it happened.
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
Btw friend of mine who bought Canon 1000d said to me: Dude I tried to do anything to turn off that noise when I press shutter realese and I can't manage to do it.
sadamisko 2 years ago
it should be 58mm F/1.2 AIS Noct-Nikkor right?
Noctilux belongs to Leica
sipkenz 2 years ago
Uh, yeah, Noct-ilux-Nikkor. The 58mm ƒ/1.2 AIS Noctilux is one of only three Nikkor Noctilux lenses using Leica optics.
Yes, that is correct, Leica optics in a Nikkor lens.
That is why 58mm is still around with a big price tag and other two are impossible to find (collectors' treasures).
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
lol the last one was funny!
azn1221 2 years ago
my friend was carrying a mentor LF camera and some guy told him: "play some music boy"
rgbling 2 years ago
that husban and wife this is really..wow
and ohh whats the deal with Ritz camera people?, do they just accept anyone?
utubenice 2 years ago
Unfortunately, yes, they accept anyone without training them. Ritz Camera used to be most popular store for high school dropouts.
That's why we shop at Samy's or B&H. :)
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
amen to that, i bought a battery for my d80 from ritz and somebody came in and signed for it and took it away, they are unorganized and inexperienced
RngrOnTheEdge 2 years ago
Well, thank god because Ritz Camera (walk-in stores, not online) is going out of business. Why are they going out of business? Because they have NO idea how to sell cameras to customers who have "real" money (such as on debit card, check, or cash).
Real working photographers never bother shopping in Ritz Camera because no one knows what you're talking about. Try for yourself, tell them "Hey, I want to see the 24mm Perspective Control" they will stutter on you.
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
ahhahah this was a great video:D....there are so many people getting a d3 and complaining over crazy stuff like shutter noise.
TotalNoize300 2 years ago
They have four options:
1) Buy a "Blimp" (camera muffler).
2) Buy a Leica M8.2 rangefinder.
3) Buy a D90 or D5000.
4) Admit this person is an idiot.
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
HAHAHHAHAHAHAH
5:22
IdiotsGon3Wild 2 years ago
LOL. i wish there were smileys to express my amusement.
saquina80 2 years ago
hahahaha so funny! great video Joey!
C4dor 2 years ago
great video hahahah
:P
billyhottie2 2 years ago
haha nice
mnaitz 2 years ago
Well, you could technically consider Some of Ansel Adams photography to be HDR. His shots covered up to a 10 stop range of exposure. His stuff has been in galleries, exhibitions and Museums. If we take HDR for what it actually is "HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE", and not for what a majority of people perceive it to be (Over saturated, multi-colored vomit), then can we say HDR is an art form. Squeezing the maximum exposure range into a single photograph can yield outstanding results when done PROPERLY.
Aphesia 2 years ago
Ansel Adams didn't invent HDR because he used his own techniques in making images with proper exposure with the camera and making prints with proper development in the darkroom.
He is the inventor of "Zone System".
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
I already know this. I never stated he invented HDR. I simply stated that he was one of the earlier users of HDR method. Using his own techniques in the darkroom to squeeze more range into his photography. I only stated this because you said in your video there were no HDR in museums or art galleries. When in fact this isn't true. But I do agree with you on the current state of what most people perceive to be HDR. There is some UGLY stuff out there. But, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
Aphesia 2 years ago
Ah, yeah, I got your drift. Ansel Adams surely knows how to match his images to how he saw with his eyes... which today's Photomatix HDR violently mess it up big time.
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
Omfg, these quotes makes me laugh my ass off!
I dont really have any quote except one:
I was carrying my D40 and a guy asked "How many Mpx do you got?"
"6 Megapixels"
"Oh, you need at least 10Mpx to get the same quality as a film camera"
I dont know if this is true, but do I really need film quality in a digital image?
Do I care? No.
JoacimSc 2 years ago
Sorry to disappoint this guy... Digital can NEVER meet the resolution of film because film equals to infinity resolution while digital have limitations.
But we will see about that in, what, 200 years later where digital finally beats film.
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
Will see you at year 2209 then :D
JoacimSc 2 years ago
More like 10 years. The last 10 years we have seen digital leap up to near film quality. If we keep the current trend with camera technology, I foresee another 10 years or maybe even less by the time digital imaging will surpass film. It will eventually become like Vinyl records and Mp3 players. People will only used vinyl for the vintage quality sound while people will only use film cameras for vintage quality photos. Just my opinion though lol :D .
Aphesia 2 years ago
We doubt it will happen. Look into medium format digital backs in past 10 years. Hasselblad, Mamiya, and Phase-One still haven't reached film's quality.
We believe film is untouchable.
Lilkiwiguy87 2 years ago
Yeah you have a good point. I believe film still has an edge quality wise. But I think if we think realistically, The technology probably already exists but isnt available to consumers and is also extremely expensive to manufacture or for the public to afford. Also, realistically thinking, The convenience of digital will leave film camera manufacturers will little desire to further produce film based cameras. Either that or they will eventually end up being more expensive. Which would be Sad :*(
Aphesia 2 years ago
I agree, there's smoothness and texture in it....once they developpe an engine that produce this tonality and most importantly the colours etc...(eg skin tones...) then digital will be good...not yet. I guess 5 years from now.
Talaramama 2 years ago
yup its gonna happen, but heres the thing a film is actual matter that you can hold in your hand but a digital, its only numbers, information.
panzarw 2 years ago