This is pretty.
This is a good trick. Take advantage of rolling shutter to treat each pixel as a sensor. Can increase your sampling rate to ~number of pixels x camera FPS.
You might remember the idea from “bag of chips as a microphone”.
I’m reminded a little of this trick I came across recently too, where you remove the lens from a camera, and use the pixels as a ruler. Both using the physical properties of the camera in a creative way.
1 Like
A real fake camera, inside Blender, to take real fake real fake photographs.
1 Like
Nikon previously released the Zfc. A modern digital camera in a body like an old SLR. The only existing camera in that class is the Fuji XT series. But the Fuji XT is the top end flagship camera from Fuji. The Zfc is much less expensive. Still a very tempting camera for those who have Z-mount lenses.
Now Nikon has released the Nikon Zf.
Wow, this is a tempting camera. It costs only a bit more than the Fuji XT-5, but it’s full frame. This is, to my knowledge, the only modern digital camera with a full frame sensor and an old school SLR form factor. Just like the Leica M is the only modern full frame digital camera in an old school rangefinder body (that I know of).
I have a Fuji X100F, which is an APS-C rangefinder with a fixed lens. There is an X100V, but I skipped that as it didn’t seem like a necessary upgrade for me when it came out. Meanwhile the X100F is still my favorite most used camera. It still takes great photos. And somehow I’m still learning more about it all the time. I’ve just really fallen in love with the way the Fuji cameras work.
That said, the X100F is now starting to show its age. The battery life is not great. It still uses micro USB. The newer Fuji cameras that have come out have some great new features and film simulations. And the new improved, supposedly actually works properly, Fuji app doesn’t support this old camera.
I’ve been waiting for a new release from Fuji to upgrade. A new X100 would be tempting. But I’m really hoping for an XPro4. That’s basically an X100 with interchangeable lenses. The XPro 3 exists, but it’s from 2019. It’s been discontinued, and has all the same oldness issues as the X100F.
All that said, this Nikon Zf really changes things. As much as I have come to love the Fuji system, here I could get a full frame sensor from Nikon in the form factor I want at a pretty reasonable price. I think I’m going to go to a camera store and try it out. Or maybe I’ll become one of those camera people that keeps buying and selling cameras more frequently. I do have a few sitting on the shelf that I could move along.
Edit: I said the Nikon Zf is much less expensive than the X-T5. It’s not actually. Zf is $2k and the X-T5 is $1700. That said, the Zf is a full frame sensor, even if it’s not the absolute top of the line Nikon sensor, it’s still pretty high end. The X-T5 sensor is APS-C, but is the best Fuji has to offer (except for their medium format cameras, obviously). When you consider that it’s just $300 difference for the sensor size upgrade, and that other full frame mirrorless cameras like a Sony a7Cii cost $2200+, the price of the Zf is very attractive and competitive.
Edit 2: Additional info! This camera has an SD card slot AND a micro SD card slot. My GH5 has two slots, and I use it for various things, like separating video and photos to separate cards. Or recording to a panel to two cards at once, for safety. Or if I ever make an insanely long video I can have it rollover from card 1 to card 2.
On a purely photo camera, with SD cards as big as they are, what do I need two slots for, especially if one is micro SD? I think it’s actually really genius. You use the SD as your primary memory card. But you put a micro SD in there and just leave it. You can keep taking photos off of the SD and erasing it between shoots, but leave the micro as a permanent backup of everything you’ve ever shot. And if you ever grab the camera to shoot quickly, you don’t have to worry if you remembered to get a memory card in there. the Micro SD is always in there for sure.
3 Likes
Excited for the Nikon Z and Nikon .
1 Like
There was recently a paper published describing a camera setup from some researchers. It records 7 frames at 4,800,000 fps.
It uses a smart trick with a DMD (the mirror array inside any modern projector) to produce a changing diffraction pattern. That fans the 7 frames out across the sensor that does the actual recording.
The paper has some pics:
https://opg.optica.org/getimagev2.cfm?img=UIdxt3XOtuTfmNZttuPzpTtc5vHpCDOdyb0L5VcM9CI%3D&uri=optica-10-9-1223-g003
Extra cool because it’s all relatively normal, cheap parts. In theory, basically any camera could be used to capture the image.
A camera is just a light-sealed box that has an opening which allows the photographer to control when light gets into the box. A lens can be put over the opening to control the shape of the light when it does enter. That was true for the first camera ever and the newest camera.
The mechanism inside the camera which captures the light and records an image has changed greatly over time. As long a it can physically fit inside the box, that mechanism is replaceable. There’s nothing much stopping anyone from putting a brand new digital sensor in an old film camera, as long as they can make it fit.
As the price of film and development rises, and it’s supply decreases, analog cameras could become useless. Film can only be used once, and it expires. If the wheels of industry that produce film, or the chemicals to develop film, come to a halt, every analog camera will become a dead weight no matter if it’s a cheap plastic disposable one or a preposterously expensive Leica.
Retrofitting digital sensors into old analog cameras is such a no-brainer. Old cameras and their lenses are often excellent. They’ve lasted this long because the quality is high. People frequently use adapters to put old lenses on newer digital cameras. This is just the same thing in reverse.
And so it’s obvious that I’m Back exists. Sadly, I don’t think it’s there yet. But it’s existence makes me hopeful that the product will improve and eventually an ideal one will come along for me to buy.
The first problem with this is that it’s too big. You not only have to add the sensor, but a big chunk of electronics on the bottom of the camera. No thanks. This needs to be miniaturized to fit almost entirely inside the camera. Maybe I can tolerate a small external module on the hotshoe or something, but not that big.
Also the sensor is just a micro 4/3 sensor. I already have a micro 4/3 camera. I can use old lenses on that camera already. One of the reasons I use the old film cameras is to get a larger sensor without having to shell out thousands for a digital camera with a larger sensor. If the digital sensor isn’t the same size frame as the film that was originally in the camera, that’s a non-starter for me.
I’m still very glad this product exists, and hopeful for the future of this category. If I could put a 35mm sensor in my Canon F-1, that would actually be preferable to buying a Nikon Zf. If it was small enough I could even move it around from camera to camera. There’s a lot of potential here. One day it will be miniaturized enough to work. Hopefully in my lifetime.
2 Likes
The popularity and price of analog photography have been rising for years. But the supplies of film have been decreasing.
Back in 2012 someone started a company, CineStill. They bought motion picture film from Kodak, and chemically removed a protective layer from it. Then they cut the big film reel up into strips of 32 frames, and put them into individual canisters. They resold it as their own brand. Honestly, it’s pretty great. I crowdfunded them in 2016 when they released a 120 version.
Since then they’ve taken off. People in the film world all know their name. They have a full lineup of films to choose from, as well as developing chemicals. The film is now widely available, in photo stores basically everywhere. I really like their monobath. It makes developing black & white film at home very easy and cost effective.
Aaaaand, they just ruined themselves by deciding to be frivolous trademark trolls.
I guess they were feeling threatened by the fact that other people can do the same thing they are doing and undercutting them on price.
Either way, once I finish all the film I’ve got stocked up, I won’t be buying from them again.
3 Likes
I was in Manhattan today to go to the dentist. Decided to make a quick stop at the camera store to try the aforementioned Nikon Zf. They didn’t have them on sale yet, but there was a display model.
There are a lot of positives about this camera, but ultimately, I don’t think I’m going to buy it.
I’m sure the autofocus wasn’t impressive to people who are used to using the high end Nikon and Canon cameras, but it was impressive to me. I’ve only really been using Micro 4/3 cameras and my Fuji X100. I never experienced that high end autofocus. It’s significantly faster and more accurate.
Even though the camera has a full frame sensor, it was not nearly as large or as heavy as I thought it would be. The lens was much bigger than I’m used to, and disproportionately chunky relative to the body, but not so heavy.
The reason I won’t buy it is that despite having the sort of old school design, the UX just isn’t there. That’s really the huge selling point of the camera, and they didn’t nail it. They came close, but not quite there.
The lenses don’t have aperture rings. At least the default one doesn’t. I’m sure you can get some other lenses that do, maybe even with electronic contacts that report the aperture back to the camera. But it’s not the default. That’s kind of meh.
Despite having very nice ISO and shutter speed dials, they still have a PASM switch on the side! That’s not how it’s supposed to go. A film camera should have an A setting on each dial, and the aperture ring. That way you don’t have to specify PASM, you just put one, two, or all of the settings on A as is appropriate. With this PASM switch you could end up in a situation where the camera is on aperture priority mode and you keep turning the shutter speed dial to no effect whatsoever. That’s annoying.
The final thing is admittedly maybe not a fair criticism. My experience with Nikon digital cameras amounts to just the few minutes I tried this one out in the store. But wow, were the menus BAD. There really aren’t any cameras out there with good menus, but these were particularly difficult to navigate. It’s probably just a matter of learning them, but I’m not about to spend $2000 to find out.
I think I will be keeping my plan to wait until next year to see what Fuji releases. My X100F is still my most-used camera. We’ll see if they release another camera in that line and/or another XPro and make a decision. Otherwise, maybe I’ll just wait even more years for an X-T6.
1 Like
The Fuji X Summit is scheduled for February 20th.
Of course we don’t know for sure what will be announced there. The most reliable rumor suggests that they will announced the next camera in the X100 series. They also say it will have the 40MP sensor that is present in the XT-5, and also have IBIS. Those are some major upgrades.
If there rumors are true, I think I’ll be ordering this camera immediately. The X100F I have is my most used and favorite camera, but is slightly long in the tooth. I skipped the X100V, so I’ll jump on the new one right away. Also, since the X100s that are already out are in such high demand, I may have to fight to get the new one. Hopefully I can also get some good resale value on the one I have already.
If they also announce an XPro4, that will be a difficult and tempting choice.
That is a sexy camera.
Unlike various other TikTok crazes over cups and other nonsense, this is actually legitimate. As I said, I got plenty of cameras, and I use the X100F more than all the others combined.
When it comes to cameras, Nikon has always been behind in the video department. Instead they put their energy towards ultra pro and niche stills photography. Sports, nature, astrophotogrpahy, etc. Nikon is at or near the top.
As for video, they’ve always been behind. SONY, Panasonic, and Canon all dominated video in different ways.
Until now.
https://www.nikon.com/company/news/2024/0307_01.html
RED has been this kind of weird company. They started out with a bang, having the higher resolution digital cameras at prices that were more reasonable than what was available. But over time, their cameras took heat (pun intended) for having issues like overheating. Better alternatives started appearing also. People could film very high resolution high frame rate with much cheaper equipment. People who were going to pay big for real film production would just pay even bigger and get ARRI or something.
The merge of RED and Nikon opens up some strong possibilities. If they can make it work, they might be able to take on SONY and such. But it’s no sure thing. It’s going to be a competition, and probably for the benefit of everyone who uses cameras.
1 Like
A merger like this feels so out of left field but, damn, it’ll be interesting to see what comes out of it.
Pansonic just announced the Lumix S9
There’s nothing particularly new about this camera. There’s no new amazing technology here. It’s still very notable that this is a fairly unique combination that doesn’t quite exist in another camera.
It’s a full-frame 35mm sensor using the L-mount. Up until now that mount has mostly been used by Panasonic and Leica. And it’s also only really been used on large cameras which are primarily focused on video. I never really heard of any stills shooters using L mount. There’s no reason to considering the other options available.
This S9, however IS a stills focused camera. It’s as compact as can be given the large sensor size. And the primary feature they are hyping are the real-time LUTs, which is really just a direct shot at Fuji’s film simulations. They’re just using the LUT video terminology to set themselves apart, and because that’s the terminology used by their video-first userbase.
What other compact stills-first digital cameras are there at this sensor size that have interchangeable lenses? Actually, not many! You’ve got the preposterously priced Leica M series. SONY offers a few, but they are all more expensive than the S9, and they are still video-first despite having a more compact form factor. All of Canon offerings are larger DSLR-shaped bodies. Nikon also dosn’t offer any, although they do have the retro-styled Zf which I mentioned when it came out. And of course Fuji only offers APS-C and medium format.
If you want a compact shaped, stils-first, digital camera with a 35mm sensor, this is kind of the only choice. And them throwing the LUT feature in there is like hey, no need to get a Fuji, load up all the presets you want. And you aren’t limited to what we give you. You can use this app to make more, and go wild.
If someone is already doing video with Lumix L cameras, getting an S9 seems like a great idea. Get double duty out of the lenses you already own. Don’t need to go to some other system to get a stills-first body for travel or whatever.
And if someone out there is looking for a stills camera, well.You can get the X100VI that I just got. Of course, good luck getting one for the retail price of $1600. Oh wait, the S9 is $1500 and will likely be very easy to get at retail price. Of course you have to buy lenses on top of that. It might be bigger, but it has interchangeable lenses, and a larger sensor. Of course, it only really lacks the optical viewfinder.
That’s a very good value proposition. It could absolutely bring stills-first people into the L-mount system. Once they’re in, they could also be absorbed into the getting other L-mount cameras for video.
Kind of amazing how in a market with as much saturation and variety as cameras, a company can still think of a product that targets an unoccupied space. This is what the good capitalism is supposed to be with competition. There has yet to be that much consolidation in the camera world, with so many big competitors all successful in their own way. In any other industry we would have already seen everyone merge into two big companies that do all kinds of price fixing and offering the same uninspired products.
The rumor is that the Panasonic GH7 is about to be announced on June 5th. It’s basically one of those rumors that’s all but officially confirmed.
I had the GH4, and upgraded to the GH5 only because the HDMI port on my GH4 broke. I then upgraded to the GH5II only because it offered the ability to stream directly without additional hardware like a capture card. These upgrades weren’t expensive because I sold my prior camera each time.
I skipped the GH6, which did not offer any features that were meaningful for me. It’s thicker, heavier, and even has a fan to deal with the heat it generates. All that just to get better video quality and higher frame rates. I really didn’t see the purpose in that because if image quality is a higher priority for you, why not just go to the larger sensor size?
It seems like micro 4/3 has been on the downturn for awhile. Olympus has largely faded. Panasonic has been producing full frame cameras, and giving them more attention. Even so, I still think micro 4/3 is a good platform, and I’m glad it exists. There is a legitimate need for cameras that have big capabilities with smaller and lighter equipment. Nobody else is really doing that with the focus on video.
The GH7 coming out is great for the system. It shows that Panasonic hasn’t given up on it. It gives people confidence that there is still support for this platform. It also tells other companies in the camera world that they should still be producing lenses and other accessories that are compatible with it.
What I’m curious about is whether the GH7 will just be a spec bump, or if it will actually have some kind of enticing feature to set it apart. Will post again when the official announcement is made.
1 Like
I’ve still got my Lumix and been using it on and off. It still does the job but it is indeed encouraging that they aren’t abandoning the platform.
1 Like
The GH7 rumor was indeed true.
As expected, it’s all improvements to image quality. More dynamic range, resolution, frame rate, etc. It can record prores raw video internally, whereas before you needed external recording devices for that. They updated the external XLR audio accessory, which is nice. They’ve also got real time LUT going on.
Nothing unexpected or new and exciting. So what I said before still stands. A serious pro filmmaker who needs a smaller camera, this is a winner for them. But for people like me what video am I ever going to make that needs more than 4k 60fps 10-bit? Nothing?
This is great, though overall. Me of a few years ago had to get a pretty high end camera to meet my needs. Me of today can get a lower end camera and be more than fine. Meanwhile, the pros have more options.
Really, the most important thing is the continue life of the Micro 4/3 system. No matter what discourse might look like online, the smaller sensors still have a real purpose and a strong (enough?) userbase.
I still use my ancient GX1 regularly and it’s still a great camera.