If Sony can do it, why can’t anyone else.
Are the SONY full frame mirrorless cameras that small? Let’s check the size.
Here’s the SONY Alpha 7C
And here’s the M50 Mark II
Actually pretty close! But the 7C has the more rangefinder-esque rectangular form factor where the M50 has the more classic SLR style with the hump above the lens.
With all my bellyaching about needing a smaller full frame camera, I need this for reasons…
Canon EOS R1 to have 85MP global shutter, 40fps burst, 9-stop IBIS.
Global shutter? It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a global shutter. Dang.
So it seems like 360 video is starting to get fairly decent for action footage? Anyone got some firsthand experience?
I was watching this video and it actually seemed good enough that I diddn’t realize it was a 360 camera at first, which hasn’t been my experience with 360 stuff in the past. Blows away the static views I get with a GoPro, even if the image isn’t quite as good on a technical level it’s certainly good enough and the immersion is way better.
In the comments the pilot mentioned it was an Insta360 X2. Might have to look into that more. Also, first time I’ve noticed someone take 360 footage but splice it into a traditional linear video where the perspective is locked; so how in the hell do you edit 360 recordings? Seems like you have to have a joystick or something and aim the ‘view’ while running the footage. Seems like a pain unless the UI has really been dialed in for it.
I’ve not used it myself, but the videos I’ve seen of people using the Insta 360 iPhone app makes it look like they’ve nailed the UI and workflow. You step through the footage, and using key frames just select the direction and zoom you want, and it makes it all flow together. It’s pretty seamless.
However I’ve never been impressed with the image quality unless it’s kept to a very wide angle and the lighting is really good.
1 Like
Yeah for sure the image quality isn’t up to even a high quality 1080 traditional camera; but it’s getting to the point where it’s not distractingly bad and useful if you wanted to do something such as the example above where it really helps for the camera to ‘look around’.
If I lived in Finland, I would be first in line for this.
1 Like
Perkele!
fifteen perkeles
1 Like
Finland seems like a cool place to be sure… would be a fun gig.
Are they selling this to make people feel better about buying MSRP normal Leicas?
I have always wanted an M6, but it just makes no sense given that for the same price I can get something like an XPro3 and lenses for it. There are some rumors though…
Pre-pandemic I built up a small stockpile of film. Sadly, I didn’t stockpile Fuji 400H, which has since been discontinued and is now very expensive. Since it’s looking more likely I’ll be able to safely go outside I’m hoping to shoot it all. It’s probably technically expired, but it’s been in the fridge, so I’m sure it will be fine. My plan is to just shoot it without care, as if it was digital until it runs out. Then just buy as I go so the fridge doesn’t get full.
All the film cameras I own are manual focus. I like a manual focus, but sometimes it’s just tedious. So I was thinking, the one kind of camera I don’t have that I would actually use is a 35mm film camera with auto-focus.
I start researching the options. As it turns out, auto-focus was actually a pretty late development in terms of analog cameras. Well, not exactly. You had cameras like the Canon AF35M around '79-'80 that had pretty good, if imperfect, auto-focus systems. Seems silly to get one of those when I already have a Canonet QL17 G-III.
If you start looking around you realize almost all the auto-focus film cameras were consumer point and shoots that did not have interchangeable lenses. Most of them inexpensive and unexciting. Some of them released in the late '90s to work with APS film, that you can’t get anymore. And some of them very expensive and highly desired like the ones made by Contax.
I already have two Canon FD bodies and a handful of lenses. That system lasted until '92, did it ever have auto-focus? Well, since the FD mount itself did not offer support for the camera body to manipulate the focus of the lens, there was only one solution, a lens that focuses itself.
https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/3570afzoom.htm
Even if you could find one that worked at a decent price, what a monstrosity. Blech.
As it turns out, the professional film cameras with auto-focus that are worth using today came way later. In the brief time period in the early 2000s digital wasn’t good enough yet for pro use. People didn’t have iPhones yet. Digital was already starting to kill film for consumers. Remember those cameras with floppy disks for storage? What were professional photographers using during that time period?
Apparently they used the Nikon F5 and the Canon EOS 1v. These are really fascinating cameras nowadays. They are full on professional SLR cameras with most of the non-video features you would expect from a modern DSLR. They use the same exact lens mounts as modern Canon and Nikon DSLRs. Those lens mounts were on these cameras before they were on digital. You can buy a brand new Canon DSLR lens and slap it on an EOS 1v, and the auto-focus will work no problem. And these can be found used in great condition for just a few hundred dollars! If you walked around with one, nobody would know it wasn’t digital unless they looked closely.
There’s one other interesting camera out there that has me thinking. And that’s the Canon EOS 3. At the time, the Canon EOS3 was basically the prosumer alternative to the 1v. Same lens mount, most of the same features, but the body was more plastic and less heavy duty than the 1v. When the camera was new, this was definitely the option for someone who wasn’t actually a pro.
Why even consider the EOS 3 today when you can get a 1v? It has one feature that I have not seen even on the newest of cameras. Eyeball auto-focus! The viewfinder can track your pupil and select which of the 45 auto-focus points to use based on where you are looking. I haven’t tried it myself, but by all accounts people say it works amazingly well. Many call it the mind-reading auto-focus. If it was so legit, why don’t any newer cameras have this??!?! I bet an iPhone could even do it by using the front camera to look at your eye while the rear camera takes the photo.
Anyway, I don’t see myself buying any of these, even though I would love to try out the eyeball auto-focus. I’d be interested in something more like the Fuji Klasse if the price wasn’t so ridiculous. However, if I was someone who was already invested in the Nikon or Canon DSLR systems, I would absolutely get an F5/6 or EOS3/1v without hesitation. The ability to use all your existing lenses with film instead of digital for a low price, why not?
Makes me wish it was possible to make an analog camera that used micro 4/3 lenses. Seems unlikely given the difference in sensor size. But I see no reason someone couldn’t make an analog camera that used SONY lenses or such. I think the problem is that the demand may be sizeable, but not sizeable enough to cover the huge development and manufacturing costs.
2023: Scott builds a darkroom in his apartment
I did develop some black and white film at home before. It’s a huge pain in the ass. Will probably not be doing that much more going forward.
From my one class in high school, the fun part is making prints and cropping and masking and blurring stuff with panty hose. Also putting the print in the development solution and watching the image appear was pretty cool.
I’m super scared to open any lens. Not because I don’t think I can put it back together. But because I can’t possibly keep it dust-free.
Yeah I would basically want a cleanroom to try it.
I recently learned about a very interesting camera. The Fujifilm Rensha Cardia Byu-n 16. There’s also an older version that is just 8. It was also sold under the name Kalimar Action Shot. Here’s a YouTube video about it.
Here’s an eBay auction for a new looking (but untested) one found in a thrift shop that just ended. I tried to bid $300 with 10 seconds left. It ended up going for almost $600. HELL NO.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/324598238414
I’m really curious if there’s a way to mimic the functionality of this camera with an app. Most cameras I have can take photos at a very high fps, or even just digital video. The problem is they all have one lens, and not 16 separate slightly offset lenses. Could I somehow use 16 different crops on 16 sequential images to achieve a similar effect? Maybe if I move the camera around? There’s really nothing else quite like this thing, probably why a piece of plastic sold for such a ridiculous price.
I remember seeing quick and dirty temporary clean room guides for people attempting home repair of hard drives in the late 90s. It usually involves curtaining off an area or using a bathroom, and misting the air with water to pull dust out of it. Then working in a limited time window post-misting.
I can’t speak to how practically effective that is.
1 Like