Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: The best camera is...  (Read 14041 times)
Bryan Conner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


WWW
« Reply #80 on: August 02, 2012, 11:55:15 PM »
ReplyReply

I have been reading this thread with great interest.  I have flip flopped between thinking that the OP is a legitimate poster with a (to him/her) legitimate question and thinking that the OP is a troll looking to stir the pot then sit back and laugh.  I still am not sure about this.  But, I did think to do an internet search for the word "Captian".  I thought originally that the person had misspelled the word Captain, which would have been evidence supporting the troll theory.  A person who works in "Apples corporate retail sector" would probably not make such an error in spelling.  But, now I know that the word Captian does exist on the www.  From definition-of.net:  Pertaining to one who is supreme. The name of a person who exceeds in every aspect of life. An amazing human being. A Captian.Anyone who is known as amazing, awesome, stellar, or freakin sweet.

I still do not know whether the OP is for real.  Why would such a supreme being need to ask the lesser beings for help? 

Just sayin'.   Grin
Logged

EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2370



WWW
« Reply #81 on: August 03, 2012, 12:08:37 AM »
ReplyReply

You could do a lot worse than the H3d-39. Nice back with good DR and color.    I had the multishot version of that back but in their CF mount which allowed me to mount it on a variety of cameras.   It was the CF-ii 39MS.  Still works on the H body but you could also mount it on a Fuji 680, a mamiya RZ, or in my case a Rollei 6008AF all of which are fine cameras and have nice sets of lenses.   It's really a shame that Hasselblad killed the CF line of backs. 
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #82 on: August 03, 2012, 06:13:25 AM »
ReplyReply

I have flip flopped between thinking that the OP is a legitimate poster with a (to him/her) legitimate question and thinking that the OP is a troll looking to stir the pot then sit back and laugh.  

I'm pretty sure y'all been trolled, but it has allowed everyone a nice chance to shake their shibboleths ...
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1648



WWW
« Reply #83 on: August 03, 2012, 06:27:09 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm pretty sure y'all been trolled...

Speak for yourself  Grin
Logged

Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 724


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #84 on: August 03, 2012, 11:08:45 AM »
ReplyReply


D800 has better dynamic range than the IQ180, but a sensor half the area size.

Is this statement based on your actual experience or is it anecdotal in nature?
Logged

Captian Light
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24



WWW
« Reply #85 on: August 03, 2012, 01:09:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Is this statement based on your actual experience or is it anecdotal in nature?

What is the obsession with the D800, and Nikon in general. In comparison with Leica, Hasselblad, and Canon, Nikon just seems to produce flat and lackluster images. Not to mention the smugness that comes from Nikonians who think they're better than everyone.
Logged

When I eat, it's the food that is scared.
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7236


WWW
« Reply #86 on: August 03, 2012, 01:17:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Not exactly the impression I get from the samples I have seen.

Best regards
Erik

...
In comparison with Leica, Hasselblad, and Canon, Nikon just seems to produce flat and lackluster images. Not to mention the smugness that comes from Nikonians who think they're better than everyone.
Logged

Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 724


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #87 on: August 03, 2012, 01:23:50 PM »
ReplyReply

The question was posed since the author makes the statement of fact.  In order to better understand what was said I seeking clarification; is the statement based on personal experience with the D800 and IQ180 or is it anecdotal?

And to more directly answer your question.  I think a certain amount of "smugness" for lack of a better term can be expected from actual users of any system be it Hasselblad, Canon, Nikon, Leica or Red.  It boils down to mine is bigger and better than yours.
Logged

jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #88 on: August 03, 2012, 01:25:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Speak for yourself  Grin

Credit where credit is due ... you did not take the bait ...
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5120


« Reply #89 on: August 03, 2012, 02:06:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Is this statement based on your actual experience or is it anecdotal in nature?
You omit a third alternative: examination of test data, sample images including raw files, and reviews based thereon from a variety sources. Even us professional scientists do not rely solely on the results of experiments that we did ourselves. Dynamic range is after all a fairly specific quantitative measure --- we are not talking about more visceral, experiential attributes like "pop" or "3D effect" or the way that different lenses "draw", or how a camera "falls in the hand".
Logged
Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 724


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #90 on: August 03, 2012, 02:39:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I understand the third concept.  What I don't understand is the ability to make a factual statement without first having true first hand information.  Without the firsthand information you're left with nothing better than hearsay evidence. 

My only problem with the statement is that the author makes it as if he has actual experience and not what was picked up along the way on the internet.  I've read many issues on the internet, have done a Google search on the subject however there's no way I'd present information in such a factual manor without first adding the caveat that while not actual experience the statement is based on what I've read.  I don't have a D800 nor an IQ180 so can't speak to which as better dynamic range.  I do have an IQ160 and 1DsIII but that's yet another subject.
Logged

jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #91 on: August 03, 2012, 04:12:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I understand the third concept.  What I don't understand is the ability to make a factual statement without first having true first hand information.  Without the firsthand information you're left with nothing better than hearsay evidence. 

If you actually understood ... then you wouldn't call scientific data "hearsay" ...

Logged
Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 724


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #92 on: August 03, 2012, 04:35:02 PM »
ReplyReply

When it comes to the photographic community I have always given more credence to a statement that was supported by actual hands-on experience versus a theory or hypothesis of another yet un-named person.  While empirical and properly documented evidence is useful in a general term for deciding which stick is bigger or better I need to see it for myself in the situations that I use on a daily basis.

Again to make a statement which gives the allusion of actually seen the evidence firsthand is lacking in my opinion. 

I still feel it's a simple request.  Is the statement based on first hand experience or anecdotal.  Have you actually seen it or have you just read about it.  A factual statement is based on facts that the person represents to be true.  Of course we are speaking of the internet where no one lies or misrepresents themselves or their statements so everything we read including this thread is factual.

Just feeling cranky today....  Tongue
Logged

hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1666


« Reply #93 on: August 03, 2012, 05:03:51 PM »
ReplyReply

I still feel it's a simple request.  Is the statement based on first hand experience or anecdotal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
I think that you are making a lot of fuzz that there is no reason to make. A fair request would be "did you experience this first-hand?"

Quote
While empirical and properly documented evidence is useful in a general term for deciding which stick is bigger or better I need to see it for myself in the situations that I use on a daily basis.
Without those empirical "evidence", you and I may not have had cameras at all.

If you only trust only your own eyes and your own experience, then there is really nothing left to discuss. Go out making images :-)

-h
« Last Edit: August 03, 2012, 05:07:45 PM by hjulenissen » Logged
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #94 on: August 03, 2012, 11:29:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I do have both a D800E and an IQ180 and have previously posted examples, the D800E does have more DR than the IQ180
It is slight but noticeable when pixel peeping and not noticeable in print.
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #95 on: August 05, 2012, 09:35:58 AM »
ReplyReply

What is the obsession with the D800, and Nikon in general. In comparison with Leica, Hasselblad, and Canon, Nikon just seems to produce flat and lackluster images. Not to mention the smugness that comes from Nikonians who think they're better than everyone.

Case closed.

Logged
torger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1358


« Reply #96 on: August 07, 2012, 09:26:51 AM »
ReplyReply

So what is the best setup for landscape photography?

This one is easy :-). A technical camera with an IQ160 back (IQ180 is just more colour cast issues), or if not too fixated with having lots of pixels a 33 megapixel Leaf Aptus-II 7 (you can make quite big prints with that too, and has excellent performance with technical lenses).

Landscape photographers used 4x5" and 8x10" view cameras back in the film days not only for the resolution, but for the movements too. I think having movements is an important part of landscape photography, but as always it depends on your artistic style.

The tech camera should be a model with built-in tilt function as it is important for high resolution landscape photography if you open shoot open scenes (which many indeed typically do). Pancake cameras are easier to use, but I kind of like view cameras (I use a Linhof Techno myself) which have more flexible movements and considerably cheaper lens mounts.

A Nikon D800E is an excellent budget alternative, but the limited availability of excellent tilt-shift lenses does not make it as nice as the MFD tech cameras for landscape. For deep DoF images I don't think there is any "look" advantage of MF systems.
Logged
ziyatacir
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


WWW
« Reply #97 on: August 07, 2012, 03:31:13 PM »
ReplyReply

The best setup that money can get for me:
Cambo w-rs AE
Phase one IQ180
Rodenstock 40 mm Tilt&swing.

This is the gear I got and I moved from Canon EOS-1 ds mark iii and L glasses.
It is a dream come through.
Check out my pictures at www.ziyatacir.com  .

Ziya Tacir
« Last Edit: August 07, 2012, 03:33:12 PM by ziyatacir » Logged
Raul_82
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 104


WWW
« Reply #98 on: August 17, 2012, 11:30:26 AM »
ReplyReply

with a 50k budget that you are willing to spent, and assuming that you are more into landscape, I would suggest one 40 Mpx or higher Digital back, and either a view camera (if you are into photography as a contemplative and patience art),  or a SLR like the Mamiya 645DF (If you would like to speed up a little, and don't need the movements)

There really isn't a "best camera", there are good cameras made for specific needs. 

Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad