I'm sorry to hear that. But looking at it on the bright side: if you can still use your hands reasonably well, you should be good. On a more serious note, ailments like arthritis or severe tremor can spoil the broth, making it difficult to spool film onto reels etc.
Digital seems to be designed for those old enough to retire from analog
Hah, that's one way of looking at it! Sure enough, digital can be easy on the wallet, and there are many bobs and bits that make the photographer's life easier.
Whether it has the same overall appeal as film...that's up to you to decide!
At the very least, it more readily allows you to indulge in studying the individual pixels....
Since I’m focused, pun intended, on landscape photography I prefer all the details a good sensor can give
it’s almost impossible to see the full potential of film easily since the complexity one needs to understand and the quality control of labs doing the development is hit or miss, but digital is as easy as SD card to computer, wa la…!
Since I’m focused, pun intended, on landscape photography I prefer all the details a good sensor can give…!
Actually my film scans do look amazing while not being as sharp or clinical…!
In a way; both digital and film come with their pitfalls. But digital does away with the chemical part of the process, and scanning of course, and I think that makes it a little easier for some to deal with.
Well, that's a compelling argument for shooting digital.
And that's a compelling argument for shooting film.
Why choose if you can have both!
I prefer photos to details and don't see much point assessing the "quality" of an image at any magnification higher than the final print size. If it looks good on a piece of 8x10 paper, it looks good. If I want a photo of a pine needle, I won't take a photo of a tree - let alone of a forest.
Where did he mention which Nikkor lenses he is using?Zeiss lens you have for Leica beats any of mentioned Nikons handily.
Where did he mention which Nikkor lenses he is using?
There's a list in the signature. Unless something unlisted was used.
It doesn't display on my mobile browser.
His signature lists:
50mm AI and pre AI f/2 and a lens.
Where did he mention which Nikkor lenses he is using?
My signature lists the Nikkor lenses I use…!
His signature lists:
Nikon F2; Nikkor-28mm f/2.8 AI-s, 35mm O.C. f/2 pre AI, 50mm f/1.4 AI-s, 50mm AI and pre AI f/2 and a 105mm AI f2.5, lens.
Leica M-D 262 with a Zeiss T Planar 50mm f/2 ZM
And you the most accurate and realistic 50mm lenses I have ever seen or tested.
The 105mm f2.5 is a darn good one as well.
Until I got the Zeiss T Planar 50mm F/2, I thought they were great…!
This explains the posterization bit, but not the fuzziness due to other reasons. See post #28 for a list. If you were to get your scans in e.g. 16 bit TIFF, they'd still look virtually the same.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?