Jump to content

Larry Bolch

Members
  • Content Count

    195
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from Robr in Starting to get a little discouraged with my food photography. Can Fuji X compete with DSLR? Critique requested.   
    Food photography is all about styling. Photography is simple, use a sturdy tripod since exposures can be on the long side, normal lens for natural perspective, f/8.0 or f/11 for adequate depth of field, base ISO setting. The Toit would do fine. Since the food is not in motion, there is no problem doing a four-second exposure at f/11 at ISO200.
     
    Unless you just can not get the whole image in focus, don't go much beyond f/11. Diffraction has already begun at f/11, though it is still not noticeable. Beyond f/11 it increases substantially. Do a test shot. If it is over or under, use the exposure compensation dial to nail it. The food is totally patient, so there is no need to rush while getting it right. Manual exposure works fine as well.
     
    Avoid wide apertures. Food really needs to be fully seen and shallow depth of field simply looks out of focus. Consider the background. Unless it carries with it some meaningful information, a bit of softness does not hurt. Of course, this nullifies the prime advantage of the 56mm, which is far more suited to photographing people where shallow DOF can be useful. If I needed the added focal length, I would trade for the brilliantly sharp 60mm f/2.4 which also gives you much more closeup capability.
     
    If you have not studied food styling, you will be amazed at the voodoo that goes into it. Most photographed food is inedible. That perfectly done turkey has been varnished the perfect colour and shine! Ice cream melts, so mashed potatoes or lard are used in its place. Ice also melts, so ice cubes and crushed ice is clear plastic. Sparkling vegetables have been sprayed with glycerine. Grapes get their patina via talcum powder. It is well covered on the web. Search for 'food photography tricks of the trade'.
     
    If anything the X-T2 is overkill. The images on your page are less than one megapixel. You are throwing away more than 23MP of detail. What could a more expensive camera possibly give you? If you were shooting food professionally, it is fully capable of display prints for use in mall food booths or restaurants, of enormous size and clarity. If you have doubts, don't take my word for it. Rent a dSLR and try using it and the X-T2 on the same setup.
  2. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from woodlander in 3 Days in Rome... Which Gear?   
    Whatever works at home,
    Will work the same in Rome.
  3. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from sama3033 in Fuji X-H1 – Your Opinion   
    Fuji has simplicity well covered with their entry-level cameras. This camera is anything BUT entry-level. It is intended to carve out a spot in the ever more important video/stills field. It is a fully pro-level camera and makes no excuses about it. Any commercial videomaker will feel completely at home in the complexity of the video menus.
     
    You may have noticed that they also announced the MK lenses in X-mounts. These are lenses designed for commercial use, with all the necessary bells and whistles. At $4kUS, they are not by any stretch of the imagination entry-level or even for enthusiasts. This is in keeping with Fuji's traditional industrial-level clients. At the moment, B&H lists 87 different pro-video Fujinon lenses ranging in price from $4,000 to $233,490.00. During the film era, their large format lenses were considered state-of-the-art and their medium format SLR—GX680—was the envy of Hasselblad users. With the X-cameras, it is somewhat of a new venture for Fuji entering the retail commercial market. 
     
    DSLRs will be around for the foreseeable future, but with diminishing sales. Fuji is wisely laying the groundwork for fully pro-level mirrorless cameras with the GFX50S medium-format and the X-H1 in the video field. Working photographers demand fully featured cameras and take the time to learn the complexities. When CaNikon finally builds pro-level mirrorless cameras, Fuji will already be there.
  4. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from Bob Cooley in Fuji X-H1 – Your Opinion   
    Fuji has simplicity well covered with their entry-level cameras. This camera is anything BUT entry-level. It is intended to carve out a spot in the ever more important video/stills field. It is a fully pro-level camera and makes no excuses about it. Any commercial videomaker will feel completely at home in the complexity of the video menus.
     
    You may have noticed that they also announced the MK lenses in X-mounts. These are lenses designed for commercial use, with all the necessary bells and whistles. At $4kUS, they are not by any stretch of the imagination entry-level or even for enthusiasts. This is in keeping with Fuji's traditional industrial-level clients. At the moment, B&H lists 87 different pro-video Fujinon lenses ranging in price from $4,000 to $233,490.00. During the film era, their large format lenses were considered state-of-the-art and their medium format SLR—GX680—was the envy of Hasselblad users. With the X-cameras, it is somewhat of a new venture for Fuji entering the retail commercial market. 
     
    DSLRs will be around for the foreseeable future, but with diminishing sales. Fuji is wisely laying the groundwork for fully pro-level mirrorless cameras with the GFX50S medium-format and the X-H1 in the video field. Working photographers demand fully featured cameras and take the time to learn the complexities. When CaNikon finally builds pro-level mirrorless cameras, Fuji will already be there.
  5. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from Arthur in Long Exposure Settings   
    Exposure at ISO200 in bright sunlight would be approximately 1/200th at f/16. Five whole seconds would cause terminal over-exposure. Try again after sunset or before sunrise. Neutral density filters would also help though they would need to be extremely dense. Debateable if they would be worth the price for such a cliché image.
  6. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from vivizen in Fuji Half Frame Film Camera   
    Of course, the X-cameras are the same format and size as film half-frame cameras. You may well be the only person on earth who would buy a Fujifilm half-frame film camera. There are good reasons why Fujifilm may not respond to your desire. 
     
    Over the decades, film has improved very slowly. In the past two decades, there has been little incentive to improve it at all. My gorgeous art deco Olympus FT was the epitome of half-frame, but even with the superb lenses, the print quality was appalling, even compared to ordinary 35mm. Back then, size REALLY mattered.
     
    On the other hand, sensor quality has made jumps in orders of magnitude. According to the great photographer and printmaker Ctien, m4/3 caught up to 6×9 film about six years ago. This could be nit-picked, but the fact is that digital lusts for nothing that film gives. Film has a cost, processing has a cost and printing has a cost. Only if your time has no value, time too has a cost.
     
    http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2016/03/when-will-micro-43-equal-medium-format-film-we-have-the-definitive-answer.html 
     
    Then there is the obvious. No matter the format, the total cost of ownership goes up with each exposure when shooting film. Film has its cost, processing has its cost, printing has its cost, and then there is time. Processing colour film yourself requires precise timing and temperature. Negative film is a bit forgiving, but slides—the equivalent of shooting JPEGs—is not. Temperatures regulated to ±¼° and disaster if you fumble. Kodachrome offered no processing options. Successful printing in the fume-room means years of practice and vast quantities of materials—and time. With Photoshop and an Epson photo printer, a day in the fume-room is reduced to 15 minutes or less with the result assuming maximum skills, approaching colour separation/dye transfer printing more than direct colour.

    Again it can be argued, but an APS-C or full frame image is now well past what medium format offered back in the film era and approaching large format. It may be well worth mentioning that large format lenses showed appalling numbers when tested upon standard laboratory standards. With an 8×10 contact print, it simply did not matter. With a photomural, it also did not matter, since it was viewed at a distance. Our Fujinon lenses can match or beat the lenses that were sold during the film era. Compared to the best of that time, our lenses are bargains.
     
    If you want decent image quality, forget the smaller formats. Medium-format may equal or exceed m4/3. Our APS-C and full frame are in the limbo between medium and large format. Decades back, shooting the breeze with my working colleagues, I recall wanting a 35mm sized camera that shoots 8×10 quality images. I am old, but I may well shoot with one in my lifetime.
  7. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from Vidalgo in 3 Days in Rome... Which Gear?   
    Whatever works at home,
    Will work the same in Rome.
  8. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from triton76 in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    As a photojournalist during the film era as well, to get 360 shots required a brick of 10 rolls of 36 exposures or a brick and a half of 24 exposure rolls. At the end of the roll, one stopped shooting, rewound the film back into the cassette, assuming 35mm, opened the back and removed it, then opened the box with the next roll, removed it from its canister, threaded it to the take-up spool, closed the back and advanced to the first frame, watching to make sure the rewind knob turned indicating that the film was properly moving through the camera. 
     
    Now it takes about 20 seconds to switch to a fresh battery and that only happens about once in 360 shot. Compared to 10 or 15 very bulky rolls of film, it is tiny. Covering sports, if there was a pause one took advantage of it to swap in a fresh roll even if the previous one was not finished. Covering NASCAR I often turned in many short rolls in order to have the maximum exposures available for the big wreck.
  9. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from asathor in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    I looked up CIPA (Camera & Imaging Products Association) data on mirrorless cameras and made a selection of them. Being tested by an independent body, they should be much relative to one another if not absolute in real-world use.
     
    Fujifilm XA3 - 410
    Fujifilm X100F - 390 Fujifilm XT-20 - 340 Sony Alpha a6500 - 350 Sony Alpha a7R II -290 Canon EOS M10 - 255 Nikon 1 J5 - 250 Olympus PEN E-PL8 - 350 Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 - 410   As long as camera makers concentrate on compactness and light-weight, the situation will continue. Battery grips are somewhat of a solution, but large bodies and heavy batteries are pretty much dictated to get dSLR performance.
  10. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from GoodPhotos in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    As a photojournalist during the film era as well, to get 360 shots required a brick of 10 rolls of 36 exposures or a brick and a half of 24 exposure rolls. At the end of the roll, one stopped shooting, rewound the film back into the cassette, assuming 35mm, opened the back and removed it, then opened the box with the next roll, removed it from its canister, threaded it to the take-up spool, closed the back and advanced to the first frame, watching to make sure the rewind knob turned indicating that the film was properly moving through the camera. 
     
    Now it takes about 20 seconds to switch to a fresh battery and that only happens about once in 360 shot. Compared to 10 or 15 very bulky rolls of film, it is tiny. Covering sports, if there was a pause one took advantage of it to swap in a fresh roll even if the previous one was not finished. Covering NASCAR I often turned in many short rolls in order to have the maximum exposures available for the big wreck.
  11. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from pete1959 in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    That was certainly true of Nickle-Cadmium and  NiMH batteries but is of minimal concern with Lithium-ion batteries.
  12. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from zippo in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    As a photojournalist during the film era as well, to get 360 shots required a brick of 10 rolls of 36 exposures or a brick and a half of 24 exposure rolls. At the end of the roll, one stopped shooting, rewound the film back into the cassette, assuming 35mm, opened the back and removed it, then opened the box with the next roll, removed it from its canister, threaded it to the take-up spool, closed the back and advanced to the first frame, watching to make sure the rewind knob turned indicating that the film was properly moving through the camera. 
     
    Now it takes about 20 seconds to switch to a fresh battery and that only happens about once in 360 shot. Compared to 10 or 15 very bulky rolls of film, it is tiny. Covering sports, if there was a pause one took advantage of it to swap in a fresh roll even if the previous one was not finished. Covering NASCAR I often turned in many short rolls in order to have the maximum exposures available for the big wreck.
  13. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from Curiojo in Travelling Lenses.   
    Hopeless to get a definitive answer. It is not about geographically specific demands upon lenses, but rather the focal lengths you yourself find comfortable in a given photographic situation.
     
    There are no wide-angle countries, no telephoto countries nor any 18-55mm specific countries. Wherever you go, you will find narrow alleyways and broad plazas. Flowers native to the region photograph no differently from those outside your door. Superwide lenses can make some sweeping vistas seem vast, but a panorama shot with a normal lens will capture even more. On the other hand, a telephoto can strongly emphasise a unique landscape feature. A lens that works well on a tall person will work fine on a shorter person. A bird is a bird, and photographs about the same no matter where you find it.
     
    I love travel photography and I could post an inventory of my kit on the most recent trip. It would do you no good. I used everything from a fisheye to the equivalent of a 2,000mm on a bridge camera. It is very unlikely that we work and see identically, so even if I posted along with examples and expressed my reasons for lens choice, they would not necessarily resonate with you at all. Even though it was a journey through the Rocky Mountains and I live in a rather flat city, what I used there is what I use here. Your eye and your workflow dictate the lenses—not the destination.
  14. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from pete1959 in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    As a photojournalist during the film era as well, to get 360 shots required a brick of 10 rolls of 36 exposures or a brick and a half of 24 exposure rolls. At the end of the roll, one stopped shooting, rewound the film back into the cassette, assuming 35mm, opened the back and removed it, then opened the box with the next roll, removed it from its canister, threaded it to the take-up spool, closed the back and advanced to the first frame, watching to make sure the rewind knob turned indicating that the film was properly moving through the camera. 
     
    Now it takes about 20 seconds to switch to a fresh battery and that only happens about once in 360 shot. Compared to 10 or 15 very bulky rolls of film, it is tiny. Covering sports, if there was a pause one took advantage of it to swap in a fresh roll even if the previous one was not finished. Covering NASCAR I often turned in many short rolls in order to have the maximum exposures available for the big wreck.
  15. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from Guzzi Jim in User review of useful lenses plus advice sought   
    If you are comfortable with the two zooms, as BobJ says, you are pretty much covered for everything. I would recommend the addition of either the 23mm or 35mm f/1.4 for indoors and night photography. Considering how well the camera handles high-ISO ratings, being able to shoot wide open or just a stop or two down will open up a whole new and fascinating world. I have not shot with the 23mm, but use the 35mm constantly in low light. With an ISO6400, you get a decent shutter speed and the quality of the content more than makes up for the small amount of noise.
  16. Like
    Larry Bolch reacted to CDBC in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    Larry, that's an interesting input. And of course photographers would always have a second body loaded and ready, when shooting at that rate.
     
    Noting your location, here's an aside that may amuse: in the late 70's, I was working in a photographic retail store in Edmonton Centre. Very low humidity and lots of nylon carpet in the store, so static shocks were frequent.
     
    These shocks killed three brand new Pentax ME's just from being picked up from the display cabinet before we figured out what was going on; on one occasion (you learned to hold a key between your forefingers), just touching the cash register triggered it to ring up a $100,000 sale and open the drawer.
     
    But the weirdest thing (and one I'll take some credit for solving) was when a couple of photographers that I knew who were shooting for the Edmonton Journal kept encountering 'lightning strikes' across their negatives. This turned out to be caused by the automatic rewind in their Nikon's zipping the film back into the cassette so fast that it generated static shocks from the plastic film base passing through the 35mm canister's light blocking flocking (could not resist that) so quickly.
  17. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from PascallacsaP in Lightroom for x-trans... seriously?   
    Sigh...
     
    The ever recurring thread. It will go on endlessly between those who view images on a pixel level vs those who view images normally. The pixel peepers will become personal and abusive and the photographers will respond in kind. Pixel peepers will fight among themselves over alternate software, each promoting their favourite, with contempt for the others who don't see the difference.
     
    As the thread finally winds down, someone else will blame Lightwave for waxy skin and it will begin all over again.
     
    <sigh>"Sigh"</sigh>
  18. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from George_P in Battery Management and the Fuji X-T2   
    As a photojournalist during the film era as well, to get 360 shots required a brick of 10 rolls of 36 exposures or a brick and a half of 24 exposure rolls. At the end of the roll, one stopped shooting, rewound the film back into the cassette, assuming 35mm, opened the back and removed it, then opened the box with the next roll, removed it from its canister, threaded it to the take-up spool, closed the back and advanced to the first frame, watching to make sure the rewind knob turned indicating that the film was properly moving through the camera. 
     
    Now it takes about 20 seconds to switch to a fresh battery and that only happens about once in 360 shot. Compared to 10 or 15 very bulky rolls of film, it is tiny. Covering sports, if there was a pause one took advantage of it to swap in a fresh roll even if the previous one was not finished. Covering NASCAR I often turned in many short rolls in order to have the maximum exposures available for the big wreck.
  19. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from Curiojo in Starting to get a little discouraged with my food photography. Can Fuji X compete with DSLR? Critique requested.   
    Food photography is all about styling. Photography is simple, use a sturdy tripod since exposures can be on the long side, normal lens for natural perspective, f/8.0 or f/11 for adequate depth of field, base ISO setting. The Toit would do fine. Since the food is not in motion, there is no problem doing a four-second exposure at f/11 at ISO200.
     
    Unless you just can not get the whole image in focus, don't go much beyond f/11. Diffraction has already begun at f/11, though it is still not noticeable. Beyond f/11 it increases substantially. Do a test shot. If it is over or under, use the exposure compensation dial to nail it. The food is totally patient, so there is no need to rush while getting it right. Manual exposure works fine as well.
     
    Avoid wide apertures. Food really needs to be fully seen and shallow depth of field simply looks out of focus. Consider the background. Unless it carries with it some meaningful information, a bit of softness does not hurt. Of course, this nullifies the prime advantage of the 56mm, which is far more suited to photographing people where shallow DOF can be useful. If I needed the added focal length, I would trade for the brilliantly sharp 60mm f/2.4 which also gives you much more closeup capability.
     
    If you have not studied food styling, you will be amazed at the voodoo that goes into it. Most photographed food is inedible. That perfectly done turkey has been varnished the perfect colour and shine! Ice cream melts, so mashed potatoes or lard are used in its place. Ice also melts, so ice cubes and crushed ice is clear plastic. Sparkling vegetables have been sprayed with glycerine. Grapes get their patina via talcum powder. It is well covered on the web. Search for 'food photography tricks of the trade'.
     
    If anything the X-T2 is overkill. The images on your page are less than one megapixel. You are throwing away more than 23MP of detail. What could a more expensive camera possibly give you? If you were shooting food professionally, it is fully capable of display prints for use in mall food booths or restaurants, of enormous size and clarity. If you have doubts, don't take my word for it. Rent a dSLR and try using it and the X-T2 on the same setup.
  20. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from p360 in Fuji Fisheye   
    Not my first fisheye, so I think it will continue getting considerable use. The reason, is that I am not using it to shoot typical "fisheye" shots, but much more as a superwide or panoramic lens that has curvature which I don't emphasize. I have tested it using the X-Pro1's sweep panorama, and stitching worked! I have also tested stitching in the new version of Adobe Camera RAW with dramatic results.

    I find it does very nice interiors with all four walls, when shooting from a corner. Landscapes are quite dramatic as well. Photoshop CC has tools that can pretty much straighten everything, but for the most part, I don't bother.
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.
  21. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from gaopa in Available storage on SD card   
    Yes, over the years the few cards that have been reported as corrupted, the common thread was that they were not formatted in the camera. Evidently, cards—like hard-drives—can become fragmented. Formatting them in the camera restores them to what the camera wants to see when it writes.
  22. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from claude in Fuji Fisheye   
    Not my first fisheye, so I think it will continue getting considerable use. The reason, is that I am not using it to shoot typical "fisheye" shots, but much more as a superwide or panoramic lens that has curvature which I don't emphasize. I have tested it using the X-Pro1's sweep panorama, and stitching worked! I have also tested stitching in the new version of Adobe Camera RAW with dramatic results.

    I find it does very nice interiors with all four walls, when shooting from a corner. Landscapes are quite dramatic as well. Photoshop CC has tools that can pretty much straighten everything, but for the most part, I don't bother.
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.
  23. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from fbherr in Any reason I shouldn't be using 2 adapters to connect an old lens to my X-T2?   
    "If it works, don't fix it." Adapters are simply tubes with no optics. Using two instead of one should make no difference in the operation of the camera or image quality.
  24. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from George_P in How to achieve tungsten white balance on XT1?   
    Auto white balance does not work for a good reason. Early in the digital era, some engineer decided to make auto white balance full spectrum. It worked well indoors, giving a nice neutral balance. Everyone was happy—that is until someone shot a glorious sunset. Yup—neutral balance as if it was shot at noon.
     
    Not everyone was happy then. 
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. /uploads/emoticons/default_biggrin.png">  
    If one is shooting in mixed lighting or unknown lighting, there is the Custom balance feature that works very well. Select it and point the lens at a known neutral tone. There are grey cards specifically designed for this, but a sheet of white paper will work as well. Just make sure the reading is done at the subject position. 
  25. Like
    Larry Bolch got a reaction from mcdesign in Lightroom for x-trans... seriously?   
    Sigh...
     
    The ever recurring thread. It will go on endlessly between those who view images on a pixel level vs those who view images normally. The pixel peepers will become personal and abusive and the photographers will respond in kind. Pixel peepers will fight among themselves over alternate software, each promoting their favourite, with contempt for the others who don't see the difference.
     
    As the thread finally winds down, someone else will blame Lightwave for waxy skin and it will begin all over again.
     
    <sigh>"Sigh"</sigh>
×
×
  • Create New...