|Angle Viewfinder VIDEOS|
|Monday, March 26, 2012|
Customize your Olympus Pen.
In this in depth video award winning photographer Giulio Sciorio shows
you how to customize your Olympus Pen with some stylish accessories. Not only will the Flipbac Grips stick to the surface of your camera, they also adhere well to surfaces such as those cool camera covers. Thanks for sharing the great video Giulio!
|Monday, November 21, 2011|
NEW! Camera Grip for Canon S100 & Nikon V1
|The G4 Grip - It's here!|
Many people find that the small bump on cameras such as the Canon S100 and the Nikon V1
do not provide enough of a grip. The G4 Flipbac Camera Grip will fit
over this bump to create a perfect hold. It can also be used on regular
cameras lacking a grip.
The G4 Flipbac Camera Grip features a leather grain texture, made of high grade
silicone and quality 3M adhesive. And for those of you who like to be more subtle, the G4 does not have a logo. When
mounted on the camera, the G4 Camera Grip handsomely adds form and function as if a “factory finish”. The G4 Camera Grip is USD $10.99*.
|Friday, September 09, 2011|
Flipbac Camera Grips - Behind the Scenes
|Here we explain the steps and decisions we took to bring our
camera grips to market.|
|Tuesday, August 30, 2011|
The E-P Mini takes on big brother E-P3.
We’ve got your black, we’ve got your pink, and we’ve got
magenta. We have your color!
The new PEN E-PL3 and PEN E-PM1 (E-P mini) are pretty
colorful. But they aren’t all show and no go. They challenge any small
dslr for image quality and speed. They even look to go head-to-head with their
older sibling, the E-P3.
One visible deficiency these new cameras have over the E-P3
is no grip. Easily fixed. We have dressed up the EPM1 with the Flipbac Camera
Grip 1. Now we can really take on big brother E-P3!
E-P3, the big brother:
|Tuesday, June 28, 2011|
Pentax Q – Mini-Me’s Camera of Choice!
Last week we saw the release of Pentax’s new “Q” camera. A rugged, understated retro-designed camera. You may think there is a roll of kodachrome inside with all the nobs and dials.
The press release states the Q (for cute?) sells at $800 suggested retail for a kit with a 8.5mm f1.9 lens (50mm equivalent). Not cheap.
It also states the Q features “a 12.4 megapixel 1/2.3-inch CMOS sensor, similar in size to sensors used in many point-and-shoot models, but adding advanced camera features including 12-bit RAW file capture in Adobe's DNG format, in addition to standard JPEGs.” Hmmm? Don'y the Canon G12, S95, Olympus XZ-1, and Panasonic Lumix LX5 also have these features at half the price?
Get out the shrink-ray gun. Pentax Inc. explains the camera is targeted primarily at D-SLR users looking for a backup camera that is smaller and lighter than a full size D-SLR. Apart from the prime 47mm standard lens there will be a 27.5 - 83mm zoom, a fish-eye (160-degree coverage), and two 'toy' lenses – wide (35mm) and telephoto (100mm) optics. But in addition to my D-SLR and its lenses, am I also going to pack around a Mini-Me and its lenses? We all love the bokeh (soft focus) of D-SLRs. However this effect comes from sensor size and lens to focal plane ratios. The Pentax Q has the similar sensor and design ratios of the above cameras, so “D-SLR” bokeh is near impossible. The above cameras have zoom lenses, but with the Q we need to change lenses for different focal lengths.
This is one cute little camera, but other that cute, I am not clear of its purpose. Let’s hope for the best. Maybe this baby can capture the shallow depth of field shots yet!
|Wednesday, April 20, 2011|
Create a solid hold with our new grips!
We are really excited to announce the launch of our new Flipbac Camera Grips for digital
cameras. Many point and shoot digital cameras have no grip and a smooth
finish. Even though a camera may be small, it is often difficult to hold
and can slip out of your hand. Our grips can be easily
applied to the front of your camera to prevent slipping and create a
solid hold. One-hand picture taking is easier and safer. The three
different grips, inspired by the most popular cameras today, have been
designed to blend in seamlessly with your camera. More images and information are over here >>
|Wednesday, February 02, 2011|
This blog has been quiet for a time. We are focusing efforts on a new product that should be out soon. However watching the 2010 fall season and into the New Year unfold, there have been a lot of new cameras. Most are evolutions from previous models. Last year also saw the coming of age of the still camera/video ability - all good.
A camera that has caught my eye is the Olympus XZ-1. I have always had a sweet spot for Olympus. Twenty years ago I bought a ME-Super in my late teens. It was an almost pocketable SLR. Great little camera, great lenses. Then Olympus produced the C-3040Z, C-4040Z and C5050Z digital cameras which featured some of the brightest zooms to ever appear on compact cameras. Then we slipped into the dark ages of long dark zoom lensed cameras.
Is Olympus our modern day Medici family? Leading us out of the darkness into a camera design renaissance? In our “Top 5+” page we put the Olympus XZ-1 second after the Canon S95. The only issues being the bigger size of the XZ-1 and lens cap. However we are having second thoughts. The XZ-1 has taken the better of the two other forerunners in the high end compact category - the Panasonic LX5 and the Canon S95.
It has the brightest lens, without the compromise of being too short a focal length, a really useful 28-112mm lens range and a very reliable exposure system that makes a photographers hit rate that much higher. The XZ-1 has a good ISO even though it is seldom used because the lens is so fast, and a very fast internal processing easy to use interface. I also appreciate Olympus has gone the understated route with its design. I have never understood the benefit of a flashy camera other than “big face”. For better photography, the lower key the equipment the better.
The future looks bright!
|Monday, December 06, 2010|
A travel slide show that will not bore you.
|Sunday, November 21, 2010|
Which would you prefer?
Which would you prefer – An Ansel Adams original print or a negative? I came across this thread on DPReview and appreciate and agree with these viewpoints.
These comments are very relevant today with the universal use of digital cameras and Photoshop. The saying that “photographs never lie” is not true. It is the opposite. In the past darkroom techniques such as, cropping, burning, dodging, masking, retouching where commonly use to manipulate photographic images. In most cases this was done by the photographer to enhance the photo, not to deceive. In fact, taking the photo was only half of the job, the processing and printing was an equally important second part to complete an image. So from the start of photography, photographs have been manipulated. For many years now the darkroom has been replaced by the desktop computer and Photoshop. While the image capturing tools and process has changed, the photographer’s goal has not. Taking a digital photo is still the first step in producing an image, followed by post processing and printing. So to answer the above question – Would I prefer an original Adams print over a negative - absolutely!
The thread below is quoted from DPReview:
Rsn48 wrote: “Even if the negatives are Ansel's work, they aren't that valuable, I know I'm one of the few, if only on the planet to think this, my reason is simple. Ansel often bragged about how much time he would put in the darkroom to bring a negative to live in a print. Ansel was really one of the original photoshop freaks of his day.
His prints were more about the darkroom than about the negative; he'd burn this, dodge that, etc. Ansel was about creating a "feeling" about his images, the drama of the sky [which on print may have not been dramatic], the tones of the mountain as it recedes into the valley, etc. Owning an Ansel negative is kind of like discovering all the paint tubes Picasso used.”
Jon Rty wrote: “Well, that's oversimplifying it a bit. As I've understood it Adams went to great lengths to ensure the best possible result he could get. This of course included much work in the darkroom, but also incredible care and technique when exposing and processing his film. Developing individual sheets based on notes he made while taking then, the zone system and what not. He is one of the best known early craft masters, but that didn't include only the darkroom. And then there's the fact that he had a great eye as well.”
Rsn48 wrote: “Ansel was no doubt an excellent photographer and I'm sure great care and creativity went into the negative, but the negative was the starting point, not the end point. So let’s say I have in my trunk a rare Ansel negative a famous mountain in California and I get it developed by professional developers here in Vancouver BC, I still won't have an Ansel print. The pro's I'd employ wouldn't know Ansel's intent for that negative, to evolve the image into one of his prints.”