Nice! Thanks for sharing! I have a friend that is onto compact cameras including a classe wide model and I can see his point in having something compact in your pocket and take a photo now and then! Have a nice Friday!
Thank you for this review! Never even heard of it before, so i JUMPED on ebay to snatch one. And then i saw the price... oh well! Thank you again for all your videos. I have watched, and enjoyed, them all
The pricing is stupid. It's really a shame. Great camera, but not at any price. Thanks for your kind words! It's a lot of fun to do the videos. Still learning a lot on every one.
Hello Alastair, have you found a good place to get these serviced? The flash on my no longer charges up (probably a simple capacitor or electrolytic issue) and looking to get it repaired.
Hi Brett, I'm afraid I don't know of any places that can service it - but that's only because it hasn't required any service and I haven't had any need to search around. As I'm sure you know figuring out the problem wouldn't be too hard, but finding replacement parts could be a major challenge. Sorry I can't be more help.
The Klasse (either one) is a contemporary of and is very similar in operation and imaging performance to the Contax T2 or Nikon 35Ti. fI you are looking to buy something of this sort, I'd let price be the major factor, and if you can accept the non-retracting lens it sports, I'd defer in favor of the Konica Hexar AF, which has a lens which is a stop faster, and performs noticeably better than any of these model;s. I wish I had bought the Hexar before I put my money on a T2 20 years ago. With the silly prices being paid for these types of cameras these days, I should sell the T2,. buy the Hexar, and pocket $300, but I don't use the T2 hardly, and the Hexar would go largely unused, so why bother?
This is so true. I'm not really a fan of 35mm, anyway. The Hexar is a great camera - totally forgot about it until you mentioned it. I shot with one a few years ago and had a great time with it. Now to look at the pricing on those Hexars. I'm sure it is as bad as you say, though. Hard to rationalize a purchase at those prices...
NO experienced photographer takes a roll of film out of the freezer and loads it into the camera without waiting at least a few hours for the film (still inside its packaging) to 'warm up' to room temperature so as to avoid moisture condensation on the emulsion! in fact, truly experienced photogs move the package of the film they're going to use from the freezer to the fridge first and wait at least 12 hours, then they bring the unopened package out of the fridge and still wait at least 1 hour and then take it out of its box and canister and load it into the camera! just sayin' ... (btw, this kind of camera (or anything) review where the audience see and hear more of the author rather than the item itself shows only one thing: a self-infatuated person! PERIOD! you're good material for Hollywood and tv shows though: you're a good looking man!)
Thanks for the comments. My Hollywood career is still on hold, though! I am aware of the fact that the film should come up to temperature. But we wanted to get a shot of me loading the film and it was frozen - and we wanted to get that shot of me diving into the chaos of my film storage. Time was of the essence. Ergo, cold film went into the camera. Here in Vancouver there isn't too much humidity and it isn't nearly as much of an issue if we were in somewhere warmer and more humid. That said, though, best practices weren't followed. Mea culpa. As for the review, what would you like to hear more of? More photos from the camera? More photos OF the camera? More discussion about actually shooting with it? More history? Less of me is a bit of a challenge as someone has to get in front of the camera to talk. (and I obviously do like to talk).
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird my dear, moisture condensation forming up on anything doesn't have much to do with a 'damp' climate as it does with the extreme differences between temperatures, say inside a fridge and EVEN a cold room! (it can happen in wintertime in Antarctica just as well as it may happen in Sahara in the middle of summer!) "As for the review", NO, you or any author doesn't have to get in front of the camera to 'talk' while their face is visible too! want examples? just check out some other guys and gals doing similar reviews of anything, where, we do hear their beautiful voices, plus their great reviews and often see their hands and sections of their body perhaps and occasionally their faces too! but the main / most items featured is the item itself NOT the 'anchor' ... even in the news, good quality news that is not FOX NEWS with all those supposedly sexy (but actually ugly!) female anchors, tv stations try to provide more news footage rather than just mere talks simply because 'seeing is believing' ... as simple as that ancient saying! (check out Techmoan's great videos of consumer electronics on UA-cam for example ... but he's not the only one doing a fine job at that ...) still saying: you ought to try live or recorded presentation of anything for regular tv rather than doing this kind of stuff on UA-cam ... YT is still more an 'independent' medi, so far at least ... a place for truly fine stuff (even if not very professionally made!) that want to do something serious, whether it's educational or even if it's entertainment ...
@@dadautube Hello, Sorry to interrupt your day for that old conversation, but I think this video didn’t deserve all that fuss, especially the part about him showing himself too much. People that show their faces on youtube tend to gain a larger following over time, as most human beings subconsciously like to feel connected to another human being and like to know who talks to them. Trust is partly built thanks to body language, ton of voice and eyes. Biology and evolution. Most of us tend to follow people with good content more than just content, even though good content is paramount. It’s unfortunate indeed, too much ego out there on social media, and it tends to push everyone to do that (often without even realizing it’s not necessary, since most people do it and it’s not only socially acceptable, it’s encouraged by the algorithm). Small creators with a different content (here, camera review) tend to follow that trend as well, even when the content wouldn’t be optimized for that practice. I humbly believe there is need to be that hard of them though. Personally I don’t blame that man for just doing what most people do on UA-cam.I didn’t even realize it before reading your comment actually. Yes, they could have shown the camera a bit more, but in the end it’s full of interesting information and I can watch a million photos, articles and videos about the camera. Also, the man is in his right to use his “unfair advantages”. If he presents well and it helps him connect with people we should respect that and let him use his “voice”/“style”/“storytelling”. It’s a subjective creative choice that does not kill anyone. I understand that you don’t like it, and I respect that, it’s totally your right, but we can encourage them or give advice and share our different perspectives and knowledge without being (passive) agressive. I also believe anomity is not a valid reason to do and say whatever we want, just because there seem to be no consequences. I admit it could have been way worse, but still, that felt kind of a free personal attack. They’re human beings behind the screens, we can still have healthy and constructive arguments but stay polite and kind nonetheless. It goes a long way. Just my 2 cents. Have a lovely day!
@@GuillaumeRx WOW! what a thorough long and BORING article! (no, i'm not sorry about saying that! therefore, please don't expect me to apologize if that did offend you!) so, i just quit reading on the 3rd or 4th line as soon as i saw how so many words were put in here to state the obvious! you're right about one thing though: in short, *eye-contact* makes a lot of difference when communicating with others, especially in real life or videos etc ... but do authors of text-only masterpieces of literature (as well as technical instructions with or without diagrams and pictures etc) also make eye contact with their readers? (they do, but with the eye of the mind and via proper wording and use of language!) yes, surely when Internet 'content producers' and 'influences' and the like make videos, that eye contact thing is really more helpful ... yet i have seen such videos on UA-cam and elsewhere with little to no eye contact in them ... in fact, the 'creators' of those videos (or voice-only podcasts) do make their statements in a very powerful way! and some of those videos are made by inexperienced albeit highly creative teenagers! sometimes little kids! and believe it or not, some of them have made thousands of $$$ via their silly little videos too! (now, do they need eye contact really? maybe they do, so they can make millions possibly billions instead of thousands of bucks perhaps ...) to sum it all up, the main point of criticism here was about the wrong way this gentleman used frozen film right out of the fridge to put it inside the camera! that's 'misinformation' sold to the public! under different circumstances concerning more sensitive topics (such as medicine for example) presented to humanity, that could be a serious crime, punishable by the law, in if you didn't know that ... (just because every little kid can make Oscar-worthy short or long videos using their smartphones these days, it doesn't mean everything is allowed on the .net really, does it?) hope you read my boring long text at least up to this point ... you didn't? i don't care! neither should you ... life goes on with or without this video, with or without our comments! good bye and good luck. and have a nice day ...
@@dadautube sorry I can’t have a conversation with you if it’s one sided and you don’t bother reading, and keep being direspectful. Especially when you say my comment’s too long but you write the same type of book. Double standards. I made my point politely. You do whatever with it. Have a lovely day!
Those last two shots just sold me on this camera! Wow
Definitely subscribed! Love your stuff
Nice!
Thanks for sharing!
I have a friend that is onto compact cameras including a classe wide model and I can see his point in having something compact in your pocket and take a photo now and then!
Have a nice Friday!
Glad you enjoyed the video. Thanks for your comment.
Thank you for this review! Never even heard of it before, so i JUMPED on ebay to snatch one. And then i saw the price... oh well! Thank you again for all your videos. I have watched, and enjoyed, them all
The pricing is stupid. It's really a shame. Great camera, but not at any price. Thanks for your kind words! It's a lot of fun to do the videos. Still learning a lot on every one.
Hello Alastair, have you found a good place to get these serviced? The flash on my no longer charges up (probably a simple capacitor or electrolytic issue) and looking to get it repaired.
Hi Brett, I'm afraid I don't know of any places that can service it - but that's only because it hasn't required any service and I haven't had any need to search around. As I'm sure you know figuring out the problem wouldn't be too hard, but finding replacement parts could be a major challenge. Sorry I can't be more help.
i personally pronounce it [klase]
in my opinion it's nikon's attempt at german spelling, so i read it as a german word
That's the most reasonable explanation for the correct pronunciation I have yet heard. Thanks! I'll go with your idea!
Would love to own one but the price is just ridiculous
The Klasse (either one) is a contemporary of and is very similar in operation and imaging performance to the Contax T2 or Nikon 35Ti. fI you are looking to buy something of this sort, I'd let price be the major factor, and if you can accept the non-retracting lens it sports, I'd defer in favor of the Konica Hexar AF, which has a lens which is a stop faster, and performs noticeably better than any of these model;s. I wish I had bought the Hexar before I put my money on a T2 20 years ago. With the silly prices being paid for these types of cameras these days, I should sell the T2,. buy the Hexar, and pocket $300, but I don't use the T2 hardly, and the Hexar would go largely unused, so why bother?
This is so true. I'm not really a fan of 35mm, anyway. The Hexar is a great camera - totally forgot about it until you mentioned it. I shot with one a few years ago and had a great time with it. Now to look at the pricing on those Hexars. I'm sure it is as bad as you say, though. Hard to rationalize a purchase at those prices...
NO experienced photographer takes a roll of film out of the freezer and loads it into the camera without waiting at least a few hours for the film (still inside its packaging) to 'warm up' to room temperature so as to avoid moisture condensation on the emulsion! in fact, truly experienced photogs move the package of the film they're going to use from the freezer to the fridge first and wait at least 12 hours, then they bring the unopened package out of the fridge and still wait at least 1 hour and then take it out of its box and canister and load it into the camera! just sayin' ... (btw, this kind of camera (or anything) review where the audience see and hear more of the author rather than the item itself shows only one thing: a self-infatuated person! PERIOD! you're good material for Hollywood and tv shows though: you're a good looking man!)
Thanks for the comments. My Hollywood career is still on hold, though! I am aware of the fact that the film should come up to temperature. But we wanted to get a shot of me loading the film and it was frozen - and we wanted to get that shot of me diving into the chaos of my film storage. Time was of the essence. Ergo, cold film went into the camera. Here in Vancouver there isn't too much humidity and it isn't nearly as much of an issue if we were in somewhere warmer and more humid. That said, though, best practices weren't followed. Mea culpa. As for the review, what would you like to hear more of? More photos from the camera? More photos OF the camera? More discussion about actually shooting with it? More history? Less of me is a bit of a challenge as someone has to get in front of the camera to talk. (and I obviously do like to talk).
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird my dear, moisture condensation forming up on anything doesn't have much to do with a 'damp' climate as it does with the extreme differences between temperatures, say inside a fridge and EVEN a cold room! (it can happen in wintertime in Antarctica just as well as it may happen in Sahara in the middle of summer!) "As for the review", NO, you or any author doesn't have to get in front of the camera to 'talk' while their face is visible too! want examples? just check out some other guys and gals doing similar reviews of anything, where, we do hear their beautiful voices, plus their great reviews and often see their hands and sections of their body perhaps and occasionally their faces too! but the main / most items featured is the item itself NOT the 'anchor' ... even in the news, good quality news that is not FOX NEWS with all those supposedly sexy (but actually ugly!) female anchors, tv stations try to provide more news footage rather than just mere talks simply because 'seeing is believing' ... as simple as that ancient saying! (check out Techmoan's great videos of consumer electronics on UA-cam for example ... but he's not the only one doing a fine job at that ...)
still saying: you ought to try live or recorded presentation of anything for regular tv rather than doing this kind of stuff on UA-cam ... YT is still more an 'independent' medi, so far at least ... a place for truly fine stuff (even if not very professionally made!) that want to do something serious, whether it's educational or even if it's entertainment ...
@@dadautube Hello,
Sorry to interrupt your day for that old conversation, but I think this video didn’t deserve all that fuss, especially the part about him showing himself too much.
People that show their faces on youtube tend to gain a larger following over time, as most human beings subconsciously like to feel connected to another human being and like to know who talks to them.
Trust is partly built thanks to body language, ton of voice and eyes.
Biology and evolution.
Most of us tend to follow people with good content more than just content, even though good content is paramount.
It’s unfortunate indeed, too much ego out there on social media, and it tends to push everyone to do that (often without even realizing it’s not necessary, since most people do it and it’s not only socially acceptable, it’s encouraged by the algorithm).
Small creators with a different content (here, camera review) tend to follow that trend as well, even when the content wouldn’t be optimized for that practice.
I humbly believe there is need to be that hard of them though.
Personally I don’t blame that man for just doing what most people do on UA-cam.I didn’t even realize it before reading your comment actually.
Yes, they could have shown the camera a bit more, but in the end it’s full of interesting information and I can watch a million photos, articles and videos about the camera.
Also, the man is in his right to use his “unfair advantages”.
If he presents well and it helps him connect with people we should respect that and let him use his “voice”/“style”/“storytelling”.
It’s a subjective creative choice that does not kill anyone.
I understand that you don’t like it, and I respect that, it’s totally your right, but we can encourage them or give advice and share our different perspectives and knowledge without being (passive) agressive.
I also believe anomity is not a valid reason to do and say whatever we want, just because there seem to be no consequences.
I admit it could have been way worse, but still, that felt kind of a free personal attack.
They’re human beings behind the screens, we can still have healthy and constructive arguments but stay polite and kind nonetheless.
It goes a long way.
Just my 2 cents.
Have a lovely day!
@@GuillaumeRx WOW! what a thorough long and BORING article! (no, i'm not sorry about saying that! therefore, please don't expect me to apologize if that did offend you!) so, i just quit reading on the 3rd or 4th line as soon as i saw how so many words were put in here to state the obvious!
you're right about one thing though: in short, *eye-contact* makes a lot of difference when communicating with others, especially in real life or videos etc ...
but do authors of text-only masterpieces of literature (as well as technical instructions with or without diagrams and pictures etc) also make eye contact with their readers? (they do, but with the eye of the mind and via proper wording and use of language!)
yes, surely when Internet 'content producers' and 'influences' and the like make videos, that eye contact thing is really more helpful ...
yet i have seen such videos on UA-cam and elsewhere with little to no eye contact in them ... in fact, the 'creators' of those videos (or voice-only podcasts) do make their statements in a very powerful way! and some of those videos are made by inexperienced albeit highly creative teenagers! sometimes little kids! and believe it or not, some of them have made thousands of $$$ via their silly little videos too! (now, do they need eye contact really? maybe they do, so they can make millions possibly billions instead of thousands of bucks perhaps ...)
to sum it all up, the main point of criticism here was about the wrong way this gentleman used frozen film right out of the fridge to put it inside the camera! that's 'misinformation' sold to the public! under different circumstances concerning more sensitive topics (such as medicine for example) presented to humanity, that could be a serious crime, punishable by the law, in if you didn't know that ... (just because every little kid can make Oscar-worthy short or long videos using their smartphones these days, it doesn't mean everything is allowed on the .net really, does it?)
hope you read my boring long text at least up to this point ... you didn't? i don't care! neither should you ... life goes on with or without this video, with or without our comments! good bye and good luck. and have a nice day ...
@@dadautube sorry I can’t have a conversation with you if it’s one sided and you don’t bother reading, and keep being direspectful.
Especially when you say my comment’s too long but you write the same type of book.
Double standards.
I made my point politely.
You do whatever with it.
Have a lovely day!