zsedcft: Why is everybody not using wordpress? I understand the appeal of zenfolio etc. because you can just create a site and they will deal with selling your pictures and handling your clients, but simple portfolio sites look much better with a simple wordpress theme.
You can get a good theme for $50, Hosting for about $4 a month (or less) and your domain for about $10 a year. Once you get a little more advanced, you can add a shopping cart using woocommerce and link it to your paypal account for free. The option are pretty much limitless when you get into plugins. Wordpress.com can even host your site if you don't want to get too technical.
IMHO, if you want to be a pro photographer you pretty much need to know how to run a website. It really isn't too difficult once you get the hang of it, either. The sites on photographers.pro look extremely amateur. You can browse live sample wordpress websites at themeforest to see the difference. Just type "photography" into the search bar there.
SEO on WordPress is far superior to any of the smugmug type services. As another guy said, if you link it to a blog you can supercharge your SEO because you get original content and back links. I spend a maximum of 20 mins a month maintaining my site and you can choose a host with versioning or use updraft plus to automatically make backups. You can also host video externally on vimeo if you are worried about speed. Paypal take about 2.7% per transaction and do it in their server so you don't need as much encryption as you described. The only complaint that people could have is that it is hard to learn, but it is actually much easier than it used to be. WordPress is actually OK for security. Don't use ancient plugging and you'll be fine. Every single drupal site in the world was compromised last year so nothing is perfect.
$4 a month is probably not going to get you the best hosting, but it should be good enough for most people. If you get a lot of visits, you can always spend $10 or $25 for better stuff.
I think that most photographers a quite technical people anyway, and most enjoy learning new stuff. There are a lot of hosting services that offer a free domain and have 1 click wordpress installers. There are themes (such as "x" that I use) that have visual drag and drop page builders and customizable sample pages, so the learning curve isn't too steep.
Zenfolio is good for less technical people or people who don't want to handle their own prints. I used them for a while but decided that I would rather just make myself a website. I could never get the zenfolio ones to look as good as I wanted. I heard that they also aren't great for SEO because they try to direct most of the traffic to their site (this may not be true, I didn't look into it in great detail).
Why is everybody not using wordpress? I understand the appeal of zenfolio etc. because you can just create a site and they will deal with selling your pictures and handling your clients, but simple portfolio sites look much better with a simple wordpress theme.
zsedcft: That FLM is almost as expensive and has a similar folded length to the sirui t-025x. It is a lot lighter (sirui weighs 1.5lb), but with the sirui you can get almost as low (half an inch off) and have a usable size tripod for when you don't have a table to hand. I think carrying the extra pound is worth it for the added flexibility.
I have two tripods, the sirui t-025x and a BENRO C2682T. The Benro is seeing less and less use with my D800 because the Sirui can hold just about anything.
I think the Gorillapod is the only one here that really makes sense as a useful product. Maybe other people have different definitions of useful, though.
I doubt 3x the space. The sirui reviewed here looks like it uses the same head so you can guestimate from that. I see what you are saying, but I don't see the point in spending another $200 on a tripod that is extremely limited. You might as well just put the camera directly on the edge of the table and save even more space.
I have a suction cup tripod thing (2 suction cups) that is a much more useful. You can even use it as a mini tripod if you wish.
zsedcft: It's a shame that they have limited it so much. If they gave it an optional external antenna, high bitrate video and a way to limit the quality of the stream to increase range - it would be a great drone camera. You could just strap it to a cheap drone and get pro footage with a life feed. Maybe they could open up the firmware and send one to the guys who hacked the GH1 - that would help them sell a lot more.
The video sample that I have seen from it look no better than a gopro. I might pick one up when they land in the olympus refurbished store for $100ish.
it only weighs 147g, so I think pretty much any DJI could take it. The 14mm f/2.5 wouldn't add much weight.
It's a shame that they have limited it so much. If they gave it an optional external antenna, high bitrate video and a way to limit the quality of the stream to increase range - it would be a great drone camera. You could just strap it to a cheap drone and get pro footage with a life feed. Maybe they could open up the firmware and send one to the guys who hacked the GH1 - that would help them sell a lot more.
That FLM is almost as expensive and has a similar folded length to the sirui t-025x. It is a lot lighter (sirui weighs 1.5lb), but with the sirui you can get almost as low (half an inch off) and have a usable size tripod for when you don't have a table to hand. I think carrying the extra pound is worth it for the added flexibility.
zsedcft: This one isn't for me. I don't think f/2 is fast enough at 35mm so it won't replace primes. 35mm is such a common focal length that you need f/1.4 to differentiate between your "pro" photos and the ones anyone can take with their kit zoom. f/2 is OK, but 35mm f/1.4 is one of my favorites.
Interesting lens, none the less. It will work for a lot of photographers and I'm sure it will sell well.
People on this forum are so unpleasant!
I started the comment off with "this one isn't for ME". I ended it with "it will work for a lot of photographers" yet two people decided to try to belittle my opinion.
Fast primes don't make great photos on their own, but they give you creative options that aren't available to people who settle for zooms (which is the vast majority of people). If you are fine with your 18-200mm, so be it.
That is not really the point of f/1.4 lenses. It is all about depth of field. If you wanted to shoot f/2.8, you could buy much smaller, cheaper lenses.
This one isn't for me. I don't think f/2 is fast enough at 35mm so it won't replace primes. 35mm is such a common focal length that you need f/1.4 to differentiate between your "pro" photos and the ones anyone can take with their kit zoom. f/2 is OK, but 35mm f/1.4 is one of my favorites.
samfan: OVFs and EVFs have each their advantages.
From OVFs, both SLRs and RFs have their advantages.
From EVFs, both large rear LCDs and the small peek EVFs have their advantages.
It's a pity that people start wars over this. It's like arguing whether wide lenses are better than long lenses.
I personally like the immediacy of OVFs but I hope all the current camera formats will survive for a long time. Because what I don't like is taking pics with mobile phones.
I don't understand "fanboy wars". It is just weird people with nothing better to do. I'm glad I don't have to meet them in real life - they would probably start an argument of which is better; salt or pepper?
rsf3127: Even today there are people that use things like Tachihara.So there will be people who buy a SLR instead of a mirrorless camera in the foreseeable future.Freedom of choice is a must. Even if you are free to make mistakes.
We should invent a term for this attitude. The one where mirrorless shooters think they are somehow more enlightened than everyone else. "Messiahorless Complex" maybe?
Lawrencew: The most interesting thing for me about mirrorless is as demonstrated by Sony (and others), the increasing ability to separate lens mount/manufacturer from body manufacturer, and provide all the necessary AF and IS capabilities in the body.
This is potentially by far the bigger game changer as far as the manufacturers are concerned as it disrupts their ability to lock the consumer in to their body.
Canon should be the most worried in my case at least, as they can no longer make the assumption that because I have a large number of Canon EF lenses my next camera purchase is automatically going to be a Canon.
I just read that this minute on sonyalpharumors. Pretty exciting. I think I'll wait to see the performance of the adapters and wait for Sony to get any possible bugs ironed out of the a7rii (not that I know of any, but there usually are with cutting edge technology) before I spend $3200, though.
Canon should be really worried. You can get a similar resolution, 4k shooting, lighter camera with better dynamic range for about the same price as the 5DSR and it will AF Canon lenses.
It is just a bit annoying that I can't get a 7Rii to AF my Nikon Lenses. Although I guess once you add the weight of the metabones adapter+all of the extra batteries you need the weight saving is marginal vs my D800.
magneto shot: It takes a thousand steps to build a reputation and one step to tear it down. Before you undergo any new project, pls repay ur Ada clients.
There is more to it than a failed kickstarter project. The accounting is extremely questionable. Haje talked about the tooling costs being something like 4x their original funding goal and something like 66% of the pledges. Any reasonable CEO/project manager would have known the tooling costs within a small margin of error before they undertook the project. The project was doomed from the start.
The whole thing stinks. Who is to say that the kickstarter project wasn't just a cover to fund the company for a couple of years to stave off administration. They are not prepared to give the backers the information that they are requesting. The only accounting information that has been released is a pie chart that is totally insufficient.
You can troll people and try to wind them up all you like, but there was either gross incompetence or something more sinister going on at Triggertrap. Either way, it is a company that people should avoid like the plague.
zsedcft: Amazing how they had time to develop this but didn't have the time or the inclination to come through with their Ada kickstarter project. They have willfully broken the Kickstarter TOS that they signed up for (VISA and Mastercard agree that they have broken the contract) and yet they continue to lie to backers that showed faith in them. Along the way they took $300,000 of backer money and spent it on pay rises and fancy business trips.
Dishonest companies don't deserve your money. I'm sure that I am going to get flamed here (no guarantees on kickstarter etc.), but I believe that we should only support the companies that look after their customers. Triggertrap evidently are not prepared to do that and I am going to continue to make people aware of that fact each time they launch another one of their useless, gimmicky products.
Hopefully I will persuade at least one person to support an honest company instead of these charlatans.
I had a request asking for more information about the VISA and Mastercard thing I mentioned. If you go to backertrap.info (it is an information site where backers are sharing information about the failed campaign, if mods want to vet it) there is a lot of reports of people successfully getting charge backs from the credit card companies based on the 2012 Kickstarter TOS that Triggertrap signed.
It might be past the point at which you can claim now, but there is a lot of information about small claims court etc. if you are in the UK.
Maybe DPReview could do an article on those chargebacks. It is an interesting situation in itself as it brings into question the whole kickstarter funding model.
Amazing how they had time to develop this but didn't have the time or the inclination to come through with their Ada kickstarter project. They have willfully broken the Kickstarter TOS that they signed up for (VISA and Mastercard agree that they have broken the contract) and yet they continue to lie to backers that showed faith in them. Along the way they took $300,000 of backer money and spent it on pay rises and fancy business trips.
zsedcft: This thing should have 2 card slots. Most professionals will not buy this if they can't have in-camera backups, it is not worth the risk of losing client photos or even once-in-a-lifetime shots.
I can't even consider this camera because of that one omission and it is annoying. I'm sure that it is cramped inside the A7rii body, but they need to find space for a second card.
I am not a wedding photographer, but if I was, I imagine that I would be using only one camera body for the exchange of rings or the first kiss (probably the one with the 70-200mm on it). If the card in that camera failed, I would lose the most important shots of the day.
Maybe I am just over cautious with this, but I just don't think that there is an excuse to not have a second SD slot or even microSD slot in a $3200 camera. There are work arounds, but none of those are ideal.
A few things;
@Leonard Callow. Film cameras couldn't expose two films simultaneously, that is ridiculous. They would have lost half of the light if they tried to split it. If they could have, they would have because film is more volatile. Also, you should get over YOURself. Someone who attacks someone for what they need in a camera has issue that you need to get over.
Two card slots would facilitate an eye-fi style SD card and the off-camera backing up that some of you suggest. The transfer speed is terrible compared to writing straight to card, so it is not the same.
How many cards have I actually had fail? Only a few, but if one did, and a lost a bunch of important shots I would be screwed. Go on any SD card page on amazon and look at the 1 star reviews. They aren't all fake.
Keep on keeping on with your internet hate. Most people who shoot for money can't live with one card because it presents an unacceptable risk. If you got paid for your work, you would know that.
That is just not practical. You mentioned battery life (which is already a concern, but is manageable) but Wi-Fi transfer speeds can't compete with writing straight to the card, especially when you can generate 50MB+ RAW files at 5fps. It also doesn't help you if you are unlucky enough to have your card become corrupted in the camera, which can happen.
I think it is a massive oversight by Sony but maybe it isn't as important to other people as it is to me.