Sherlock74: The Ona bags are far more stylish.
Ona bags are nice indeed, but I believe in a different (much higher) price class.
justmeMN: A mirrorless camera in a camera bag isn't significantly more convenient than a small DSLR in a camera bag.
Somehow you managed to compare some of the smallest mirrorless with one of the largest DSLRs on the market. Nice try.
Oh but where's the one in Multicam pattern for the Airsoft crowd?
Nice bags, silly looking finishes, sorry.
"... he's even developed his own remote-controlled camera system for getting as close as you can with dangerous animals like rhinos, lions and… meerkats."
Wonder if this helped:
Dimac: too big and too ugly and missing things, deleted from my wish list
Well KZMike, judging by the number of likes locke_fc received, you're wrong.
Very nice. Simple yet effective, you managed to create a stunning image with a minimal PP work.
It's so easy to get carried away with over-doing the PP these days.
kimchiflower: I used to watch his videos, but after some of his 1-hour clips, I started to realise he could really do with editing his disposable teen humour chit-chat down.
Besides, who pays for online info these days?
"Besides, who pays for online info these days?"
DigiLloyd is reading this comment and laughing his way to the bank ;-)
Prognathous: Isn't the 055CXPRO4 a better buy? It's currently cheaper than the new MT190CXPRO3 ($340 vs $410), it's more stable (maximum load 17.64 lbs / 8.0 kg vs 15.4 lb / 7.0 kg), folds shorter (21.46" / 54.5 cm vs 24" / 61 cm) and opens taller (66.93" / 170 cm vs 63" / 160 cm). All of this for the negligible added weight of (0.15 lb / 100 gram).
Shared disadvantages of both: The column doesn't have a bottom hook to hang a bag for added stability, and features that other brands provide at this price are all extra - No retractable spikes, and no bag or strap.
I'm currently considering the 055CXPRO4 but haven't made up my mind yet. There are too many other tripods that are appealing and provide different tradeoffs. I would very much appreciate comments and suggestions in the thread that I opened here:
I was in the same boat as you, considering MF 055CXPRO4 among others. Settled eventually with an Induro CT214 and couldn't be happier.
Paul Farace: I understand crystal growth mechanics, but still... to look at these and NOT believe in the hand of a creator!
"...i know why: because we are too proud to accept that there are things that we do not understand. believing is beneath us so to speak..."
Pat Cullinan Jr: It was staged. Even the New York Times revealed this. Read http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/arts/design/18capa.html?ref=arts, if you dare.
"It was staged..."
The article talks about speculation and doubt. You seem to know more than the historians and experts quoted in it.
Good for you, Junior.
Not bad at all...
jkrumm: The 7r shots look significantly better.
You're seeing things...
cgarrard: Nice nails on the girls hand :).
What Barnaby does in privacy of his home is no one's concern.
xlynx9: Anyone know what city these are taken in?
You're funny guy...
jackgreen: I really cant understand the concept of the Sigma 13-35 f1.8 lens. Yes, it's bright. But for what situation it's good? For interior or architecture shots you want to use small aperture, you never will shoot full open. For portraits its way too short. It's good news if they have new lens formula -- worth to wait bright normal and portrait lenses.
Indoors, low light, concerts, fireworks, astro-photography, weddings, corporate functions...so quite a few, and I disagree that 52mm is "way too short" for portraits.
nikos theodosiou: I returned my D7100 already!I ordered it from Amazon but after using it I found that the buffer locks up using continues shooting.My D7000 performed much better in this area!In fact with Nikon cash back you can get a D7000 for £500 half the price of the D7100!!Agreed the extra resolution of the D7100 is nice but its not worth twice the price!Overall I was disappointed with the 7100..
Don't fall for it NPDAV, it's just trolling from a D7100 wannabe owner. It's amazing how many people lie on this forum about the cameras they supposedly "owned" then returned and went back to cheaper model.
NickBPhotography: I'm actually looking to downgrade from a D800 to this, and swap my 24-70mm and 70-200mm F/2.8 for the 16-85mm VR and 70-200mm F4. People may question why but I'll put a considerable amount of cash back into my wallet, whilst saving almost 1.5kg in weight over my existing setup! That's quite a lot of weight/space!
Whatsmore, I no longer need a camera as good as the D800. I am always asking to borrow my GF's D90 when we go for walks/days out and am always impressed by how well it performs, how little it weights, and how I don't every think twice about taking the D90 for a day out/walk. I'd never take my D800 abroad with me as I'd have to babysit it all day and would not leave it in the hotel. I'd care less for something like this. What's more, I'll also make a massive saving on my insurance due later this year!
This sounds like a post fromsomeone who never owned the pro kit consisting of D800, 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 lenses and tries to "justify" his purchase of a DX camera instead by bagging the FX camera kit he is unable to afford.
tonywong: Can't wait to see the reviews on this one...my Dell 3007s are really long in the tooth.
They are, because there are new 30" DELL IPS monitor models that superseded 3007, like the 3011 and 3014.
IrishhAndy: Shocking in its mediocrity. Cameras are getting really boring.
Maybe this will help convey the message that the photography isn't abot the camera...who cares anymore if it's 600, 650 or 700, it doesn't really matter.
Has it been that long already? 9 months?
Canon is turning these low end EOSes into a joke. There will be certainly a good number of 650D owners who would feel a hard done by.