How do people react when you steal a shot using a flash?

clackclack said:

mschf said:

Urfff, the Grinch came around for Xmas and broke our fridge, a lovely American-style Samsung with extra freezer space for ice cream, you'd have appreciated it . So all the funds I laid aside for possibly a Lumix 12-35 went towards buying a 2nd fridge to temporarily make do with and a compressor and some other parts to fix the Samsung.

But.... my wife got me a pack of nice socks, and although in most cases I'd consider very Scroogy, it was actually a thoughtful gift seeing as my pup tore to shreds half my existing socks over the past couple of months.

How about you Ant? Also hope you had a nice New Year's, wishing you the very best for 2019!

Click to expand...

I had a plan to have all but a small slice of omg pavlova ..with caramel banana, but my cunning plan backfired and the tiny slice ended up being mine.

Christmas and new years are still going, but tomorrow is back to work ..so holidays finish and sadly so does the wine.

Thanks for the wish too, I like to collect those.

Big Big year for me this year, and it begins real soon.

Happy Best Year Ever wish to you Martin.

ant

Click to expand...

Dammit Ant, you've awakened my sweet tooth. Unfortunately there are no cold treats in the house currently, and the cookie cupboard is bare. I may have to raid my daughter's stash of Snickers bars, they're no good for her anyway

mschf said:

clackclack said:

mschf said:

Urfff, the Grinch came around for Xmas and broke our fridge, a lovely American-style Samsung with extra freezer space for ice cream, you'd have appreciated it . So all the funds I laid aside for possibly a Lumix 12-35 went towards buying a 2nd fridge to temporarily make do with and a compressor and some other parts to fix the Samsung.

But.... my wife got me a pack of nice socks, and although in most cases I'd consider very Scroogy, it was actually a thoughtful gift seeing as my pup tore to shreds half my existing socks over the past couple of months.

How about you Ant? Also hope you had a nice New Year's, wishing you the very best for 2019!

Click to expand...

I had a plan to have all but a small slice of omg pavlova ..with caramel banana, but my cunning plan backfired and the tiny slice ended up being mine.

Christmas and new years are still going, but tomorrow is back to work ..so holidays finish and sadly so does the wine.

Thanks for the wish too, I like to collect those.

Big Big year for me this year, and it begins real soon.

Happy Best Year Ever wish to you Martin.

ant

Click to expand...

Dammit Ant, you've awakened my sweet tooth. Unfortunately there are no cold treats in the house currently, and the cookie cupboard is bare. I may have to raid my daughter's stash of Snickers bars, they're no good for her anyway

Click to expand...

put them in your freezer (if its working)
chill them after you steal them (better than working)

..put them on ice.

ant

(and say something much sweeter than a snickers to your daughter)

John Kot said:

Paulmorgan said:

[...]

For anyone that might be interested this is what is needed for mounting a flash to the underside of a camera.

Click to expand...

As used by Stephen Shore in American Surfaces:


By Hinnerk Ruemenapf - Own work, CC BY 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=914016

Click to expand...

I`ve got one of those flash units, not safe on modern digital, its even fried a few radio triggers, as have a few others

Member said:

mschf wrote: LOL! Yeah, it's amusing how Jeff and Mat essentially invited the discourse and then spin like a roulette wheel when someone dares to give an opinion ("naysay") they don't want to hear

Click to expand...

Martin, I returned to this thread after riding off on my high horse seeking greener pastures several days ago. When people try to convince me that sticking a strobe 1-2 feet away from someone's face and firing away is not intrusive (no matter the power setting) I know when it is a Lost Cause as far as I am concerned.

I've done flash photography with people for over 40 years, using everything from tiny Morris strobes (handy little buggers) to mega-powerful Elinchrom packs, so I know something about how flash affects subjects. Flash is a powerful tool, no doubt about it, but in the wrong hands it can become a bludgeon. When used by a self-centered photographer with no finesse. . . Well, the results speak for themselves.

I admire your patience when trying to reason with people who (judging from their various comments) don't really care how their "style" (I use the term loosely. . .) of photography affects their subjects, particularly when said subjects have no say in the matter. I don't see any evidence of bravery on the part of those photographers; quite the opposite in fact.

The above quote says it all. . . I got a good LOL when I read it. :-D Otherwise there isn't much that is redeeming about this particular thread.

I wish you luck with your fridge. . . Most modern appliances are junk. The appliances that I grew up with and owned in my early years lasted forever (kinda like my film cameras and manual focus lenses). But even the expensive stuff (Wolf, Subzero, etc.) have problems, judging from the online comments by owners.

I hope that your needed parts aren't too pricey. We had one of those small cheaply-made plastic slide-out cheese drawers break in a relatively new Frigidaire refrigerator. How does $105 for a new one sound to you? A broken glass and plastic shelf? $95. (Whatever happened to the old metal refrigerator shelves? I can live with a few spills and drips now and then. . .) The plastic handle came apart within the first six months, so it was covered under the warranty. (We aren't abusing these things. . . We have no kids, we're a couple of retirees for Gawd's Sake.) Then there is the lightbulb that burned out in our new freezer. . . $30. And No, only the manufacturer's bulb will suffice. I thought that I had dodged the bullet when my wife opted for an electric GE range. She loves it. (Replacement plastic burner dials are over $75 EACH for the fancy Samsung gas range I had planned as a surprise for her.) But then one day a burner shorted-out and with a loud POP! and burned a hole clean through the copper bottom of a tea kettle. Replacing the burner did nothing; now we are looking at replacing the entire circuit/switch. We've been getting pretty handy fixing this stuff in our so-called Golden Years. . .

Oh Well, the Speed Queen washer looks to be a keeper. . . But we'll have to wait and see if it lasts 25+ years like our first avocado green Maytag washer ($50 used) and the Italian espresso maker that lasted 23 years. ;-)

lightandaprayer said:

lightandaprayer said:

mschf wrote: LOL! Yeah, it's amusing how Jeff and Mat essentially invited the discourse and then spin like a roulette wheel when someone dares to give an opinion ("naysay") they don't want to hear

Click to expand...

Martin, I returned to this thread after riding off on my high horse seeking greener pastures several days ago. When people try to convince me that sticking a strobe 1-2 feet away from someone's face and firing away is not intrusive (no matter the power setting) I know when it is a Lost Cause as far as I am concerned.

I've done flash photography with people for over 40 years, using everything from tiny Morris strobes (handy little buggers) to mega-powerful Elinchrom packs, so I know something about how flash affects subjects. Flash is a powerful tool, no doubt about it, but in the wrong hands it can become a bludgeon. When used by a self-centered photographer with no finesse. . . Well, the results speak for themselves.

I admire your patience when trying to reason with people who (judging from their various comments) don't really care how their "style" (I use the term loosely. . .) of photography affects their subjects, particularly when said subjects have no say in the matter. I don't see any evidence of bravery on the part of those photographers; quite the opposite in fact.

The above quote says it all. . . I got a good LOL when I read it. :-D Otherwise there isn't much that is redeeming about this particular thread.

I wish you luck with your fridge. . . Most modern appliances are junk. The appliances that I grew up with and owned in my early years lasted forever (kinda like my film cameras and manual focus lenses). But even the expensive stuff (Wolf, Subzero, etc.) have problems, judging from the online comments by owners.

I hope that your needed parts aren't too pricey. We had one of those small cheaply-made plastic slide-out cheese drawers break in a relatively new Frigidaire refrigerator. How does $105 for a new one sound to you? A broken glass and plastic shelf? $95. (Whatever happened to the old metal refrigerator shelves? I can live with a few spills and drips now and then. . .) The plastic handle came apart within the first six months, so it was covered under the warranty. (We aren't abusing these things. . . We have no kids, we're a couple of retirees for Gawd's Sake.) Then there is the lightbulb that burned out in our new freezer. . . $30. And No, only the manufacturer's bulb will suffice. I thought that I had dodged the bullet when my wife opted for an electric GE range. She loves it. (Replacement plastic burner dials are over $75 EACH for the fancy Samsung gas range I had planned as a surprise for her.) But then one day a burner shorted-out and with a loud POP! and burned a hole clean through the copper bottom of a tea kettle. Replacing the burner did nothing; now we are looking at replacing the entire circuit/switch. We've been getting pretty handy fixing this stuff in our so-called Golden Years. . .

Oh Well, the Speed Queen washer looks to be a keeper. . . But we'll have to wait and see if it lasts 25+ years like our first avocado green Maytag washer ($50 used) and the Italian espresso maker that lasted 23 years. ;-)

Click to expand...

Agree with your views on flash photography, well stated! Also appreciate your concern over the broken fridge . They definitely don't make 'em like they used to, of course it's not only appliances we can say that about; while shopping for a new camera about 3-4 months ago (previous camera lasted me 12+ years) I noticed all models I held in the hands felt somehow brittle, maybe it's just that they weighed less than I expected but still the feeling that the thing is delicate (and perhaps a bit 'gadgety') persists.

Oh well, these are the times we live in and I suppose we shouldn't complain too much, if we want to mass consume without paying extra for quality, we deserve what we're given

There's one rule I like to try and stick to.

Don't buy Chinese, even if it's to EU regs etc and 'designed by' a British or EU company...

My 50cc is Chinese made and I paid £380 for it 3 years old. It is good for buzzing about town and from town to town but I used it on dual carriage ways today for city to city and I felt I was truly risking my life. I will never do more than town to town again on it....

I expect to get a year out of it and then sell it for half that price and upgrade to a Japanese (Honda or Yamaha) 125cc sports style geared bike like a CBR or YZF.

Easy Rider said:

There's one rule I like to try and stick to.

Don't buy Chinese, even if it's to EU regs etc and 'designed by' a British or EU company...

Click to expand...

I hear ya. It can get a bit complicated though as you increasingly come across very well-made Chinese products, even stuff that's bargain priced

Easy Rider said:

My 50cc is Chinese made and I paid £380 for it 3 years old. It is good for buzzing about town and from town to town but I used it on dual carriage ways today for city to city and I felt I was truly risking my life. I will never do more than town to town again on it....

Click to expand...

Yeah, not worth risking your life for sure, though I'd guess most 50cc models, even something Japanese, really wouldn't be too well suited for more than just quick and short trips. Maybe it's not even about mechanical issues but its top speed and other drivers overtaking you in dangerous ways.

Stay safe mate

Easy Rider said:

I expect to get a year out of it and then sell it for half that price and upgrade to a Japanese (Honda or Yamaha) 125cc sports style geared bike like a CBR or YZF.

Click to expand...

mschf said:

Agree with your views on flash photography, well stated! Also appreciate your concern over the broken fridge . They definitely don't make 'em like they used to, of course it's not only appliances we can say that about; while shopping for a new camera about 3-4 months ago (previous camera lasted me 12+ years) I noticed all models I held in the hands felt somehow brittle, maybe it's just that they weighed less than I expected but still the feeling that the thing is delicate (and perhaps a bit 'gadgety') persists.

Oh well, these are the times we live in and I suppose we shouldn't complain too much, if we want to mass consume without paying extra for quality, we deserve what we're given

Click to expand...

I've always been fine with paying for quality. . . I tend to keep things that serve me well, so it pays-off in the long-run vs. replacing cheaper stuff that I don't enjoy using very much anyway. My only rule is to avoid debt unless it is impossible to do so: Time Is Money and Money Is Time; Freedom Is A Balanced Combination Of Both. (Sometimes debt is a wise decision; much of the time it isn't. I learned the difference early-on.)

When I was starting out in photography, I bought used and new while I saved my pennies for better gear. At one point I could afford gas to get where I wanted to shoot or I could buy film but not both. LOL In those days I tried third-party lenses but generally they weren't nearly as good as they are today. So I stuck with Nikkors until I got a Tokina zoom around 2009. I really like it but I must note it has needed a minor repair for a few years: the aperture ring moves past its limits a bit. I didn't drop the lens nor abuse it. . . So It Goes. It doesn't affect using it aside from feeling a bit strange and Tokina will repair it for less than $100. (I'm finally going to send it in before the weather turns nice in the spring and I feel like doing more photography.)

My primary digital cameras are currently a D200 and D700. I got them in large part for their build-quality. . . And the price was right. $600 for a brand-new D200 after Nikon brought out the D300. $875 for a like-new D700 on eBay a year or two ago. I've owned lighter Nikon DSLRs but I just cannot abide all of the plastic. (I totally get your "delicate" reference.) And since I rely on the AF-ON button that precludes all of the consumer cameras anyway. The smaller Nikon film cameras were a different breed. The better ones were great for a working photographer; I could get 3 new FM2 bodies for the cost of one F3. I've owned both; the F3 was sold long ago. I've held onto one of my FM2 cameras as it is an old friend; it certainly earned its keep many times over.

mschf said:

Easy Rider said:

There's one rule I like to try and stick to.

Don't buy Chinese, even if it's to EU regs etc and 'designed by' a British or EU company...

Click to expand...

I hear ya. It can get a bit complicated though as you increasingly come across very well-made Chinese products, even stuff that's bargain priced

Member said:

My 50cc is Chinese made and I paid £380 for it 3 years old. It is good for buzzing about town and from town to town but I used it on dual carriage ways today for city to city and I felt I was truly risking my life. I will never do more than town to town again on it....

Click to expand...

Yeah, not worth risking your life for sure, though I'd guess most 50cc models, even something Japanese, really wouldn't be too well suited for more than just quick and short trips. Maybe it's not even about mechanical issues but its top speed and other drivers overtaking you in dangerous ways.

Stay safe mate

Member said:

I expect to get a year out of it and then sell it for half that price and upgrade to a Japanese (Honda or Yamaha) 125cc sports style geared bike like a CBR or YZF.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yeah it's the being so low to the ground and the max speed of 45mph and cars speeding past not to mention the wind! Not worth it, better off paying train fares to the cities

lightandaprayer said:

mschf said:

Agree with your views on flash photography, well stated! Also appreciate your concern over the broken fridge . They definitely don't make 'em like they used to, of course it's not only appliances we can say that about; while shopping for a new camera about 3-4 months ago (previous camera lasted me 12+ years) I noticed all models I held in the hands felt somehow brittle, maybe it's just that they weighed less than I expected but still the feeling that the thing is delicate (and perhaps a bit 'gadgety') persists.

Oh well, these are the times we live in and I suppose we shouldn't complain too much, if we want to mass consume without paying extra for quality, we deserve what we're given

Click to expand...

I've always been fine with paying for quality. . . I tend to keep things that serve me well, so it pays-off in the long-run vs. replacing cheaper stuff that I don't enjoy using very much anyway. My only rule is to avoid debt unless it is impossible to do so: Time Is Money and Money Is Time; Freedom Is A Balanced Combination Of Both. (Sometimes debt is a wise decision; much of the time it isn't. I learned the difference early-on.)

Click to expand...

Like you I used to happily pay a bit more for better quality, but these days I'm not so sure if the extra expense is in buying products that ride on a brand name's historically respected quality; the Subzero brand you mentioned, I never owned one but while in high school did work part-time at a parts/service counter for a white goods store that carried Subzero fridges... as you know, those were top grade, basically industrial-specced products in a typical residential shell. It was extremely rare for a Subzero owner to show up at the counter. I don't know how they are nowadays but I wonder if they're anything like what a sales guy at a Miele store said to me just a few years ago, that a 2000-eur Miele fridge essentially has the exact same guts as a certain other, much cheaper brand of a European manufacturer (sorry, I can't remember which one, I do remember that the brand also sells under various names -- sort of like Sears-branded Ricoh cameras ). Maybe the Miele is constructed better, I don't know, but I'm not sure I'd be willing to pay 2x-3x the price of an average fridge if the internal components are the same quality.

lightandaprayer said:

When I was starting out in photography, I bought used and new while I saved my pennies for better gear. At one point I could afford gas to get where I wanted to shoot or I could buy film but not both. LOL In those days I tried third-party lenses but generally they weren't nearly as good as they are today. So I stuck with Nikkors until I got a Tokina zoom around 2009. I really like it but I must note it has needed a minor repair for a few years: the aperture ring moves past its limits a bit. I didn't drop the lens nor abuse it. . . So It Goes. It doesn't affect using it aside from feeling a bit strange and Tokina will repair it for less than $100. (I'm finally going to send it in before the weather turns nice in the spring and I feel like doing more photography.)

My primary digital cameras are currently a D200 and D700. I got them in large part for their build-quality. . . And the price was right. $600 for a brand-new D200 after Nikon brought out the D300. $875 for a like-new D700 on eBay a year or two ago. I've owned lighter Nikon DSLRs but I just cannot abide all of the plastic. (I totally get your "delicate" reference.) And since I rely on the AF-ON button that precludes all of the consumer cameras anyway. The smaller Nikon film cameras were a different breed. The better ones were great for a working photographer; I could get 3 new FM2 bodies for the cost of one F3. I've owned both; the F3 was sold long ago. I've held onto one of my FM2 cameras as it is an old friend; it certainly earned its keep many times over.

Click to expand...

+1 on the F3 and +1 on the FM2, I used those as well, though I slightly leaned towards the F3 more as I found aperture-priority shooting very convenient, though there's something to be said about having a camera that works without power . Those were super-durable cameras, it was surprising to me that some time later I encountered something that may have been even more durable, trading my Nikon kit for a Rollei 3003 and a few nice Zeiss primes... not something known to be a photojournalist's camera so who knows, the Rollei may not have been tough enough to survive that kind of use, but man, the thing just felt really really solid. I guess a modern equally tank-like version of that or an FM/F3 would just be too expensive today, plus in a way it doesn't make sense to build something like that when digital cameras are pretty much disposable items as long as there's constantly new tech seducing people to "upgrade".

The D200 was a camera I had the pleasure of using on 2 or occasions back around 2007-2008, for shooting marathons. Rock solid camera. The camera I've owned going on 13 years now is the Sony R1 -- supposedly the same sensor as the D200 but cropped a little and resulting in 10mp output -- it wasn't a super-expensive camera but it might have been the camera that made me appreciate good plastic... totally agree with you wrt plastic products generally, but there are exceptions now and then . The Lumix GX9 I now have, while for my needs a fantastic little camera, just feels delicate in the hand despite (I think) most of the outer pieces being magnesium... in fact it's a bit weird, I got it with the 12-32 and was disappointed it had a plastic lens mount but after getting over that it felt to me like the plastic material was pretty good stuff, definitely has something about it that makes it feel somehow more 'abuse-tolerant' than the camera body . Overall though it may just be light weight of the camera+lens that's deceiving me; a few weeks back I got a Kodak Retina to m43 adapter, and bolted the adapter + Schneider 50/1.9 on the GX9, and the weight of it all felt really nice. It's one reason why I thought I might order the Lumix 12-35 (for its additional weight) and keep the little 12-32 as a spare (it'd be a shame to sell it since it is a little wonder).

Would be nice if one day a well-designed digital back for those old Nikon (and other) SLRs came to market, don't you think?

mschf said:

Easy Rider said:

I'm with Bresson regarding flash. I can't paste the quote from my phone as I don't know how to.

I've used it twice as it suited the photo but both were crowd shots, I'd never use it for a close candid portrait, is rude imho.

Click to expand...

"Like attending a concert with a pistol in your hand"

I'm not a fan of flash photos either... don't see the point other than to coax people into reacting. Silly.

Click to expand...

I’m not shy out on the street, and have little interest in using flash. I like using natural light, and generally don’t like the look of flash photos, except for this one, where i wanted the crystal to shine:


Crystal Vendor. ©Sam Kanter 2015

Each to their own.

--
Sam K., NYC
“I’m halfway between tightrope walker and pickpocket.” — HCB
—
Native New Yorker:
http://www.blurb.com/b/7943076
__
Street Gallery:
http://skanter.smugmug.com/NYC-Street-Photography
__
Recent Photos:
https://skanter.smugmug.com/Recent-Photos

It's the light feel of the Gx8 and other similar cameras that fools you.

Even though I know they have great output and AF etc, I can't use them due to the feel.

Probs coz I started out with a K-1000 and 50mm F1.8 and other film 35mm slrs....

I like the Fuji X-100 T as it has a metal top and bottom plate so feels heavy, like a 3/4 weight version of an OM-1 with a 35mm on it....

Easy Rider said:

It's the light feel of the Gx8 and other similar cameras that fools you.

Even though I know they have great output and AF etc, I can't use them due to the feel.

Click to expand...

That is probably what it is, just have to get used to it. For me it isnt necessarily that the camera feels odd in hand -- the nice ergonomics likely aleviate that as well -- it's more being not convinced that the thing will keep working fine if it gets banged around a bit

Easy Rider said:

Probs coz I started out with a K-1000 and 50mm F1.8 and other film 35mm slrs....

Click to expand...

Those K1000s were really nice workhorses... intrrestingly made in China IIRC

Easy Rider said:

I like the Fuji X-100 T as it has a metal top and bottom plate so feels heavy, like a 3/4 weight version of an OM-1 with a 35mm on it....

Click to expand...

Will have to pick up an x-100 someday to see how tough it feels. Is the build a level or two above an x-t20? The t20 was really nice to handle, instant nostalgic familiarity with it but generally was a lot like the gx9 for perceived material quality/fragility.

My K-1000 had Asahi written on the hump

Yes the X-100 T as I have mentioned has die cast magnesium top and body plates. X-T20 does not.

Like I mentioned, about 3/4 the weight of a K-1000 or OM-1 with a small prime. Like a modern Leica, it has a 'real camera' feel...

Interesting you mention it as I'm looking at a new one right now. Well mint used with 12 month warranty....

Sl1 is nice but no 18mm prime and I want to start doing 28mm now

Also Above ISO 1600 is not great. I have clean as heck ISO 6400 shots from the X-100 T with F4 and 1/250... So good I didn't need to think of opening up wide or using a slower speed to use a lower ISO...

Add the WCL and I have small, completely silent 28mm F2 and up with the gentle leaf shutter being like a few stops of IS built in In my experience. Call KR for what he is but he noticed the same thing in his review.

Shame Nikon and Canon crop don't do a good range of primes. Canon has a great 24mm F2.8 pancake but no 18mm so that rules the SL2 out. M50 looks good and a nice 22m F2 pancake but no 18mm. Nikon has a decent 35mm F1.8 but no 24mm or 18mm which ruins an otherwise great D3XXX and D5xxx line of cameras with fab IQ.

Fuji are the only APSC game in town with really good primes from 14mm upwards.

Adding the WCL and the TCL for the X100 line at the price they are for the amazing IQ they provide was both genius and generous. High ISO is peach from X-trans II and onwards.

The F is very nice to hold. But the T is the one you should try Hard to explain but it's just nicer, the F is just a little bit bloated and the 16mp files from the T stand up to 24mp files from other cameras just like Fuji claim they would. Forget the S, IQ is same but it's a slower camera and does not have as good dials or a 4 way controller. The T is a lovely little camera and the aperture ears are very nice.

--
When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.
Mark Twain

clackclack said:

Paulmorgan said:

clackclack said:

Paulmorgan said:

clackclack said:

thought it was going to be music and something I had never heard before ..got all excited for nothing.

Click to expand...

How about a tune about Ants

Click to expand...

hahaha ..is a little bit peaches (peaches for teachers) in sound. Hit the volume straight off, was properly loud.

clackclack said:

Anyway reading up on all this, interesting stuff, has far more depth, it gets more doc than street though.

http://www.humansofnewyork.com/tagged/Invisible-Wounds

Click to expand...

will catch up, and read it later today ..title has me curious.

Click to expand...

Its from the guy that started out with the project Humans of New York, he`s branched out a bit more now.

clackclack said:

Thanks for the song Paul, am going to thrash it. My holiday was meant to be another week, but I love my job too much and am back at work ..with music.

one for you ..

Click to expand...

Lol I watched the film when it came out.

Click to expand...

I edited it ..is another you might not have heard for a while

anyways ..back to music and work.

Click to expand...

Lol a bit of patti Smith

Easy Rider said:

My K-1000 had Asahi written on the hump

Yes the X-100 T as I have mentioned has die cast magnesium top and body plates. X-T20 does not.

Like I mentioned, about 3/4 the weight of a K-1000 or OM-1 with a small prime. Like a modern Leica, it has a 'real camera' feel...

Interesting you mention it as I'm looking at a new one right now. Well mint used with 12 month warranty....

Sl1 is nice but no 18mm prime and I want to start doing 28mm now

Also Above ISO 1600 is not great. I have clean as heck ISO 6400 shots from the X-100 T with F4 and 1/250... So good I didn't need to think of opening up wide or using a slower speed to use a lower ISO...

Add the WCL and I have small, completely silent 28mm F2 and up with the gentle leaf shutter being like a few stops of IS built in In my experience. Call KR for what he is but he noticed the same thing in his review.

Shame Nikon and Canon crop don't do a good range of primes. Canon has a great 24mm F2.8 pancake but no 18mm so that rules the SL2 out. M50 looks good and a nice 22m F2 pancake but no 18mm. Nikon has a decent 35mm F1.8 but no 24mm or 18mm which ruins an otherwise great D3XXX and D5xxx line of cameras with fab IQ.

Fuji are the only APSC game in town with really good primes from 14mm upwards.

Adding the WCL and the TCL for the X100 line at the price they are for the amazing IQ they provide was both genius and generous. High ISO is peach from X-trans II and onwards.

The F is very nice to hold. But the T is the one you should try Hard to explain but it's just nicer, the F is just a little bit bloated and the 16mp files from the T stand up to 24mp files from other cameras just like Fuji claim they would. Forget the S, IQ is same but it's a slower camera and does not have as good dials or a 4 way controller. The T is a lovely little camera and the aperture ears are very nice.

Click to expand...

Heh heh I just bought an 'excellent' condition X-100 T in black with 12 month warrany and a 'Mint' WCL.

I was worried 28mm might be too wide but looked through my keepers and quite a few of my best were at 17-18mm with the Nikon and Sigma 17-50 F2.8. giving about a 27.5mm FOV.

This will have me at 28m spot on and has near focus of 10cm which is good as the 17-50mm had 30cm close focus distance and would hesitate to focus or lock up sometimes at 17mm.

Will keep the sl1 and 24mm for summer as I do prefer using it. But high ISO is rubbish and no 18mm prime so just for 35mm FOV good light summer shots.

Time to go real close

skanter said:

I’m not shy out on the street, and have little interest in using flash. I like using natural light, and generally don’t like the look of flash photos, except for this one, where i wanted the crystal to shine:


Crystal Vendor. ©Sam Kanter 2015

Each to their own.

Click to expand...

Now that's an image where flash really does the trick. . . A casual viewer won't even know that a strobe was used but it gives the subject a certain look that I like. I assume that it also lightened the shadow under his cap just a bit.

mschf said:

Like you I used to happily pay a bit more for better quality, but these days I'm not so sure if the extra expense is in buying products that ride on a brand name's historically respected quality; the Subzero brand you mentioned, I never owned one but while in high school did work part-time at a parts/service counter for a white goods store that carried Subzero fridges... as you know, those were top grade, basically industrial-specced products in a typical residential shell. It was extremely rare for a Subzero owner to show up at the counter. I don't know how they are nowadays but I wonder if they're anything like what a sales guy at a Miele store said to me just a few years ago, that a 2000-eur Miele fridge essentially has the exact same guts as a certain other, much cheaper brand of a European manufacturer (sorry, I can't remember which one, I do remember that the brand also sells under various names -- sort of like Sears-branded Ricoh cameras ). Maybe the Miele is constructed better, I don't know, but I'm not sure I'd be willing to pay 2x-3x the price of an average fridge if the internal components are the same quality.

Click to expand...

Brand names mean nothing to me unless they get the job done in the Real World. There have just been too many that have become shadows of their former selves, riding on their reputations for quality and excellent customer service. Example: I have a Tag Heuer chronograph that I got around 15 years ago that has been a total disappointment. It went back to Tag early on for major work and then around 5 years ago it needed the entire movement replaced. There was miscommunication with the repairman i.e. he wasn't exactly clear about the total cost of the repair. I would have passed if I knew the true cost. I grudgingly paid for it after getting a pitiful $100 discount and you know what? I haven't worn the watch since I picked it up. . . I did get the Tag at a good price (not grey market either like the watches at Costco. . .) so it could have hurt a lot more. But Still. . . Do I really need a chronograph after I quit needing to time Polaroids? Nah. . . I didn't really need one when I did shoot a lot of Polaroid test shots. It was simply convenient and I wanted a nice watch vs. a Swatch. Live and Learn.

We have a local appliance parts store the sells to the public as well as repairmen, etc. The brother and sister owners have run the store for decades; I get the inside poop from them. I also know an independent repairman who works on all brands. . . Both sources have saved me quite a bit of money. It may not seem like it considering my previous Tales of Appliance Woes but it could have been a lot worse. I could have purchased more expensive appliances with their own costly-to-repair problems.

Member said:

+1 on the F3 and +1 on the FM2, I used those as well, though I slightly leaned towards the F3 more as I found aperture-priority shooting very convenient, though there's something to be said about having a camera that works without power . Those were super-durable cameras, it was surprising to me that some time later I encountered something that may have been even more durable, trading my Nikon kit for a Rollei 3003 and a few nice Zeiss primes... not something known to be a photojournalist's camera so who knows, the Rollei may not have been tough enough to survive that kind of use, but man, the thing just felt really really solid. I guess a modern equally tank-like version of that or an FM/F3 would just be too expensive today, plus in a way it doesn't make sense to build something like that when digital cameras are pretty much disposable items as long as there's constantly new tech seducing people to "upgrade".

Click to expand...

A Rollei 3003? I have never seen one in the flesh. . . A truly revolutionary 35mm system with a price tag to match. (And people think Leica is expensive. . .) Modern Rollei film cameras never really made it in the States; the cost had a lot to do with it. People just figured that if they were going to spend that kind of dough that they might was well go with Hasselblad. I heard really good things about the Rollei 6000 medium-format series cameras but I never personally knew anyone who used them. But when I was looking at medium format film cameras I seriously considered getting a Rollei 6008.

Member said:

The D200 was a camera I had the pleasure of using on 2 or occasions back around 2007-2008, for shooting marathons. Rock solid camera. The camera I've owned going on 13 years now is the Sony R1 -- supposedly the same sensor as the D200 but cropped a little and resulting in 10mp output -- it wasn't a super-expensive camera but it might have been the camera that made me appreciate good plastic... totally agree with you wrt plastic products generally, but there are exceptions now and then . The Lumix GX9 I now have, while for my needs a fantastic little camera, just feels delicate in the hand despite (I think) most of the outer pieces being magnesium... in fact it's a bit weird, I got it with the 12-32 and was disappointed it had a plastic lens mount but after getting over that it felt to me like the plastic material was pretty good stuff, definitely has something about it that makes it feel somehow more 'abuse-tolerant' than the camera body . Overall though it may just be light weight of the camera+lens that's deceiving me; a few weeks back I got a Kodak Retina to m43 adapter, and bolted the adapter + Schneider 50/1.9 on the GX9, and the weight of it all felt really nice. It's one reason why I thought I might order the Lumix 12-35 (for its additional weight) and keep the little 12-32 as a spare (it'd be a shame to sell it since it is a little wonder).

Click to expand...

The D200 is a very rock-solid camera. . . Its CCD sensor shooting RAW reminds me of Kodachrome 64 under-exposed 1/3 of a stop. Typically I barely touch its files in post; curves and sharpening mostly. I wish that CCD and CMOS sensor development coexisted in the Canokin Universe. Not everyone needs a CMOS camera with a ton of pixels.

Member said:

Would be nice if one day a well-designed digital back for those old Nikon (and other) SLRs came to market, don't you think?

Click to expand...

I would prefer that Nikon put the money into a digital F3/FM2. A camera designed with manual focus lenses in mind. . . I have always preferred MF. I consider autofocus to be a grand scheme to suck tons of money out of photographers' pockets. It's worked really well too! And don't get me started on Digital Upgradeitis. . . Man, I guess that people just have Money To Burn. (More likely it is usually funded by maxed-out credit cards.)

It's difficult for me to imagine what a Nikon digital back would be like. . . But I'm definitely open to the idea, even if it is a total fantasy. I have a great Nikkormat FT2 that I would like to convert. ;-)