Gear discussion thread v. "I got some new gear and I got to post it here" - General

AF? iirc, that's fixed lens. The hexar rf is a bit to pricy. I have considered a Bessa, but the CL seems right.

this thing is hilariously good for the price [url]http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/181446363287?lpid=82[/url]

[QUOTE=notlabbet;45455354]AF? iirc, that's fixed lens. The hexar rf is a bit to pricy. I have considered a Bessa, but the CL seems right.[/QUOTE] Oh yes I meant the RF. from what I've seen they go for similar prices to the CL, but with a 1/4000 shutter and a bit more modern electronics. They don't have 40mm frame lines though

Maybe 50 is better. I just like how small the 40 is and the CL is more durable compared to a hexar.

[img]https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2939/14526198279_343c612790_c.jpg[/img] schindler anamorphic, 50mm 1.8 on a full frame camera + magic lantern raw 4:3 at 1024x768

A manual focus Nikon 135mm f2.8 for $850 don't miss out on this incredible opportunity [url]http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/pho/4581139478.html[/url]

a barley used lens

When I checked it at first it was $850 now it's much lower and less funny ;(

I found this cool website [url]http://www.igorcamera.com/leica_copies.htm[/url] Not a bad price for the 40mm. Seems about right, and no shady eBay biz.

[IMG]https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2939/14533541749_e86f70bcb8_c.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5552/14717006151_5645798a0f_c.jpg[/IMG] some stills stuff using the lens - awful vignetting but i'll do it beyond 70mm [editline]22nd July 2014[/editline] sorry about the fingers btw it was meant to be a focus check but i liked the composition

jeez andy mind censoring that? my virgin eyes can't handle this

more concerned i look like a tit

Thinking about trading my a77+16-50mm 2.8 for an a850 or a900. I only have that APS-C lens and several full frame lenses, so it would be better in that regard. I do love live view, but if I'm getting an a7 in the future it would fulfill my manual focusing needs, while the a850 would be good for AF stuff and flash work still. As a two camera kit it would be good, and overall give me more options than just an a99 or a77 Realistically I use my RX-100 for most landscape zoom purposes, so the 16-50 really is only special for events (which I never do) and product (which I have a few macro lenses). Just some mulling thoughts.

I got to hold an olympus xa today. I want one so bad now.

I have an XA2, it's great. I keep forgetting to set the focus though.

My lc-a is basically a xa2, right? Zone focus and all that.

The XA has a 35mm lens that's shorter than its focal length that's crazy

^ Zuiko has been making a lot of rare lenzes. They was more innovative than any other manufacture for quite a few years.

[QUOTE=notlabbet;45493418]My lc-a is basically a xa2, right? Zone focus and all that.[/QUOTE] They're quite different, also yeah zone focus. Flowers, people or mountains. [editline]25th July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Trogdon;45493462]The XA has a 35mm lens that's shorter than its focal length that's crazy[/QUOTE] Yeah it's tiny.

Getting £80 at some point this month. Hopefully going to try and get the Canon EF 50 mm f/1.8 II looks like a pretty interesting lens

i always thought canon's base 50mm felt [I]really[/I] cheap in-hand. nikon's 1.8d feels much more solid and has a far better focus ring [editline]25th July 2014[/editline] optics wise they're pretty close though as any modern 50 is

My moms canon 50 got stuck on her camera and had to be destroyed to remove it.

[QUOTE=notlabbet;45496537]My moms canon 50 got stuck on her camera and had to be destroyed to remove it.[/QUOTE] My brother's ejected the glass elements of the lens when he focused to infinity because the little plastic gubbin that normally holds it in hard worn down with use.

[QUOTE=.Lain;45496392]i always thought canon's base 50mm felt [I]really[/I] cheap in-hand. nikon's 1.8d feels much more solid and has a far better focus ring [editline]25th July 2014[/editline] optics wise they're pretty close though as any modern 50 is[/QUOTE] The build quality is atrocious, which is made worse by the fact that the previous model had a much better build (and now goes for around $200). It does keep the price down to a very small level for a new lens, but still it's quite poorly manufactured

Anyone have any experience using a Praktica FX2 or 3?

[QUOTE=krten_2x 4b;45499108]Anyone have any experience using a Praktica FX2 or 3?[/QUOTE] No direct experience with it, googling around though it looks miserable to use. Waist finder and very mechanical, probably doesn't have a meter. Is there a reason you are interested in it? For practical use it seems highly dated

[QUOTE=Trogdon;45499003]The build quality is atrocious, which is made worse by the fact that the previous model had a much better build (and now goes for around $200). It does keep the price down to a very small level for a new lens, but still it's quite poorly manufactured[/QUOTE] like really, i've held yoghurt pots with better plastic

[QUOTE=.Lain;45496392]i always thought canon's base 50mm felt [I]really[/I] cheap in-hand. nikon's 1.8d feels much more solid and has a far better focus ring [editline]25th July 2014[/editline] optics wise they're pretty close though as any modern 50 is[/QUOTE] I was thinking about picking it up for my Canon 650D since someone earlier on in this thread suggested that its a worthwhile lens.

[QUOTE=Trogdon;45499228]No direct experience with it, googling around though it looks miserable to use. Waist finder and very mechanical, probably doesn't have a meter. Is there a reason you are interested in it? For practical use it seems highly dated[/QUOTE] I had the opportunity to buy one the other week but passed on it. I was just checking to see if I made the right choice

[QUOTE=cr2142;45500534]I was thinking about picking it up for my Canon 650D since someone earlier on in this thread suggested that its a worthwhile lens.[/QUOTE] Build quality may not be good, but optically it is quite excellent. Don't worry about the build too much and go ahead, I promise you'll love the lens. [QUOTE=krten_2x 4b;45500964]I had the opportunity to buy one the other week but passed on it. I was just checking to see if I made the right choice[/QUOTE] I would say you made the right choice then. IMO film cameras without TTL metering and at least aperture priority are a bit dated for every day use. Although on film it is truly the lens that makes the photo (since the sensors are interchangeable per se), I always consider the actual usability of the camera when shooting film. I personally wouldn't recommend many things dated less than the 70's, just because of modern convenience. I know some people love older cameras, but I'd rather take pictures than spend time fiddling with my camera.