May 13, 20169 yr Mike it's not letting me quote you, but the Olympus entry level was super duper dope for the price. I saw real prints that were with kit and macro lenses from that camera. The RSA had a portfolio with her. She is a semi pro photog not too unlike myself but she concentrates on business work where I do private work. The pics were great. Obviously not 1600 body and 2700 lens good, but the whole rig for body and some lenses was less than $1000. I'm sure if you went with just kit lenses it would be $500ish. Olympus makes good glass. They are an optics company first I believe. They make a lot of medical optic devices, Sean could probably speak more to their talent with glass.
May 13, 20169 yr 2 hours ago, Billy Jack said: wow, you guys are kind of hard on the new guys. Yes I have never commented on a forum in my life, so I made a mistake and didn't see the date, but no need to get ill about it. I was actually laughing at myself I thought it was funny that a old fart like me couldn't use technology imagine that but I'm figuring it out. This is the hop. Ribbing is normal
May 13, 20169 yr New mirrorless is better bang for the buck than a used SLR. As for can you find used? Not sure, I have a glass investment so I have never looked.
May 13, 20169 yr Ow no I'm good I'm just joking around with you guys, if you can't laugh at yourself, what's the point. I'm a thick skinned hillbilly from Kentucky, it's gonna take more then some bass heads giving me a hard time over my lack of technology skills, to run me off. Carry on.
May 13, 20169 yr While I have also seen the Olympus shots and was amazed, I prefer the glass choices of other manufacturers....but then it is a premium as well, which now reaches towards DSLR. Like a DSL shop GLASS then the body. Pretty sure there aren't shit choices of bodies where there is good glass. Remember on a mirrorless that you multiply by 2x to get the equivalent full frame focal length. ie: 28mm FF = 18mm APS = 14mm MLess 70mm FF = 45mm APS = 35mm MLess 200mm FF = 128mm APS = 100mm MLess I picked probably the three most important ranges to pay attention too, with the first two winning unless you need reach.
May 13, 20169 yr Multi-use lenses: Olympus 12-40 2.8 $999 Panasonic 12-35 2.8 $997 Fuji 18-55 2.8 $700 (16-55 $1200) Sony ....BOOOO Canon ....??? Nikon 1 Mirrorless (10mm = 28mmFF) ...no thanks!
May 13, 20169 yr /\ Those all look the "same" so, start looking at more appropriate usage lenses for the difference.
May 13, 20169 yr Short & Portrait: Panny: 25 1.4 $600, 42.5mm 1.2 $1600 Olympus: 25 1.8 $400, 45mm 1.8 $400 Fuji: 23mm 1.4 $900, 35mm 2 $400, 35mm 1.4 $600, 56mm 1.2 $999 Long: Panny 35-100mm 2.8 $1300 Olympus: 40-150mm 2.8 $1500 Fuji: 50-140mm 2.8 $1600
May 13, 20169 yr 16 hours ago, Godsmack said: Expose for the darker areas J Be careful with that. Washed out is worse than underexposed. Losing details in the blacks is acceptable to the eyes losing details in the whites not.
May 13, 20169 yr Weird, since that post was quoted on the previous page it showed up on the previous page. The quoting period on the new forum is working a bit strange, I haven't been able to figure it out but regularly it won't let me do what I try. Thought this might be related.
May 13, 20169 yr 1 hour ago, ///M5 said: *I left out Leica for obvious reasons although they are surely the best BY FAR Lol. Can I borrow 10k so I can get a B&W body and one manual prime. I'll be the coolest hipster around.
May 13, 20169 yr 1 hour ago, ///M5 said: Be careful with that. Washed out is worse than underexposed. Losing details in the blacks is acceptable to the eyes losing details in the whites not. Neal just loves exposing himself to tan people.
May 13, 20169 yr Have any of you used compression shorts/pants, and what was your feeling on them. I'm having a lot of deep pain in my quads after I jog. Its worse than a really heavy leg day. Like a cable is being tightened from my hip flexor down to about 5 inches above the knee.
May 13, 20169 yr I only use compression shorts for sporting activities to keep the junk secure. I prefer the shorts to the briefs for no ride up and a smidge of leg protection if I slide.
May 13, 20169 yr 12 minutes ago, MKader17 said: I only use compression shorts for sporting activities to keep the junk secure. I prefer the shorts to the briefs for no ride up and a smidge of leg protection if I slide. I'm looking for recovery mostly. Thank you for the input. I purchase what I call "broga pants". Help with thigh rub and if it helps at all with that soreness, I'll spend some $$$ on real stuff.
May 14, 20169 yr 3 hours ago, dem beats said: Neal just loves exposing himself to tan people. That was our secret. Really I expose myself to who ever will look.
May 14, 20169 yr OK, here are my first few shots. I tried the tubes with the polarizer and just found it to dim the image. FWIW, these are 30 second shutters in a nearly black room, F5.6, no flash, 100 ISO, 55MM from ~20-36 inches away, depending on the shot. In the top pic my focus was at the second KT88 (big tube) from the right. If you look, the farthest left tube is equidistant from the lens, and it is also in focus. I like the depth of field that the focus provides. I got Bokeh at 5.6f The second is focused at the N on Gold Lion on the second KT88 tube from the right. I am further away in this shot. The third is the center 2 KT88s, and I am closer, throwing the front tubes out of focus. Not as big a fan of the head on depth of field as I am of the 45 degree shots. In the last the front left tube is the focus. I do like the depth in this one. Cool how you can read the British military stamping on the tube... I am interested how an F 1.4 might look in these shots.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.