BTM_Pix

On the upside, with it being a Hydrogen you will see a holographic version of yourself appearing and answering that question. I just had a look at the thread and well, yes... "......If you look at high end screen protectors from other places, who don’t necessarily make them for the Hydrogen One, (I’m thinking of a certain Brand, beginning with, D, but I, “can’t seem to remember their name”,) they’re not that much less, and probably don’t have all of the features." A brand that begins with D and wants to get away with charging you $40 for a piece of plastic and $50 shipping you say? Erm.....Dior? Daimler? Dolce & Gabbana

This guy is a parody news reporter but sums the lunacy of the situation up. Increasingly, the real news reporters are getting so exasperated dealing with the politicians over this absolute catastrofuck that a few of them are on the point of similar rants.

I'll dig something out over the weekend. I've got a few bits of M and R mount lens stuff that I've been meaning to put up as well from some recent scores.

I think the D5700 might be a winner as well if they keep the price to the sub £600 mark of the current one as I can't be alone in thinking the pricing of new bodies is getting a bit steep now?I don't know for certain but it strikes me that Nikon do seem to want to hit high watermarks with their DSLRs in each sector before they bow out rather than re-cycling the same old derivative stuff while they can get away with it. So it wouldn't surprise me if they did the same with this and put a no crop 4K in it.

It actually sits quite solidly in the hand if you use it with the screen tilted in the fashion shown in the pic in a look down configuration. But yes it is very much a lens with a camera attached rather than the other way round !

It is a complex problem with a simple answer which is to just not fucking do it Sadly, the level of reasoned debate in our parliament is several notches below the typical episode of Jeremy Kyle.

If you get tired of waiting for them to do it then maybe have a look at using Toshiba FlashAir wifi SD cards which will enable you to do it ? The current ones are 90 MB/s so far more usable than the older systems like EyeFi cards.

Yes, this one (shown here on my GX80). Also an Angenieux ironically enough. Even got the servo zoom working on it with the aid of the trusty £10 Sony NP battery sled and a cable!

Its a combination of a few different elements of that. Exclusivity of event access given to certain agencies would be one aspect of it and in cases where that isn't the official case it is becoming the de-facto one by virtue of a combination of preferential pre-allocated positioning and the number of accreditations granted. So if you take football as an example, a small agency would be given one accreditation and have to take their chances where they are positioned and cross their fingers the most important action of the event happens where they are sat while the larger agency are able to cover the entire field from four or five positions guaranteeing they get the shot. Subscription based distribution of images favoured by those agencies also means that per image payments are becoming rarer as its so much easier and cheaper for a newspaper to illustrate a story with any number of images as part of their subscription plan than it is to deal with individual payments per image. If you combine both of those factors then it becomes economically unviable for a lot of agencies and photographers to cover events so where you might have had a typical match with, for example, 30-40 photographers covering it then even if you have two agencies with subscription models and multiple photographers at it the opportunities to earn a worthwhile sum is reduced to a very small amount for half of them. When the market opportunity for the images to be able to be sold into gets reduced to that extent then so does the market for the purchase of the gear to make those images, hence why I'm bewildered by Sony getting involved for anything other than vanity or completeness purposes in it. These agencies also have direct deals with the clubs themselves which also severely limits the opportunity to sell images from aspects outside of the 90 minutes such as training sessions and press conferences both by price (because again, these images are "free" for publications who have all you can eat subscriptions) and also by virtue of them having enhanced access to the stadium and the players. The same agencies also have deals with the organising associations of the tournaments so its a short hop to tie the whole thing together into a deal to being the official and exclusive supplier of images. Its worth bearing in mind that as with any editorial content, in sports photography it is often the most controversial images that will earn the biggest fees through syndication bolstered by exclusivity. Very often of course those images would be considered 'off brand' for players, clubs and organising associations so control of the brand image though exclusivity of access is also a powerful driver for this change. And then you get on to the TV rights holders who are paying literally billions of pounds to broadcast the events and who are also very keen on protecting and polishing the brand as well. If there is a fight in the crowd at a football match or a streaker runs on the pitch etc then you are very unlikely to see that on your TV screen as the broadcasters choose what goes out so it irks them that photographers (who pay zero of course to cover the event) don't also turn their lenses away from a disturbance but are very much likely to turn their full attention towards it and start firing away. With the super fast distribution of still images from pitch side these days those unfiltered scenes can be on newspaper sites unhindered within a minute and be damaging the 'brand'. Taking all of that into account leads to a logical conclusion that TV rights holders will eventually do a deal with a large agency to give them live access to the TV images for frame extraction and editing (transmission of out of camera images to remote editors is already standard practice anyway) as soon as the image quality is there. Will the pictures suffer ? Yes and no. The TV companies have the best coverage positions and quantity of coverage of anyone in the stadium so they can produce arguably more interesting content anyway. What you will lose is the individual aspect of choice with which a photographer will create the image as you will be stuck with making something out of what you are given so if the TV framing of a piece of action is wide then so will your 'picture' of it and if its in tight then so will your version of it be as well whereas you might well have chosen to do the exact opposite in both cases. One thing that will also advance its introduction in football at least is the phasing in of the VAR video refereeing decision system which is used for supporting or overturning decisions made by the on field referee. As these are normally the contentious and hence newsworthy incidents such as was it a penalty, was he offside etc, the images from the numerous cameras that the system uses arguably capture the peak moments of action and frame extracts are increasingly being used by newspapers to illustrate them with. I'm going to give the whole thing probably three or four years tops (particularly in light of the 8K at the Tokyo Olympics) before the balance tips, which is why I've wound down my involvement in it virtually completely in the past six month.

It covers S35.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind a bit of technical jousting and whatever myself but at some point all this shit has to mean something tangible in terms of an image. The amount of A/B/C/D camera comparisons that I see getting chewed over that use completely different lenses on each camera bewilders me to be honest, like the lens is somehow incidental. I've posted this before with regard to making a Cinecorder but I'm definitely going to get rid of a few bits and pieces and buy one of these Angenieux 25-250mm if I can find a decent one.

I think its safe to say 'mojo' in this particular area of the forum

I dunno. Once you've taken that step of walking along in public talking into any camera it is debatable whether there is any self-consciousness left that can be challenged by a mere bracket being attached to the camera

I think if you match the white balance and exposure between them it gets a lot closer. I personally prefer the Zeiss image largely because its a more subtle settled look overall with enough (and smoother) separation to the background without being as jarring as the Nikkor is though I dare say this would be the case with the Nikkor at f2.8 as well.

To be fair, the mic/flip up screen thing can be easily solved with a £10 flash bracket set like this which gives you the flexibility of having it coming over the top from the back or from the side.