maxJ4380

Too late. there's a f2 35mm takumar on its way, i may also get a warming filter for the double whammy or more likely just for comparisons Lens should be here by the end of the month. It kinda rounds out my takumer set, i have most of the focal lengths i think although none are matching, there's taks, super taks, and smc's. i don't think i have a 28mm and definitely no eight element either. Next item will be a speed booster i think, to claw back some of that crop and i presume it gives me an additional focal length for each lens. Well thats how i'm looking at it anyway.

Awesome.. a new market opportunity opening up, for buying cheap plastic lens caps and grinding RX1R III into it with the dremel. Obviously i couldn't sell them too cheap as one of the smarter cookies might smell something fishy going on...

Herbie goes to monte carlo 1977. Even more vintage... or the village people that was 1980 as well.

I have a sirui in 24mm mft. I quite like it. when i first looked at it on youtube they were preproduction models i believe. I thought the flares might be a bit to much, however after buying it, i find the flares not to be too overpowering. I suspect either sirui toned them down or perhaps or youtubers sought out the absolute brightest lights to test on, which may not have been in the lenses best interests. Be interesting to see how your anamorphic adapter behaves. It was prime day everywhere wasn't it ? may not have been just us aussies... btw i like your room light. I have been setting up a black velvet curtain and i have some fairy lights to do some bokeh experiments with. If i can find something similar it might make it in as a foreground object.

know this, your not alone... it was a fad and a bad fad at that. Sad it is, that creators haven't learnt anything as it still continues... if we judge humanity by our youtube creators you'd have to say humanity is doomed. When i want to see a genuine shocked face, i go watch some thing from styropyro he is always good value.

I see lots of banding in your images kye, i hope its mot just me lol. i presume that's from the jpg setting. I used to get banding from jpegs when i used them in timelapses till i learned better. Can you maybe up the jpeg quality a notch ? I know their only test shots, however i kinda feel the banding is hindering the visual aspect abit.

Been on the look out for a yellow lens for awhile now. Some one said something down in the lens thread a while ago about a yellow lens , that got me thinking... Also i know there's two trains of thought with with photography / videography either do it in camera or do it in post. In most ways i like the in camera theory. Seems more authentic to me to do it in camera or more personal / intentional perhaps. In post seems more like an after thought to my way of thinking. Not wanting to rock any ones boat and if you like to do things in post that's great, please continue. Anyway finally decided on a lens, a super takumar 35mm f2. Should be a thorium lens from what i have read. So probably best, not to sleep with it under the pillow. I purchased this lens mostly with the intent of adding some warmness to an image / video. Not sure if the result will be a yellow or more sepia effect. There's a couple of images for your perusal. Should arrive before my birthday i hope.

I did some research some time ago from what i have read raynox are the wide angle adapter of choice. If you are keen to go further maybe do a little of your own research.

kye does your takumar 35mm f3.5 have any yellowing ? the reason i ask is I'm looking at 35mm takumars for that reason (thorium lenses i believe) rather than doing it in post. It will probably end up a one trick pony however i think i can live with that. Is that a client constraint ?

18 hadn't changed as far as i remember. i suspected 19 or 20. i skipped 19 got 20 and things has changed... took a bit to figure it out. I also bought one of these on prime day, had it in the cart, was hoping it would come on sale and it did. Saved $20, so worthwhile waiting the extra week or so.

i think i'm on version 17.2.00 of dng converter, their all backwards compatible. I convert to camera raw 4.6 as its the last version listed for cs3. it pretty simple to use, select your directory and hit convert, er.. pick a directory to save your files otherwise you'll waste 10 minutes wondering where they went... Its a 1.6 gig dl which makes it a fair size. Its free as well. its a handy program, once you have a dng, the worlds your oyster. either photo or video editing, you can do image sequences as well, which avoids the banding you get with jpg's, if your into timelapse or hyperlapses or some form of animation. Camera Raw 2.4 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 2.4 (Photoshop CS) and later, and Lightroom 1.0 and later Camera Raw 4.1 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 4.1 (Photoshop CS3) and later, and Lightroom 1.1 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Camera Raw 4.6 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 4.6 (Photoshop CS3) and later, and Lightroom 2.1 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Camera Raw 5.4 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 5.4 (Photoshop CS4) and later, and Lightroom 2.4 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Camera Raw 6.6 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 6.6 (Photoshop CS5) and later, and Lightroom 3.6 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Camera Raw 7.1 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 7.1 (Photoshop CS6) and later, and Lightroom 4.1 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Camera Raw 11.2 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 11.2(Photoshop 20) and later, and Lightroom 8.2 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Camera Raw 12.4 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 12.4 (Photoshop 21) and later, and Lightroom 9.4 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Camera Raw 13.2 and later: The DNG file will be readable by Camera Raw 13.2 (Photoshop 22) and later, and Lightroom 10.2 and later. The DNG file will often be readable by earlier versions, depending on the camera model. Custom: Backward Version: DNG 1.1, DNG 1.3, DNG 1.4, or DNG 1.6 (default 1.6)

Pardon my ignorance, cant you use adobes dng converter to change raw file to dng's ? you can then do anything you want. Well thats how i get my raw files into photoshop cs3 and that has to be older than 2017 lol. I guess there's probably some sort of image loss going on in any conversion however my 58 year old eyes don't notice it.

Your right, you don't understand. Some background for you, i have owned the commodore vic 20 with the datasette, the atari 1040st and a dx2-66 when they came out. when you bought software for them you owned it. No subscriptions back then. so for 40 years, give or take, companies developed software and made money. Some companies lots of money. Having companies give you more options to "pay" for for something you dont own, isn't much different to taking a sharp knife and stabbing yourself and wondering how many more ways can i do this, until i bleed out ? Sure the subscription model works best for Adobe because its based on greed.. sure it may be cheaper to "subscribe" for 6 months or so maybe even a year. But ultimately it will cost you more. What a way to reward your loyal customers. Lets face it none of these companies have their backs against the wall and have kids dying from malnutrition (well not the ceo's or higher anyway) and if they do, its not a funding issue. There's still plenty of software to buy out there that doesn't have a "subscribe" component, probably the vast majority of software, that is still regularly updated. So your argument is baseless. Cars are great.. you know why ? because it keeps the horses of the street. Do you know how much a horse can crap ? although its a biological action, and to be expected from any organic lifeform. It attracts flies, lots of flies, not to mention crap doesn't smell anything like perfume. Less flies, less disease. Simple as that. Mind you, cars are not cheap either. Thats why you see bags of horse crap outside of stables for sale. their trying to recoup some of the money they have spent on feed. If they try to dump it, it will cost them more money to dump at a tip / dump. Personally i'm of the opinion that anything that we involve ourselves in, is in one form or another is a revenue stream. Cars, taxi, buses, even buying a camera. It will cost you for the privilege. Public transport or anything to do with government no longer covers costs. Now it has to make money.

er, sorry to take you away from your 35-350 big boy toys 😉 however I'm looking for a smaller lens, preferably with a distinct yellowing. which means thorium glass i think. Got my eye on either the takumar 35mm f2 or the 58mm f1.2. However if you know of others let me know. From my research they seem to be guaranteed thorium glass. Of course they are not the only thorium lenses out there. Just easy to get i guess. Although easy to get is relative where ebay is concerned. I kinda like the taks in m42 mount as its easy to adapt to m43 and i already have a few of them. Main reason to get one is i'm thinking of using it for sunsets. I'm hoping the yellowing adds a bit of a kick to a sunset. I could buy a cheap yellow filter, and i probably will for comparisons however that seems like cheating to me and not terribly authentic in the scheme of things. I was liking the 58mm f1.2 for awhile except by the time i mount it to mft it becomes more like a 120mm with the crop and i'm not that interested in a telephoto at the moment. I'd also have to buy a metabones speedbooster 0.64 to bring it back to a more reasonable view and i'd like to wait a little bit longer before i pull the pin on that particular purchase.

Looking after my brothers place for a week, while he goes on holidays with his wife. I decided I'd do some unscientific observations with my assortment of cameras. I did take the e-m1 yesterday however it didn't quite go to plan. So i'll redo that before the end of the week. There's quite a few different animals to "shoot" hopefully you all get a bit of a different perspective for a bit. A frame grab from the iphone 13 pro max. i shot 4k then resized it to hd for convenience. I thought it turned out ok. Frosts tend to kill off the grasses, there's a bit of green around but not much.

I have one on the watch list for amazon prime day. Hopefully they come on sale. Even if they don't I'll grab one as they are cheaper new on prime, than buying second hand off ebay.

I last did some screen grabs in resolve 18, when i bothered to dl 20, i think they changed how you grab frames as nothing i did seemed to grab a frame. 20 was new at the time and there were no tutorials that i could find More by good luck than good management i figured it out. I do think its easier / faster in to do in 20. Just letting you know so you avoid some hiccups.

I liked the 2nd and the 3rd photo. The blooming / halation is nice or i think its nice anyway. The other photos seem subdued to me, but take anything i say with grain of salt. The lens looks like, its seen better days, which i suspect adds to the images. Not sure i want to see what a test chart looks like through that lens, but i think thats probably a great lens for a rainy / moody day scenario. Are these photos or stills from a video ? Sorry no idea what the gh7 can do. Anyway thanks for sharing

Didn't magic lantern get a cease and desist from canon ? I always thought magic lantern was doing some incredible stuff for canon. After magic lanterns advances I vaguely remember some of canons cameras having issues with timing and overheating which turned out to be software related. Which makes me wonder how long the cripple hammer in one form or another has been in active service with canon. In hindsight canon probably could have done all the stuff magic lantern did except they prefer to segregate their market and maximize profit margins it would seem.

Our local servo's tend to gouge us here, heck even the local shops aren't much better. We have had a new servo open up and thats dropped prices to a "tolerable" level. No idea for how long. Given any opportunity however and i'll drive the 70 odd kilometers to the next town and do some shopping get anything else that might catch my attention and get a couple of jerry cans as well as its always cheaper. Worst prices i have even seen was last xmas the difference was 48 cents a liter. here it was $1.98 and $1.50 70 kilometers down the road. I'd like to see them explain how it costs an extra 48c per liter to deliver it 70 kilometers down the road.

That cheap and tacky finish might work in your favour, if your into a less obtrusive style of street photography or videography. It wouldn't be my first choice but I think i'd take it, over a fire engine red one, any day of the week. However i happy enough with the em-1iii so its all kinda irrelevant to me.

i think my teacher would call this an oxymoron, although its been a lot longer than than i'd care to think about... certainly long enough that the definition has probably changed since then. I should google it... ok seems like i'm still right... I'm also thinking this would be a perfect skit for kasy over at camera conspiracies. lots to work with. btw i could only be offended, if what you said is true and since it is not... wooOSAah... Now let us return to our normal programming content.

I'm willing to bet you tell the worst dad jokes...🙄 there was a wright camera... In astrophotography, the Wright camera design, presented by Franklin Wright (Berkeley, California) in 1935, just a few years after the introduction of the Schmidt camera. does that help? so technically the wright camera came before too wongs i guess.. you could argue two wongs don't make a wright...

you should probably get in touch with the police about your concerns. I'm sure they are competent enough to get it sorted. I have no idea where that building is, but if i had of walked past it, i would have taken exactly the same photo because of the symmetry. I'd guess its close to where he works or on the way home perhaps. Heck i have even been known to drive a couple hours to photograph wheat silo's on sunset. We know diddly squat about its past, who owns it now or before and you want to break out the pitchfork and torches. my front door so you don't add me to the conspiracy list.

Took the gimbal and e-m1 to a local lookout today. didn't get to the lookout part, as there's some huge rocks and a cave atmosphere thing happening at the base. The camera gimbal combination gets heavy pretty quick. Not surprising considering my fitness level. I have grabbed some stills from todays foray Its a couple hours later now and my shoulders feel like falling off. I may have to start doing bicep curls with gimbal and camera. I had the 17mm takumar fish eye on the e-m1. Also set it f8 out in the sun and set the focus to 4m or so in front of me. Bit annoying there are no filter threads, as i would have put a vari nd on it however back then it would have been a fish eye on full frame and its understandable that filter threads probably weren't considered, although with the m43 crop, the look is not nearly so wide however. Its quite narrow in places not much wider than shoulder width but opens up about 15 meters in. Its also a trip hazard trying to go though with a gimbal in hand. Rocks and tree roots all over the place. I did do a vortex shot looking upward. Actually i tried a few things, learnt a few things. I will go back with the 24mm sirui to see what sort of difference it makes and i'm kinda looking forward to seeing the comparison. I do notice a bit of side to side movement when walking but it doesn't bother me overly much as i figure some movement is natural when walking along a trail. Sure pans and tilts should be smooth however i am curious as to other peoples expectations are? I also think i need to change the motor speeds as it pans and tilts much quicker than i would like