alex_p._schorsch

<p>The RX1 is almost the perfect camera. A great lens with a great sensor - probably some of the best results of any FF yet. This camera would probably take me to the grave. - So, if I bought it I wouldn't need any future upgrades in the sensor quality department (for me, the megapixel war is over), nor in the lens department, nor the sensitivity department. There is but one caveat - probably, in the future we will see an improvements in focusing technology. This is the only area where I perceive a possible future obsolescence in the RX1. All things said - this is my dream camera and if I can't adapt to the back-screen only - then I guess I'll just have to fork up another $450 for the EVF. </p>

<p>I used to really enjoy taking photos wih my Mamiya 6. It's a lot of fun and the results were excelent. It was stolen from my car a couple of years ago. I found the 150mm lens totally useless with this camera. The 50mm wide-angle Mamiya lens (28mm - equiv.) was to die for. A really top-notch optic. The 75mm ws also really nice. This is a really compact camera that takes fantastic results. I love 'em. Highly recommended. Cheers, Alex.</p>

<p>Leica was almost going bankrupt. Now they have launched three great products. An APS-sized sensor compact which will let photographers do casual photography with high quality results. A Full Frame M camera which will allow photographers to take full advantage of the georgeous Leica lenses and a "Medium Format" DSLR with some of the finest lenses ever produced in the history of photography. They must have spent a ton of Deutschmarks to develop these impressive cameras and must recoup the money invested. I find it amazing that they actually managed to pull it off. I believe $7,000 to be expensive for an M9 and I believe that they would probably sell a lot more of these cameras if they were priced more reasonably. I think the bottom line is that they don't have the possibilty to increase their production numbers and have arrived at a selling price that will let them sell all of the stock that they are able to churn out. It's a supply and demand equation. If they sold them cheaper, they wouldn't be able to keep up with the demand - so they put the price at a "comfortable" $7,000 per unit. If I had lots of money laying around going to waste, I, for sure, would buy one. Mind you, I'd have to plunk down another $7,000 for lenses. Leica M's are a bit slow in handling but the results that one can get out of these cameras are top notch, and for many, worth the investment. Plus, they are really cool.</p>

<p>I would go primes with this camera: 15mm limited, 31mm limited and 100mm macro for a nice lightweight kit.</p>

<p>If I were investing in primes I would go with the following to have a light-weight versatile kit: 20mm Voigtlander, 35mm Zeiss, 60mm Micro Nikon and the Nikon 135mm f/2. My two sense.</p>

<p>The 17mm f/2.8 is the perfect range lens for this camera. I only wish for two things: 1) That this 17mm lens is of good optical quality and 2) That they sell the body only so I don't have to pay for a crummy zoom that I don't want when I'm obliged to buy a kit.</p>

<p>Dear Stephen the Sony A900 is $2,700, not $3,500. Cheers.</p>

<p>How about: Ciudade del Este, Paraguay; New Delhi (even better is Old Delhi); Belem, Amazon, Brazil; Rome; Marakesh, Morocco; I would say that these cities have offered some of the most diverse and interesting human types that I have ever seen. Ciudade del Este is like a beehive, a veritable gigantic marketplace. New Delhi and Old Delhi have a fantastic mix of old and new where there are many differnt people on the streets performing almost every different type of task known to man. Belem has one of the most interesting markets in the world and their port has almost every size and type of boat along with Indians, whores, sailors, fishermen and witch doctors. Rome is brimming with strreet life. Marakesh is the meeting point of the mountain people with the desert tribes. Their marketplace is a real feast for the eyes. Age-old traditions in dress and manners make it very exotic (Fez might be even better). I have never been to China, but I bet that must be the Street Shooter's pardise. </p>

Yes crop cameras are going to disappear. Full frame cameras will start becoming cheaper and will have much better definition and will become available for advanced amateurs and pros for cheaper prices. APS sensors will also give fantastic results in the future but will probably lose their reflex mirrors and maybe even shutters, similar to the Micro 4/3 system. Then manufacturers will be able to make lenses and cameras much smaller for the APS format. They will launch specific lenses for these cameras and we will see distinct FF lenses and Micro APS lenses. Then there will be no more crops but two distinct formats. One for amateurs and people who like smaller cameras and another for Pros who do studio and landscape, etc. Mind you, the image quality of the APS formats, in the future will rival the best quality films of the old days.My 2 sense.

Why not wait a few more days and buy a G1?

The proof is in the pudding. I think Mr. Gilden has taken quite a few great photographs in his day. He is a street shooter and has captured life. I find it odd he should be critisized here so agressively. His photos are timeless. He might seem to be a pain in the ass to some of his subjects but that's his style. He brings home the bacon.

If a van is ugly, exploit its ugliness. The size and trappings of SUV say a lot about the American character.

This new Live View system from panasonic refreshes the scene 60 times per second so it will probably greatly resemble an optical viewfinder and be easy to get used to. This new Micro 4/3 system eliminates the pentaprism and mirror.The only problem I see with this system is that Olympus is always extremely slow to bring new lenses to market. By the time Panny/Oly get a decent system set up it could take more than a couple of years. Hope Leica gets invoilved with panny on some fast killer lenses. Would be just the ticket for an everyday carry camera.

Get a wide angle zoom. The best would probably be the 12-24 zoom (or heavy 14-25) and then you can just go crazy. Upgrade to the d90 and then you'll have access to the fantastic d300 sensor. This camera will open up a whole other world to your lowlight photography. After that get a 135mm fixed lens for those sneaky candids where you will shoot your prey without them even knowing it. My 2 sense, cheers - Alex.

I want to use the 105 AF (non VR) with the D300 and maybe, in the future D90 and full frame. I used to enjoy using a 25mm tube with my Canon film camera (long gone).

It depends on your strategy. If you want to stay with DX format the D300 is the best camera in the Nikon line. You could wait for a D90 if you want to save money. One spin is: The DX is a smaller sensor and has already 12 megapixels. If they start cramming more photdiodes (or whatever it is you call them) we might see a drop in Image Quality. Therefore the D300 seems like a very good prospect in the evolutionary DX chain. A camera like this is pro level so will probably last you many years. If you want to do nature photography you can have long reach with smaller lenses. Later on if you decide to buy a Full Frame with 17 or 20 megapixel sensor you can still keep the D300 for many years for macro and bird photography. The D90 will be out in a month but it will only cost about $600 or $700 less than the D300 so because of the better build quality the D300 might be a smarter investment.I believe that the 12 mega sensor is enough for action, bird and animal photography and that one can get very good pro results for the printed page with this size of a sensor. So you could buy a D300 and keep it for many years and then buy in the future a really high definition full frame body for wide angle, archetectural and big blow-up use.

Now I'm even more mixed up then when I asked the question.

So why can't Nikon take a "2x teleconvertor and take out the glass"?

Yeah, I forgot to say that I can live without Macro AF but electronic aperture and metering is very imortant.

I started out photography with Minoltas, then went to Nikon, then Pentax, then Canon and now I've decided to invest

in Nikon again. One thing gets me a little peeved with Nikon though. They seem to neglect their customers a bit by

not providing them with certain very important gear. Specifically I'm talking about Macro Tubes. Nikon has a pretty

good reputation for manufacturing quality macro (micro) lenses but it seems that they don't provide an up to date

version of macro tubes for them. For me, an extension tube is a vital part of my macro kit. Could someone explain to

me what the present state of affairs regarding Nikon and extension tubes is. I am specifically interested in buying a

25mm tube for the 105 Nikon AF macro. Thanks to any and all who can shed some light on this Nikon mystery..

Ilkka , many of the most famous photographers (especially from the past) never had any formal training in photography schools, just like some of the best writers in history never specifically studied writing.That doesn't mean that they weren't pros. For example, Henry Cartier Bresson never studied photography I consider "professional" someone who gets professional results regardless of whether they have a diploma or not. Although I think this debate is rather academic and not very productive.

I'm kinda tired of hearing here and on other sites so many people whining about how the IQ of their 6 megapixel camera is much better than the new 12 megapixel cameras. A six megapixel camera is not very good for any practical use except photos on the internet. I used to use slides and then moved on to a 6 megapixel camera, then an eight megapixel one and finally a ten megapixel camera. I am presently editing a book with a selection of twenty years of nature photographs. I have beautiful two-page spreads made from my scanned chromes, full pages from my ten megapixel camera. Then I have little tiny photographs (about 4 to the page) made from my old six megapixel camera. People seeing the layout ask why don't you blow-up this photo or that photo. I then have to explain to them that many years ago digital cameras only had six megapixel capture and bla-bla-bla. I think you get my point. All that work I did with that "state of the art" 6 megapixel camera was almost a waste of time. Cheers, Alex.

Computers have also ruined writing as has the combustion engine ruined travelling. It was much better with typewriters and horse-drawn buggies. Come on, stop griping about new technologies you old curmudgeons. It has always been my dream that cameras have "selective" exposure to correctly expose different parts of a scene. For now, we have HDR. I think that HDR might have ruined Dave Hickey's life style, not photography. It seems that you have become a slave of HDR, Dave, and are now bracketing everything. Stop bracketing when you're travelling with your family and only bring the tripod along when you are doing special stuff. Yeah , I know. My advise is falling on deaf ears. Like me - I always seem to be dragging the tripod around. I haven't mastered HDR yet - I'll probably have to spend inumerous long hours long hours trying to master it if I don't give up first. These digital post-production skills are very difficult it seems. Thanks for the great links. I'll probably learn all I need to know with the links here. Thanks fot the thread. Cheers, Alex.

Using the principal that the camera is just a box to hold film, I would say that the D90 is a pretty good buy because

it's a "box" with a D300 (digital film)sensor in it. Everybody has been raving about the quality (especially low light) of

the D300 sensor, for me, this is just what I need for wildlife and macro photography.. The D300 will be obsolete in a

couple of years so just buy the D90 to save a few hundred bucks. Video might just come in handy when you are

witness to some historical or family event. Why not? The sensor that is supposed to be coming with the D90 is one

of the best on the actual market and that's what counts. The rest are lenses and the stupid guy who pushes the

button (the weakest link in th production chain). Cheers.

Hmmm. The plot thickens.