john_mayerhauser

I can see that it was designed quickly - as stated above, it does not look professional and it doesn't have any sort of focus to it.

 

The 'about me' page is lost at sea. It's fine that you have four kids and that you are a Christian and that you like photography. As a potential customer, I do not care about the former and I sorta take the latter as a given. You need more photography-related detail there.

 

And work on the photos.

 

Good luck, Tammy.

I have a Harry Fleenor CLA'd 3.5E - he did terrific work on it. I recommend him.

 

I just had Krikor Maralian CLA a 2.8F for me and install a Maxwell screen. I shipped the camera to him on Monday of last week. He called me on Tuesday to discuss what needed to be done - by Friday, I was in his shop in New Jersey picking up the camera. Again, he did terrific work and the turnaround time was really convenient.

 

I recommend both shops.

You really should contact the person who did the CLA and ask about it.

The lenses on the two Fuji models are the same.

 

Best way to go, as stated above, is to sell the 670, throw in some extra cash, and buy the 690.

The MP seems like overkill while the white shirt is a welcome addition to any wardrobe.

I started off on Yashica TLRs and eventually migrated to Rolleiflexs. Prices being what they are, I would probably advise you to go into a Rollei T or something equivalent. It's just a step up in quality for not much money.

 

The shutter speed/aperture lever is actually very quick - get an EV reading from your meter, transfer it to the lever and then you can slide through the various combos of speed and aperture. If you want to override and choose a faster or slower shutter speed for an aperture, pull the lever up and do so.

 

I don't have a preference as to which I like better, but I think the lever system is very easy and very fast.

How else are you going to remember where you parked your submarine, Piotr?

He certainly didn't look invisible to me prowling around the way he was, but he seems pretty comfortable in thinking he's invisible and that's probably more than half the battle. He's a talented, interesting individual - thank you for the link.

The Palisades were created by magma that formed a large sill - that sill was essentially exposed by glaciers that moved across it during the ice ages.

 

The soft silt, shale, earth, whatever that once covered the sheer diabase stone was scraped away and ultimately deposited in what is now Long Island and parts of New Jersey. The freeze-thaw cycles in the time since have also added to the look of the Palisades by splitting rock off the face. It's really a dramatic looking formation.

I might not bother if I were using a cheap lens, but anything I've spent a decent amount of money on, I will use a filter. (Mostly to protect it from whatever disaster my clumsy hands can bring to bear on it.)

 

Although I have never done any sort of testing to see if there are benefits, I generally buy the higher priced multicoated lenses on the assumption that they are better.

 

John

 

PS - What part of the Mid-Hudson, Steve? (We're in Lagrange/Western Dutchess)

Spring Chicken

 

1 M-body, 4 lenses

You're better off having it done - they are very specific about the photo file. I had mine taken in about 20 seconds at Kinkos. I know Sears takes them as well.

 

Otherwise...<a href="http://www.dpchallenge.com/tutorial.php?TUTORIAL_ID=22">DP Review</a>

Leica M3, DR Summicron, Hilti 15.6V screw gun, DeWalt chop saw, some hammers, a few screwdrivers and maybe a wrench.

I would second what Grant and Adam have to say - if you want one lens to do it all and still come in under $300, you would be well-served by the Sigma 28-300. The extra reach of the 300 end would come in handy for your landscape work.

 

It runs about $270; it offers a lot of utility for very little money.

It is a great lens.

 

On a 'bang for your buck' scale, though, I'm not sure how highly I would rate it - there is a heck of a lot of bang, but it takes a heck of a lot of buck to get it. The 85/1.8 is a wonderful lens - a healthy wallop of bang for about 1/4th the buck. On the 20D, the 50/1.4 is a very useful portrait lens and is very affordable.

 

Perhaps you'll decide that spending $300-400 on a lens for this purpose and having extra money for extra lenses/accessories works better for you than spending $1,500 on one lens.

 

Good luck with whichever path works best for you!

B&H now has them in stock - had ordered one previously and was informed that it shipped today.

Probably by taking the lens off to check for sensor dust.

Sigma has a package deal where they sell two lenses (you can get them in a Canon mount) for about $225. The first is a 28-80 3.5-5.6 and the second is a 75-300 f-5.6. I've seen it advertised at B&H, Ritz, etc. - I do not know if that helps you in Kenya, but it is certainly marketed in the States.

 

They're not world-beating lenses, but they fit into your budget and your needs and it leaves a little left over for an inexpensive tripod.

If the XT is what your budget allows and you can live with the viewfinder, by all means, buy one.

 

I have a 20D, but I've had the chance to use the XT on several occasions and aside from being a little small for my clumsy mitts, I've been impressed. It's a very capable camera - it's a lot of camera for the money and the light weight makes it a joy to carry around.

For what you'd get for the grip, I would hang onto it.

 

It's a well-designed piece and it adds some grip to the R3 just where I think it needs it. I prefer it to the trigger winder.

 

As for what it looks like, I don't know that it matters. If I was concerned with the looks of it, I probably would never have bought an R3 in the first place.

The cap for the 12585 hood is the same - 14033. If you could find a generic cap that was deep enough, you could modify it to fit the clips on the cap

I think Frank might just have jumped the shark with this one.

It comes wrapped with 1,600 one-dollar bills.

Biggest mark against the Leica would be weight - you're just not going to want something that heavy on you when you're skiing. Even the Canonet GIII is a bit too much of a brick to be carried comfortably on the slops.

 

The Stylus Epic, 35RC, Konica C35, Olympus XA family - all very well suited for the job. The XA's with the slim form and clamshell cover are perfect. Plus, if you crash and land on it, you'll only wreck a fairly inexensive camera - crash land on a Leica and you and the camera will both need repair.

Frank, you're a goofball, but I think that's what I like about you. This place needed a little life ;-)