fotolopithecus

<p>There seems to be some fairly good evidence that Nikon is producing a full frame, and DX mirror-less camera based on patents, and supposedly reliable sources. I've wondered in the past why they've not, but it seems they might quite soon. Who's excited?</p>

<p>Actually I was talking about digital, but since a couple have added film cameras in I'd have to say the Nikon FM3 was perfect. Just the essentials with the added Aperture priority, just because. They really went wild in that model.</p>

<p>For years I've been on a personal quest to find the worlds best digital camera. I've owned quite a few now, and still seem unable to conclude in a completely objective way which is the best. Of course I realize different cameras excel in different areas. Most recently I've bought both a Sony A7MKII, and a Nikon D750, and to be honest I think the Nikon may have a slight edge in IQ. On the other hand the Sony is just so compact, and really nice. As soon as I think I've found the best I normally come across a published list of horribles on one photography site or another.<br> I'm not a sports, or wildlife shooter and as such don't find frames per second very important, or anything over 24mp on a full frame, but have nothing against it if noise, or dynamic range aren't compromised. <br> My own definition of what would be the worlds best dslr, or mirror-less would be the camera which had the best overall image quality giving equal importance to all the factors that comprise it, and balancing them in one camera. Low noise, high dynamic range, good resolution, etc are what I like, and I'm sure all of you have a list of what's most important to you. <br> So what is the ideal camera for you, and with what attributes does it win your admiration? Feel free to list real, and fictional cameras of your dreams. ;)</p>

<p>Thanks everyone interesting stuff.</p>

<p>Thanks Guys, so is the green tint thing still an issue in lightroom 6, or Silkypix?</p>

<p>So a Fuji XT1 for example wouldn't come with it's own editing software?</p>

<p>From what I've read are very, very, good but apparently a little different in design from standard sensors. Is there anyone who could briefly explain the differences, and what advantages there are vs downsides? Thanks, ;)</p>

<p>This is just stupid. Even if this puissant lens were the equal of a Zeiss (which it ain't) it would still be going on a smart phone which is less than optimal. No doubt one day nanobots will make lenses that are smaller than an amoeba to fit cameras the size of a Gnat's A** to take pictures of a fly's eye. Who cares.</p>

<p>The Fuji XT3 would be very compelling if it were to be full frame, because it's remarkably good with only the cropped sensor. So many decisions camera makers make that make no sense to me.</p>

<p>Yeah, I pretty much agree with your wish list.</p>

<p>On the soon to be announced Pro mirror-less cameras. I've read that Fuji should have the Fuji XT2 ready fairly soon, and if nothing else the XT1 is a beautiful camera. I'm also wondering about the time frame for the Sony A7MK3 which if I'm not mistaken should be the next in the Sony line to get updated. I may be mistaken. ;)</p>

<p>In the end I will not be surprised if it turns out to be the Government bullying B&H, and using discrimination as a pretext to get something else they want from B&H. Businesses usually cave because it's cheaper for them, whereas it costs the Government nothing to go after them.</p>

<p>Zane, the fact that they're allowed to continue importing the wood from India pretty much says it all.</p>

<p>I know DOJ once raided Gibson Guitars claiming that they were buying illegal rosewood for their Guitars. It turned out to be a raid in support of unions who If memory serves were not in Gibson's work force. DOJ never brought a case because Gibson went public about the true purpose of the raid.<br> The point being that just because the Government is behind the claims doesn't necessarily make them true. Let's see what a court of law has to say before we ruin B&H's business with claims which may not be valid.</p>

<p> Ditto.</p>

<p>Well Donald, I can assure you that no one on these forums has any idea who my friend is, out of the 7 billion possibilities on planet earth. Since he shared his thoughts with me it's certainly also my business.</p>

<p>I kind of agree, to a degree, with the notion that you can never go home again. A few months ago some friends of ours from India came to visit us for a few days, and absolutely fell in love with the town I grew up in. When they returned to India they asked my wife if I would go around and take pictures all over the village, including the houses I lived in, and interesting places around town with captions.<br> Well I did it, and it was actually less of a hassle than I expected, but when looking at my old stomping grounds, homes, schools, etc. it was kind of a bittersweet experience. I guess I was lucky in that most of the places were in good repair, but the memories, that's the part that will get you every time. On the whole I liked it.</p>

<p>Not in this particular case, but to what Stephen alluded earlier about people seeming very different after many years. It's almost as if their personalities have been compressed from raw to jpgs, and not even jpg fine some times. The big colorful personalities I remembered have become dull or faded. The question then becomes whether or not they have changed, or whether my memories of them were developed over the years since. There's no doubt we idealize past places, and people, but perhaps some were, or are more conscious of it than I have been. In any event I feel like I could make his past home live up to his memories, but of course he has no way of knowing it.</p>

<p>A few days ago I came across an old friend I had grown up with on FB. We haven't seen each other for more than 30 years although that hardly seems possible. I could always see his house through a small patch of woods about a quarter mile away through our kitchen window.<br> Anyway, he lives in Malaysia now which explains why it seemed like he fell off the edge of the earth for so many years. We did the usual catching up about this, and that via the FB message system. It took a bit of time since while I'm awake they're sleeping, and the reverse. He seems to live in some kind of community of retired western types married to Malaysian women.<br> Eventually I got around to giving him a link to my website because most of what I shoot is fairly local historic stuff and landmarks. I also said that it was too cold right now, but when the weather warmed up I'd drive by his childhood home, and take a picture to send him. I figured he'd like to look at the image and reminisce about his years growing up there. The next day I received a message that thanks, but I need not take the picture because he'd rather keep his mom's house in mind the way he remembers it.<br> Having been by the place recently it doesn't look much different than it did back in the day, but of course I'll honor his request not to take the shot. It's a curious thing I thought because depending on what your memories are you would think it would be nice to have if you're half a world away. I know he had a pretty good childhood to the degree I could know that being a friend. So it just goes to show that as important as photography is to me, and people on these forums, not everyone processes past experiences the same way. Some only wish to live in the here and now. <br> Interestingly, I think there's a similar thing going on in my wife's family who are Indians. I could be wrong, but I suspect that their relative lack of interest in memories type photographs might be cultural. It has always driven me nuts that they just didn't care about photographs of themselves, or places from the past that I considered precious. Beautiful fading pictures of my wife as a teenager cut up scrapbook style with no saved negatives. <br> We photographers may be the abnormal ones, I'm not sure, any theories? </p>