asharpe1

<p>Generally speaking, you'd want a faster lens to get the background more out of focus. With the lenses you mention (I don't have any experience with any of them, so I can't speak in particulars), unless the background was at quite a distance, it wouldn't be terribly out of focus. An 85/1.8 or similar would give you much more subject separation, though at the expense of the flexibility of a zoom. There are a couple 50-150 f/2.8 zooms available that might suit your needs, though they're more expensive.</p>

<p>I don't think a Pentax 67 would fit on my arm!</p>

<p>I finally got around to developing and printing some pictures from last summer over winter break. This is a scan of a print on Ilford paper.</p><div></div>

<p>Not all. I'm 18, and only have one "classic manual camera" (my grandfather's Contax IIa), but I spent all Xmas break printing pictures I took with my Nikon F3 and RB67, so that sort of counts. I shoot digital too because it's convenient, and better in some situations. I also made myself a wooden pinhole camera for paper negatives. I printed some 8x10s the other day for the first time (I'd only done 5x7s previously) and can't wait to set up my bathroom darkroom again. <br />I guess that'll bring down the average age a bit :)</p>

<div></div>

<p>And as far as I can tell, there's no flash sync port either. And the shutter only syncs at a 1/180, and maxes out at 1/4000. </p>

<p>In manual mode, the area in the viewfinder that normally shows you your exposure compensation shows you how the camera thinks you should expose the scene. In other words, if you set 1/100 @ f/8 when the camera thinks it should be 1/100 @ f/5.6, it will display -1. If you set 1/500 @ f/8 for the same light, the camera thinks the scene is more than 2 stops underexposed and will blink at the left side (- side) of the scale. <br>

Is it possible there wasn't enough light to lock autofocus? In that case, the lens would rack back and forth, then stop, and you wouldn't be able to take a picture.<br>

Hope this helps.<br>

Alexander</p>

<p>I love my F3/T. I just handles so nicely, and is so well built. I also love the sound of the shutter, both with and without the MD-4. Mine also didn't come with the drive cover. I've mostly been using the drive, but I'll put some tape over the hole and use the bottom half of the eveready case. <br>

<img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4112/5163071462_db318efe17_z.jpg" alt="" height="500" /></p>

<p>Nice idea though. This is one of the comments on the first linked article:</p>

<p>"Ehhhh, if you need 800 shots to get 40 good ones, you've got bigger problems than development costs. I'm being serious here, try 1/60, f4.5, iso 100-400. That's a secret sweet spot that a pro photog shared with me recently, and I'll tell you, it's tough to take a BAD picture with those settings. Okay, except in bright sunlight."<br>

I thought it was pretty funny.</p>

<p>If Canon would only update it's small/cheap fixed lenses it would be great. A 35/2 with USM would be a very useful lens imo. Especially if it had a distance scale.</p>

<p>How about a second body? With all those lenses, you must change them a lot. That would definitely be my first move, along with some lighting equipment and a tripod.</p>

<p>On Saturday I was at the South Street Seaport, in New York. I volunteer at the museum there, helping to maintain their fleet of historic ships. There were some trucks pulled up outside, with horses tethered to them. Turned out it was a Wells-Fargo publicity stunt, they had three stagecoaches and eight horses. I got this shot while they were loading up passengers. It was my first time really using my "new" Nikon (Yikes!) 80-200 f/4 AI-S lens.</p><div></div>

<p>Well, I guess there isn't much I can do now until I see all of these in person. <br>

Thanks again!<br>

Alexander</p>

<p>The biggest problem with the F2 is that it's designed for the bodies to be carried without lenses attached. That's all very well for transportation, but if you're out shooting, with one or both cameras in the bag, they're not ready for instant use. That's why I like the idea of having the both bodies facing down, with lenses, and 2 slots for lenses between them, as is shown in the Lowepro picture.</p>

<p>I've already got a Mini Trekker backpack for long distances and/or more stuff. Zach's comments have confirmed my opinion that the Nova 200 (or Nova 5) is too big. As for the perfect bag, I think this will add up to one:</p>

<ul>

<li>F-5xc (for light kit) </li>

<li>Mini Trekker (for all gear/ long distance)</li>

<li>Nova 190/4 (For traveling)</li>

<li> F-2 (for more kit than F-5) </li>

</ul>

<p>Thanks for your help everyone!</p>

<p>Henry, thank you for your response. I might just have to get two bags now! :-!<br>

Your old Nikon setup sounds a lot like my film kit. I've got an F3/T with motor drive, 50mm, the aforementioned 28 & 105, and an 80-200/4. How did you carry the two bodies? Were they one on each side of the lens dividers with no lenses. And just out of curiosity, what were the bodies?</p>

<p>It looks like I'll just have to go down to B&H sometime and try them out. That's how I found my F-5xc, btw. I was looking at the usual bags and not finding anything that suited me, when I saw it across the aisle. It turned out to be perfect!</p>

Thanks for all the responses, I've now got a bit more options to consider besides just the standard

Lowepro/Tamrac style. Ian's recommendation of the F-1 made me reconsider the F-2, and with a slight

modification of the dividers might fit my kit.

The Domke style is great for working out of, but for traveling it seems like small items ould come out and

dust/water come in as there is just a top flap. I"m sure I'll end up getting the classic F2 at some point in

the future, but for now it might not fit my needs as well as a "boxier" but more padded and enclosed bag.

<br/><br/>

But does anyone know how the Nova 190 (new model) compares with the Nova 4 (old model)? The

dimensions seem similar, and a used 4 would save me money over the 190 which is a fairly recent model

I think.

<p>Well, the 200 looks too big, but thanks anyway.</p>

<p>... And the Lowepro Stealth Reporter series are the wrong shape as well. Cambags.com doesn't have many reviews of the new Nova line. I like the rain cover on the Lowepro bags. Think Tank is out of my price range, and Domkes are good for working out of, but not as much padding. The cameras must have a lens attached each. This bag shold have a decent amount of padding, though it can't be too big.</p>

<p>This picture from the Lowepro site is how I envision setting it up. My lenses are pretty small, so I can stack say the 50 and the 28. The 105/2.5 is the Nikkor lens with an adapter, as is the 28.<br>

The Tamrac bags seem to be designed for having the bodies facing each other, which takes up more room if you don't have pro bodies. And none of them seem to be the right size/shape, either too big, too small, or too tall. Finding a camera bag is like being Goldilocks, but with hundreds of choices instead of just three!<br>

<img src="http://products.lowepro.com//CatalogImages/18-2106-IMG2_LRG.jpeg" alt="nova" /></p>

<p>Hi all,<br /> I am looking for a shoulder bag to carry my 40D and XTi, both with lenses attached , and 2-4 other lenses. I have read about the Lowepro Nova 190 AW, but I don't know if it is big enough. I'm currently using a Domke F-5xc and will continue to do so, this is just when I need to bring more gear. My gear list is:<br /> 40D, ungripped<br /> XTi, ungripped<br /> 18-55 IS <br /> 55-250 <br /> 10-20<br /> 50/1.8<br /> and sometimes:<br /> 28/2.8<br /> 105/2.5<br /> If anyone has experience with the Nova 190 or similar bags, I would be most grateful.<br /> Thanks, Alexander</p>

<p>It all depends on the focal lengths you use most, and how you "see" your compositions. I tend to think in a 35/85 way, with either a 24 or 135. But several people I know prefer the 28/50/100 kit.</p>

<p>This was taken at the South Street Seaport Museum in NYC. I volunteer there helping to maintaing their fleet of ships. (As an aside, most of my favorite pictures the last couple of months seem to be verticals. Has anyone else noticed a particular tendency for one or the other? They're not as good for displaying online though!)</p><div></div>

<p>This was taken at the South Street Seaport Museum in NYC. I volunteer there helping to maintaing their fleet of ships. (As an aside, most of my favorite pictures the last couple of months seem to be verticals. Has anyone else noticed a particular tendency for one or the other? They're not as good for displaying online though!)</p>

<p>I just bought a Manfrotto 190XPROB and a used 488RC2 head, and am very pleased with it. I got it all for $200 (I got the head used).</p>