Welcome to the IHoP v.2

[dem beats 1,223]

Mike it's not letting me quote you, but the Olympus entry level was super duper dope for the price.

I saw real prints that were with kit and macro lenses from that camera.  The RSA had a portfolio with her.  She is a semi pro photog not too unlike myself but she concentrates on business work where I do private work. The pics were great.  Obviously not 1600 body and 2700 lens good, but the whole rig for body and some lenses was less than $1000.  I'm sure if you went with just kit lenses it would be $500ish.  Olympus makes good glass. They are an optics company first I believe.  They make a lot of medical optic devices, Sean could probably speak more to their talent with glass.

[///M5 2,833]

2 hours ago, Billy Jack said:

wow, you guys are kind of hard on the new guys. Yes I have never commented on a forum in my life, so I made a mistake and didn't see the date, but no need to get ill about it. I was actually laughing at myself I thought it was funny that a old fart like me couldn't use technology imagine that but I'm figuring it out. 

This is the hop.  Ribbing is normal

[topgun 262]

Ribbed for pleasure.  

[///M5 2,833]

New mirrorless is better bang for the buck than a used SLR.  As for can you find used?  Not sure, I have a glass investment so I have never looked.

[Billy Jack 145]

Ow no I'm good I'm just joking around with you guys, if you can't laugh at yourself, what's the point. I'm a thick skinned hillbilly from Kentucky, it's gonna take more then some bass heads giving me a hard time over my lack of technology skills, to run me off. Carry on.

[///M5 2,833]

While I have also seen the Olympus shots and was amazed, I prefer the glass choices of other manufacturers....but then it is a premium as well, which now reaches towards DSLR.  Like a DSL shop GLASS then the body.  Pretty sure there aren't shit choices of bodies where there is good glass.  Remember on a mirrorless that you multiply by 2x to get the equivalent full frame focal length.

ie:

 28mm FF = 18mm APS = 14mm MLess

 70mm FF = 45mm APS = 35mm MLess

200mm FF = 128mm APS = 100mm MLess

I picked probably the three most important ranges to pay attention too, with the first two winning unless you need reach.

[///M5 2,833]

Multi-use lenses:

Olympus 12-40 2.8 $999

Panasonic 12-35 2.8 $997

Fuji 18-55 2.8 $700 (16-55 $1200)

Sony ....BOOOO

Canon  ....???

Nikon 1 Mirrorless (10mm = 28mmFF) ...no thanks!

[///M5 2,833]

/\ Those all look the "same" so, start looking at more appropriate usage lenses for the difference.

 

[///M5 2,833]

*I left out Leica for obvious reasons although they are surely the best BY FAR

[///M5 2,833]

Short & Portrait:

Panny:  25 1.4 $600, 42.5mm 1.2 $1600

Olympus: 25 1.8 $400, 45mm 1.8 $400

Fuji: 23mm 1.4 $900, 35mm 2 $400, 35mm 1.4 $600, 56mm 1.2 $999

Long:

Panny 35-100mm 2.8 $1300

Olympus: 40-150mm 2.8 $1500

Fuji: 50-140mm 2.8 $1600

 

[///M5 2,833]

All prices from the BH Catalog that landed here yesterday.

[///M5 2,833]

16 hours ago, Godsmack said:

Expose for the darker areas

 

J

Be careful with that.  Washed out is worse than underexposed.  Losing details in the blacks is acceptable to the eyes losing details in the whites not.

[///M5 2,833]

Weird, since that post was quoted on the previous page it showed up on the previous page.

The quoting period on the new forum is working a bit strange, I haven't been able to figure it out but regularly it won't let me do what I try.  Thought this might be related.

[dem beats 1,223]

1 hour ago, ///M5 said:

*I left out Leica for obvious reasons although they are surely the best BY FAR

Lol. Can I borrow 10k so I can get a B&W body and one manual prime.

 

I'll be the coolest hipster around.

[dem beats 1,223]

1 hour ago, ///M5 said:

Be careful with that.  Washed out is worse than underexposed.  Losing details in the blacks is acceptable to the eyes losing details in the whites not.

 

Neal just loves exposing himself to tan people.

[dem beats 1,223]

Have any of you used compression shorts/pants, and what was your feeling on them.

I'm having a lot of deep pain in my quads after I jog.  Its worse than a really heavy leg day.  Like a cable is being tightened from my hip flexor down to about 5 inches above the knee.

[MKader17 332]

I only use compression shorts for sporting activities to keep the junk secure. I prefer the shorts to the briefs for no ride up and a smidge of leg protection if I slide.

[dem beats 1,223]

12 minutes ago, MKader17 said:

I only use compression shorts for sporting activities to keep the junk secure. I prefer the shorts to the briefs for no ride up and a smidge of leg protection if I slide.

I'm looking for recovery mostly.  Thank you for the input.  I purchase what I call "broga pants". Help with thigh rub and if it helps at all with that soreness, I'll spend some $$$ on real stuff.

[dem beats 1,223]

Sean, I need your help.

 

I want to buy a pedal bike.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

[nem 2,019]

3 hours ago, dem beats said:

 

Neal just loves exposing himself to tan people.

That was our secret.

Really I expose myself to who ever will look.

[nem 2,019]

I hear the hot tub calling for me after a long day of work.

[sandt38 448]

10 hours ago, dem beats said:

Perv

Ha!

[sandt38 448]

7 hours ago, Aaron Clinton said:

 

 

Jesus Christ, I had no idea...

Boobie rock.

[sandt38 448]

OK, here are my first few shots. I tried the tubes with the polarizer and just found it to dim the image. FWIW, these are 30 second shutters in a nearly black room, F5.6, no flash, 100 ISO, 55MM from ~20-36 inches away, depending on the shot.

 

 

In the top pic my focus was at the second KT88 (big tube) from the right. If you look, the farthest left tube is equidistant from the lens, and it is also in focus. I like the depth of field that the focus provides. I got Bokeh at 5.6f

The second is focused at the N on Gold Lion on the second KT88 tube from the right. I am further away in this shot.

The third is the center 2 KT88s, and I am closer, throwing the front tubes out of focus. Not as big a fan of the head on depth of field as I am of the 45 degree shots.

In the last the front left tube is the focus. I do like the depth in this one. Cool how you can read the British military stamping on the tube... I am interested how an F 1.4 might look in these shots.