akptc
Shoot first, think later
wait! wait just a minute! did you say you guys can buy a Ferrari for 36K USD ?? huh..Olsen said:
akptc
Shoot first, think later
georgef said:
this is really funny, I love it 
Olsen
Well-known
akptc said:
No! Far from it! A Ferrari is very expensive in Norway. Due to taxes. But the net price before taxes 'has fallen with' 36,000 US $ (ca. 200.000 NOK - about 10%) since last year. - The price of a Scuderia has been stable in the last year in Euros, practically, but the NOK has strengthened towards the Euro. To compensate for the fall of the Dollar compared to the Euro Ferrari has to increase their prices with 25 - 30% in USA....
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I know! I think I found my retirement plan: buy in Norway, sell in the U.S.!akptc said:
akptc
Shoot first, think later
oh, well, hopes dashed.. I guess I will keep driving that old Porsche for a while..Olsen said:
hey, not a bad idea, I used to know a guy who did this (another EU country) but no clue how he dealt with US and EU taxes..Gabriel M.A. said:
Olsen
Well-known
Gabriel M.A. said:
That would lead directly to bankruptcy. But there should be considderable business oportunities trading the other way. All from 2.hand camera equipment to Caterpillar tractors.
tomasis
Well-known
Gabriel M.A. said:
better if you do the opposite
Frank Dernie
Member
Quite so. The best Motor racing photographers I know mainly manually focus for exactly these reasons.jaapv said:
raid
Dad Photographer
I am glad that I am out of the digital competition here.
If I would get the camera a gift, then I would prefer the M simply because it is a Leica RF camera.
If I would get the camera a gift, then I would prefer the M simply because it is a Leica RF camera.
jeffdkennel
Member
Having handled an M8 in the shop for a brief period of time my immediate reaction was...."feels like a great camera...but the viewfinder sucks." Handling it in a shop for 10 minutes is by no means a way to come to any concrete conclusion regarding the viewfinder (or camera as a whole)....so I was wondering how M8 owners or those with experience with the M8 find the viewfinder...especially compared with the viewfinder on the R-D1 (my camera btw).
dacaccia
M246&X100V&GFX 50R
I have worked with the M8 several times and like it, also the viewfinder which is quite similar to that of M7 and MP. I even adapted my M6 with that viewfinder. - The one of the RD-1 resembles me to the old M6 viewfinder. Not bad - but the new one is better, esp. in bad light ...
Cheers,
dacaccia
Cheers,
dacaccia
nksyoon
Well-known
Frank Dernie said:
The familiar name coupled with the motor racing reference...are you Frank Dernie formerly of Williams and now with Toyota F1?
Tuolumne
Veteran
Interesting, because I had the opposite reaction. I was playing with an M8 at the local photography store and thought it had a great viewfinder, much easier to use than my R-D1. (I am very nearsighted and wear glasses). However, it wasn't better enough to make me buy it - at least not yet!jeffdkennel said:
/T
dacaccia
M246&X100V&GFX 50R
Tuolumne said:
Try to find a diopter lens for the RD-1 viewfinder - the lenses of Nikon FM2/FM3A are fitting! I just bought one (I am shortsighted). Use it, and you will find out, that the Epson viewfinder isn't so much worse than the Leica one.
Cheers,
dacaccia
spiderfrank
just a dreamer
Frank Dernie ??? Oxfordshire, Motor racing....
hmm...
Ehi Frank, as a F1 fan, I want to know if you are "that" Frank !! It should be nice to have a famous F1 engineer here with us !! ;-D
Franco
hmm...
Ehi Frank, as a F1 fan, I want to know if you are "that" Frank !! It should be nice to have a famous F1 engineer here with us !! ;-D
Franco
rancid
Member
But you have to be careful!dacaccia said:
As far as i know, with the correction lenses for FM2,3A etc. - at least with the original Nikon ones - you have to keep in mind that the stated diopter value is 1 dpt off.
This is due to the fact, that the FM2,3A etc. viewfinders are corrected to -1 dpt as default without an eyepiece lens. So if you buy a -4 dpt correcttion lens, it is really only a -3 dpt lens and that gives -4 dpt with the FM2 viewfinder.
To make it a little more comprehensible:
Code:
stated dpt of the lens -> real dpt
+4 -> +5
+3 -> +4
+2 -> +3
+1 -> +2
0 -> +1
-1 -> 0
-2 -> -1
-3 -> -2
-4 -> -3
LCT
ex-newbie
You mean it is corrected to +1 no?rancid said:
-4 + 1 = -3?
Just asking
rancid
Member
Exactly, if the lens says -4 it is in fact corrected for -3.
This may not be the fact for third party correction lenses, so one better asks the seller/manufacturer before buying.
This may not be the fact for third party correction lenses, so one better asks the seller/manufacturer before buying.
LCT
ex-newbie
Not sure if it comes from the correction lenses. They have -1, +1, +2 etc. diopters per se and they don't cheat from this standpoint i guess.rancid said:
As i see it the problem comes from the default setting of the camera. For instance if yours has a default setting of -.5 you must chose a +2 diopter if you need +1.5.
rancid
Member
I'm not 100% sure either, but i read about that in some threads at photo.net. I am nearsighted with -3dpt and the -4 correction lens was a better fit on the R-D1s for me than the one with -3. Maybe it's just my eyes getting worse