what will it be?

mervynyan said:
this is just an excuse to change gears-:)
Click to expand...

not at all...perhaps an excuse to add to my gear but not to change it...i am more than satisfied with my fuji gear and if you had read all my replies you's know that...
this started with my realizing that my thoughts kept going back to one camera/one lens on a project...but not a new way of life.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I wouldn't choose. I refuse to limit myself arbitrarily. You shouldn't either, Joe. You're a good enough photographer that you don't need to do that to yourself.
Click to expand...

i think there was a compliment hidden in there somewhere...thanks!

remember i said 'for a project' not for life.
i often go out with a full camera bag and when i get to where i was headed i take one camera/lens out of that bag and stick with it all day. i'm really not trying to limit myself.
 
wow, 2 for the new fuji 35...
i like the lens but i'm not a big lover of the 35/50 fov...i was hoping that it would have changed for me as i can see loads of possibilities for that 35.
 
I'm intrigued by the X100T and the X-Pro2, but haven't gotten either one yet. Based on my current gear, for film it would be the Mamiya 7II with a 43mm lens, and for digital it would be the Nikon D800 and 16-35 Nikon lens...
 
Fuji X Pro 2
18-55 2.8-4
Yes, it is slow but it is stabilized and the Pro 2 can go to EI 3200 (my self-imposed limit) if need be.
if restricted to a prime, 35mm 1.4
 
I'm looking at it as something to stretch the old cobwebs a bit, not more of the same.

I would have said a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Crown Graphic with a roll film back if he wasn't such a slave to fashion. It would provide a LOT of flexibility (e.g. close-up work) but at it might be a bit big to carry. That's why I went with the Fuji GS645.

I'm not sure there is a digital camera that provides that other than a fixed lens non-zoom. A X-70 with a nice brightline finder atop seem get him away from EVF rat-race but still gives you a nice LCD for closeups.

I think it's gotta be a something to stretch him a bit.

B2 (;->
 
Last edited:
back alley said:
i find both 50 and 28 sort of bland...
Click to expand...

Exactly why I like them. The added distortions of ultra-wides can be "cool" in a music video sort of way, and of course are useful when used right, but ultimately, there is a reason why these bland lenses are used by so many. These focal lengths (28-50mm) just work well for general photography.
 
johnwolf said:
I suppose that would make most of Cartier-Bresson's work and all of Winogrand's work sort of bland. Hmmm.
Click to expand...

yes, it does...those 2 were hacks! :eek:
clearly 'I FIND' means that i find it bland for me...
i prefer 25 over 28 because it has more edge to it and is easier to control than a 21...it fits nicely for me...i also prefer 35 over 50 because it is more closely aligned to how my own vision is calibrated...
 
jsrockit said:
Exactly why I like them. The added distortions of ultra-wides can be "cool" in a music video sort of way, and of course are useful when used right, but ultimately, there is a reason why these bland lenses are used by so many. These focal lengths (28-50mm) just work well for general photography.
Click to expand...

you know that my comment was not a knock against you or any other photographer, famous or not...
 
I'm now in a low-fi no docu mood...I would say SX-70 and B&W impossible film...gasp the is would be very expensive :eek: not sure it could be for an entire year!

If in a more "normal" mood I would use my FM2T with the 28 CRC and the 50/1,4 a good combo, film I love delta ...100 probably ...

Digital? no idea maybe the DF I haven't yet bought...

robert
 
I shot the first 2 months of 2016 solely on the Ricoh GR, and I didn't really find any situations where it wasn't more than up to the task.

I couldn't do my concert work with it admittedly, but aside from that, I could definitely live with the Ricoh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom