Knuckledragger

Represent, Represent!

I disagree. Once one has calibrated how nuts and biased K-Rock is, it's possible to subtract that quantity from his reviews and extract some meaningful information. Additionally, he's often quite an entertaining read, though seldom in the manner he intends. The Fake Ken Rockwell can be amusing as well. For serious reading, I prefer The Online Photographer, who is wonderfully articulate and very cranky. His decimation of the Leica M8 is one of my favorite reads. Sadly, the field test of the M8 in Iraq he sites appears to be offline now. Back when Mike was known as the Sunday Morning Photographer, he wrote a guide to 35mm lens focal lengths which was instrumental for me my early days of SLR shooting.

In my experience, a 35mm prime is much more useful on an APS-C sensor than 50mm. For me, my 35mm F/2 is my one lens solution.

Aye, I've done the sponge/orange peel trick for years. The only downside to that is that it takes time, and I was hoping to have a smoke today.. I did experiment with the microwave and I found that the results were ...inconclusive. For a bigger ring gauge cigar like a robusto all it succeeded in doing was softening the outer 1/8" or so. I could probably experiment further, but I don't want to wreck this stick. I'll have to look elsewhere for a cigar this afternoon. I swear I had a Cao stashed around here somewhere.

Anyone ever try "resurrecting" a dry cigar in a microwave? I've heard of people doing it, but never tried it myself. I have a nice Partagas robusto that's, ahem, a bit dry after the winter, and I'd like to try to salvage it. A guy I spoke to at a local coffee shop said the trick is to set the microwave on low power and run it for 45 seconds or so. I don't want the cigar to combust from over-nuking. I'm going to remove the (foil) label before I attempt this. Any head casers ever try this?

FWIW, frothing Nikon fanboy and general purpose nutjob Ken Rockwell loves the 18-200 VR.

Looking at my S2 Audio balanced Senn cables there is NO WAI they would fit on that amp as pictured, nevermind with even wider spacing.

Whoa. A busy day at the robot factory! H4ppy B1rth D4y!

H/B/D! Gee, now if we could just find a picture of a Dalek cake...

In terms of in-production lenses (Nikon's lens history more or less thouroughly pwnz Canon's) Nikon is better than Canon at the wide end for exactly one reason: the 14-25mm F/2.8 zoom. It's sharper than Canon's 14mm F/2.8 (II) prime, and costs the same price or less. It's so good that well-heeled Canon owners are buying a GBP150 adapter that allows them to use it with their full frame Canon bodies. (The adapter is that expensive because the 14-24 is a "G" lens and lacks manual aperture controls and requires an electric interface.) Apart from that, Canon wide lenses are quite good. The EF 16-35mm F/2.8 II is a killer lens, if quite spendy. The EF 17-40mm F/4L is basically as sharp, but not quite as wide, and a stop slower. It's much lighter and cheaper, however. I own one and love it. For cropped sensors, Canon makes the best ultrawide, period. The EF-S 10-22mm is a ridiculously good piece of glass, and none of the competing models are anywhere close to it. The 14-24 is a powerful argument for going with the Nikon system (provided you are getting a full frame sensor) and it illustrates Nikon's real strength: specialty glass. Nikon's fisheyes are pretty much universally better than Canons, and their best (the absolutely bonkers 8mm F/2.8 ) is in a class by itself. Nikon also makes two brilliant portrait lenses, the 100mm and 135mm F/2 "Defocus Control" primes. Both have a secondary control to adjust spherical aberration and adjust the quality of the bokeh (out of focus area) of the shot. Only the even more insane Konica Minolta 135mm STF is better in this area. [Warning: latenight tangent] The STF is F/2.8 but it's transmission factor is equivalent to F/4.5, a stop and a third slower than its maximum aperture. This is due to a special conical element it has designed to product gaussian distribution of out of focus highlights. It's such a cult lens there's a site dedicated to it. [end tangent] Nikon announced a bunch of new super-expensive teles a while back, and I must admit I've paid virtually no attention to them. $6000 400mm F/2.8 image stabilized primes are of no interest to me. Their release is a sign that Nikon wants back into the pro/sports market, where they haven't had much of a footprint in 20 years. I think Canon still has the edge in the long (witness the 800mm F/5.6L) but Nikon is definitely encroaching on their territory. To get back to the original point of this thread: Nikon makes much better kit lenses (Canons tend to suck), and has some select specialty models that best Canon by a wide margin. Canon's current line of glass is better than any other company's and Canon is able to introduce more new models more often and get them to market faster than anyone else. Witness the new 17mm full frame tilt shift lens, which wasn't even though possible until Canon pulled it off. Realistically, I'd suggest a Nikon D60, D80 or D90, and VR version of both kit lenses (the 18-55 and uh, 50-200?) Don't skimp on the VR. Later look at the 35mm F/2 or the new DX-only 35mm F/1.8. Also consider the 50mm F/1.8 and 85mm F/1.8. That's all any sane person is likely to need. In the Canon world, a new old stock 30D is quite a bargain if you can find one, and the 40D is heavily discounted as well. the X0D bodies are built like tanks and have very nice ergonomic controls. At least for someone with ginormous hands like myself. I do not like the Rebel series. I find them to be cheap feeling, and they have fiddly controls and dim viewfinders. The EF-S 17-85mm IS kit lens is not perfect, but it's lightyears beyond the 18-55. It makes a great one lens solution. The EF 35mm F/2 is the best deal in the entire Canon lineup (and cheaper than Nikon's 35mm, to boot). The 50mm F/1.4 is not a great lens, but it's the cheapest way to get F/1.4. The only way under a grand, in fact. The EF 85mm F/1.8 is best bang for the buck, if you care about bokeh (PROTIP: life is easier if you don't.) I'm not going to seriously suggest any full frame sensor bodies or L glass. I should have been in bed hours ago.

From hell Mr Lusk, Sor I send you half the Kidne I took from one woman and prasarved it for you tother piece I fried and ate it was very nise. I may send you the bloody knif that took it out if you only wate a whil longer signed Catch me when you can Mishter Lusk

Konica Minolta DiMage Z1. Whaaat? WTF do I want with an ancient 3.2MP point & shoot digital camera? I must be nuts. Well, yes, but... the Z1 is old enough that it doesn't have a very good IR filter, so it's very sensitive to that spectrum. With deep red filter in front of it, it makes an excellent infrared camera. There are resellers that offer "IR modded" cameras on eBay for exorbitant sums and sites that give instructions on how to DIY mod cameras for IR purposes, but I'm looking neither to be price gouged nor take apart anything as fiddly as a consumer digicam. I got this new old stock Z1 for $76 shipped, which is about what a decent circular polarizer for my 17-40mm L zoom costs. As a bonus the Z1 is old enough that it uses full sized Compact Flash cards, meaning it can share with my 30D.

Trophy Sauce.

That noise at the end of the above clip is from this video: Probably a repost, but the sadist in me doesn't mind seeing it again

The cabinet work on those is dead sexy. They'd look at home next to late period Victorian furnishings, or even early Arts & Crafts. I have the perfect dresser to go with them. I dunno if they'd be of interest to you, but this guy makes cables terminated for McIntosh amps. I don't have any experience with his speaker cables, but I have a number of his ICs and a headphone extension cable. He's got a pair listed here right now. I can't say much for the red, but I know he offers a combination of colors and sleeves.