^ Nice! I'm hoping I'll get to go out for pic on Saturday but we'll see. At least my 35 f/2 is back working fine again - it was just a matter of dirty electrical contact (though it didn't look all that dirty to my naked eyes).

Speaking of lens, bunch of Canon refurbed lenses are back in stock - too bad they were completely out of stock while they had 15% off coupon going last week.

Not sure how long this'll be there but -

Lensrentals.com - used Canon 135mm F/2 L w/ 90-day warranty for $840

Edited August 11, 201114 yr by Salt Peanuts

walked around with the nokton for the day and switched back to the zeiss 35mm which is TINY by comparison and insanely lighter. what made things worse was the better iq which wasnt exactly a surprise but for the cost and the weight of the nokton is making me reconsider the purchase. the shallow dof is allegedly better for portraits but i have yet to take a picture with the nokton that i find better than the zeiss which has a softness to it that i cant really explain. the voigtlander is plenty sharp stopped down but i already have the zeiss for 2.8 or higher. wanted to get something a tad faster but im starting to realize that the extra speed isnt really doing anything that the zeiss isnt already doing (better).

Just got back from Vegas with a much lighter wallet..

IMG_5488 by drjlo1, on Flickr

IMG_5427 by drjlo1, on Flickr

IMG_5390 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Took this pic today after some instruction from Dan Ballard (danballardphotography.com) via the Colorado Photography Festival this weekend. Any feedback appreciated. It was my first photography workshop, was a great learning experience and will probably do more.

(click for larger)

Edited August 15, 201114 yr by Asr

Been too busy out and about to post much lately. Here's one I took a week ago, before hiking up 13,750ft Mount Morgan (the flank of which is to the left of this shot):

BTW the Samyang (Rokinon) 35 f/1.4 is an AMAZINGLY good lens. Sharp even in the corners at f/1.4 (if focused properly) and very very little coma. Color me highly impressed. The above shot was taken with it at f/2.0.

^ very beautiful!

Edited August 19, 201114 yr by Jon L

World War II in Photos - Alan Taylor - In Focus - The Atlantic

Been too busy out and about to post much lately. Here's one I took a week ago, before hiking up 13,750ft Mount Morgan (the flank of which is to the left of this shot):

BTW the Samyang (Rokinon) 35 f/1.4 is an AMAZINGLY good lens. Sharp even in the corners at f/1.4 (if focused properly) and very very little coma. Color me highly impressed. The above shot was taken with it at f/2.0.

Excellent shot. I have always been impressed with the 14 for the price but had not paid much attention to this one as I have the Canon version. Might have to try it out.

It's so cheap (for what it is) that it was hard for me not to (and of course, I'm damn glad I did. Of course, the Canon version doesn't get the chip for on-camera aperture control and EXIF data that the Nikon version does, but at least it's a little cheaper to compensate. The optical quality is pretty freakin' incredible for the price. It even stands up well to the Zeiss 35 1.4 in the tests on lenstip.com (and they are about the pickiest I've seen of lens testers). Whether it's sufficiently better than the Canon 35 1.4 to overcome the larger size and lack of AF, I couldn't say.

Assume you guys have seen, but in case...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE8tBLaTxAc&hd=1

The D3s is the camera I would sell a kidney to acquire.

lol i love, "all the buttons in the right position...unless you are a canon user..."

The D3s is the camera I would sell a kidney to acquire.

Pretty sure you can get 5k for a kidney.

Ok, now this is freakin' weird. For whatever reason, Fujicolor 100 scans like a dream while Fujicolor 200 absolutely refuses to play nice with my scanner. The all came from the same B&H order and were shoved in the fridge as soon as they arrived. The prints from both rolls look great, but negative scans from the 200 roll look like crap, the colours are way off and the contrast looks rather poor.

A scan from the good roll. Straight from the scanner, all I did was crop it.

Scan of the bad roll?

New Sony SLT-A77, SLT-A65 and NEX-7. All with new 24 Mpix APS-C sensor.

^ Too bad the lens selection on NEX series is still rather pitiful, though the addition of two new primes (24/1.8 and stabilized 50/1.8 ) is nice. I'm sure I'll trek myself over to a local Hunt's to try them once they're out, especially if my damn tendinosis isn't better by then.

Edited August 24, 201114 yr by Salt Peanuts

I am going to force myself not to play with one of those as I'm going to want one.... That plus adapter plus some long sony glass and you'd have a awesome bird setup for "cheap"

I think it would be easier and better just to grab A77 and a long lens if you want a "cheap" Sony bird setup.

Ok, now this is freakin' weird. For whatever reason, Fujicolor 100 scans like a dream while Fujicolor 200 absolutely refuses to play nice with my scanner. The all came from the same B&H order and were shoved in the fridge as soon as they arrived. The prints from both rolls look great, but negative scans from the 200 roll look like crap, the colours are way off and the contrast looks rather poor.

A scan from the good roll. Straight from the scanner, all I did was crop it.

Damn, those are ugly flowers.

I think it would be easier and better just to grab A77 and a long lens if you want a "cheap" Sony bird setup.

Good point. I'm going to stick with the trusty D200 for now though I would love to upgrade in the future for some better high iso performance to get shutter speeds up.

Damn, those are ugly flowers.

I didn't want to say anything...

I think he does that on purpose. He takes pictures of things not particularly photogenic, and then wants people to comment on how good they look.

At least he's not making up girlfriends anymore.