Your current GAS list? (1 Viewer)

[Scott Merryfield]

After using the BosStrap shoulder strap some, I liked it except that there was no padding, and the strap cut into my neck a little. So I just received pad from Grizzly which attaches to any type strap. So far it seems to do the trick. I'm not sure why BosStrap doesn't include some sort of padding on their strap like Black Rapid provides.

 

[JohnRice]

A while back I was asking about monitors. My "good" monitor has been losing gamut. It seems to have stabilized at 85% of both RGB and sRGB, but something is obviously wrong and it's causing problems. I've been waiting for new wide gamut models to come out and Dell has two new ones that sound great. They're the UP2516D and UP2716D. They're both supposed to be 100% RGB and they both are 2560x1440. That's kind of a small dot pitch for the 25", but the the 27" costs 50% more, and honestly, the dot pitch isn't that much larger on it. We're talking less than a 10% increase in pixel size for 50% more $$. I run dual monitors, so I can use the other one for text stuff, which is mainly what I do now. The 25" is about $470 right now, which seems like a real bargain, all things considered. The 27" is $700. I keep going back and forth, because I doubt it 's really worth the difference, especially with another monitor for text stuff.

Anyone have feedback on positives or negatives? For some reason, I don't hesitate on the $470 price, but $700 really makes me cringe a bit.

 

[Citizen87645]

I don't have any feedback on those monitors, but was intrigued by this photog's recent review of a 21:9 monitor:

http://www.ishootshows.com/2016/04/13/review-lg-electronics-34um95-34-ultrawide-monitor/

 

[JohnRice]

I got sick of stressing over a new monitor, so I went ahead and got the Dell UP2716D. The price dropped $40 at Amazon, which seemed to be the nudge I needed. The one requirement I wouldn't pass on is full AdobeRGB gamut. Everything considered, the Dell is a pretty decent deal for about $680 delivered. More than I wanted to spend, but I won't regret it in the long run.

The first one was defective. The illumination wasn't even across the screen, and there was a noticeable color shift from side to side. I calibrated it and used it for a week hoping it would improve as it broke in, but it didn't. I got the replacement yesterday, and it's spot on. It probably still has some breaking in, but so far it's great. The first one calibrated to over 100% of RGB, and this one only showed 97% the first time around, but to get reliable 100% tends to cost more like $2K or more.

A good, consistent, calibrated monitor with wide gamut really does make a difference with high quality image work. You see every adjustment, and the huge work space (2560x1440) is great in Photoshop. Plus, the grey scale tracking is so much better. Most monitors have noticeable color fluctuations across the grey scale, even when they're calibrated. I'm glad I waited and got this monitor. It'll also be a great match with an iMac, since the next time I need to upgrade my computer it probably won't be a Mini, since the Minis all kind of suck now.

 

[Citizen87645]

Looks like I'll be getting a Canon 80D and 18-135 nano usm lens at work for video and photo use.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

That Canon 80D has a feature I wish my 7D2 had -- multiple auto focus points (27 I think) being available with a f/8 lens attached. The 7D2 (and my 5D3, too) only support the center AF point in such situations. Since I do not like using the center point / recompose method, it hampers me when I use my 100-400L with a 1.4x teleconvertor. Luckily, I do not do this very often -- only when I really need the reach, which is usually if I am shooting small birds.

 

[Citizen87645]

The Canon "nano USM" is pretty nice - smooth and quiet. I've been considering the 18-135 as a traveling lens with its zoom range and compatibility with shooting video, but after using it I think I'd rather see an update to the 17-55 f/2.8 using the nano motor tech.

I've also tried the Tamron 60mm macro on the 80D and it works fine. So there's something about the 7D Mk II that messes up the auto focus.

 

[JohnRice]

OK, I think I'm losing my mind now. I stumbled across the Laowa 15mm macro. Yeah, a 15mm macro lens. Totally bizarre idea, but how much fun could that be? Has anyone ever used it? It can't be easy to work with, due to what it is and the fact it's completely manual. As in, absolutely no connection between the lens and camera. It's what we used to call a "Preset" lens decades ago. It seems a little overpriced, too.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Cameron,

I would be all over that 18-135mm lens if I used my crop body as a general purpose camera. That's a great focal range for a "walk around" lens. I use the 24-105mmL f/4 for that purpose on my full frame 5D3. It provides a little wider view, but doesn't have nearly as much reach, as that 18-135 on a crop. However, my 7D2 crop only gets used with my two telephoto lenses for wildlife, sports and zoo visits.

John,

A 15mm macro seems like an awkward focal length, but I guess you could get some interesting shots.

 

[Citizen87645]

I think I'll see about getting the 18-135 for our trip to Hawaii next year.

 

[JohnRice]

Anyone have a suggestion for a good macro rail that doesn't cost a fortune?

 

[JohnRice]

I'm curious if this drives anyone else crazy. It seems like such a simple concept. In DSLRs, there are APS-C models and Full Frame models. Why do so many people have such a problem understanding such a basic thing as knowing one from the other and what lenses work with what? Still, you look at any lens and 3/4 of the questions are "Will this work with my camera?" I admit, what really gets me is when someone has something like a D810 and still has to constantly ask that. Seriously? You spent $3K on a camera body, but you don't even bother to understand the simplest aspect of what it is?

Then there's the whole "What focal length is this 50mm lens?" But, don't get me going.

That's the end of my rant.

 

[Citizen87645]

There will always be those who want / have the best for its own sake. There are also those who will find it easier to ask a question rather than seek out the answer on their own, even if the answer is very easy to find or it would be faster for them to find it themselves.

I remember someone once sending in a letter in to Videomaker magazine about a setting on their camcorder! First, they could have easily looked it up in their manual. And even if they didn't have the manual anymore, they could have found a more timely source of information than a monthly enthusiast magazine's letters section, like maybe the manufacturer's customer service???

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I do get confused when it comes to 3rd party lenses as to which are designed for crop and which will also cover a full frame sensor. However, that is mostly because I do not buy many third party lenses -- I have owned one Sigma lens -- and they use different designations than Canon does for their crop lenses.

The "focal length" confusion can be humorous sometimes, though. Most people are used to cell phones or point & shoot cameras and have no clue when it comes to SLR lenses. I've had people ask me "what times zoom lens is that" when I'm walking around with my 100-400L telephoto. They get a real confused look when I tell them it's a 4x lens.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Should be less of an issue w/ Canon users, but for Nikon, since they decided to design their DX format in such a way that actually allows you to try using DX lenses on their full-frame bodies (and actually get usable results), it can be confusing at least for DSLR newbies and casual shooters.

Heh... I still use my 17-55 f/2.8 DX as my main widezoom on my D800 usually set to 1.2x crop for equiv FOV of ~27-66mm after accounting for vignetting (and occasionally switched to either DX crop or fullframe... typically w/ intention to crop to wider than 3:2 format for the latter) -- interestingly, the 1.2x crop effective FOV at its widest usable focal length (~22mm) of this lens is basically same as in DX crop (at 17mm), but yields ~2.5x the pixel count of the DX crop. The D800/D810 offer so many pixels that I'm usually plenty satisfied w/ its 1.2x crop yielding ~25MP -- given my shooting habits, it's rare that I have use for the full-frame ~36MP anyway.

Yeah, I do this partly because I just didn't feel like spending the $$$ on a fullframe widezoom of comparable (or better) quality. But then again, I was one of those who used to eye Canon's 1.3x crop 1D pro bodies (before committing to Nikon) as I didn't really need all the pixels of their flagship 1Ds line nor want to spend that kind of $$$.

Maybe I'll reconsider once our older kids are in college, and I'm more free to explore and shoot differently w/ more use for the full 36MP at the wide end -- despite the kids going to college soon-ish, I can actually afford a bit more w/ this stuff nowadays (plus probably won't be spending as much on the HT and content going forward since I have no desire/plans to upgrade to 4K UHD)...

_Man_

 

[Citizen87645]

I've always wanted to try medium format, but probably not at this price point.

https://www.engadget.com/2016/06/22/hasselblad-x1d/

 

[JohnRice]

Actually, $9K is less than I expected. A mirrorless MF is an awesome idea.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Actually, $9K is less than I expected. A mirrorless MF is an awesome idea.

Plus lenses.

Medium format has always intrigued me, too, but it's just not practical from a cost standpoint for me personally. A 35mm "full frame" is probably the largest sensor I will ever use.

 

[Citizen87645]

I did shoot some 120 film in a TLR once.

 

[Citizen87645]

This makes me simultaneously sad and thrilled.