Recent content by kumimajava

thanks for the advice guys - will look into those other references too.

thanks for that - based on that table, it looks like the lens should be supported. Would be nice to hear from someone with first-hand experience of it as well :)

I'm looking for a wide-angle lens for the GF1, and the Panasonic 7-14mm seems a bit pricey for the moment. the olympus 'collapsible' 9-18mm mFT seems like a sensible alternative, but despite trying to find a 'simple' answer to the question whether it will 'autofocus reliably' on the GF1...

here you go - apologies for the low quality, in a bit of a hurry today... the fun thing is that if you want a 'longer' snoot, you can just tape one of the boxes together/within the other & that works quite well (yes, they had these things on a 3-for-2 offer ;)

Having read through the Strobist tutes online, I've been meaning to make a few of their recommended 'cheap & easy cardboard snoots'. By coincidence, I'd just bought some Nivea aftershave balm a couple of days ago (the newer kind, with 'upside down' bottle), and the size of the box looked...

... one thing nobody has asked (or said) thus far is which body the lens is going on... the 18-200mm is a very good allround walkabout lens, but wouldn't use it for portraits - in this respect, even the 24-70mm is better (i'm talking nikon here - haven't tried the sigma). colours saturation...

depends on what you mean by 'best'... G10 is pretty good for high-end photography (as far as you'd get on a compact), but... ... my favourite would be the Canon Ixus 100 IS - it's tiny, easy to use, and produces ok pics, so long as you're not working in very low light. Way cheaper than a G10 too :)

... another thing to consider is the colour performance. I own the D300 and tried a d200 briefly before that, and i always got better colours out of the d300. Perhaps that's because i didn't spend engouh time with the d200 to get to know exactly how to tweak everything to get 'perfect' results -...

I don't think there's a new wideangle coming... if you look at the lens lineup in the past you had: 17-35mm 2.8 then 35-70mm 2.8 and 70-200mm 2.8 this would give you coverage between 17mm and 200mm in three 'fast zoom' lenses, all with the same 'switchover' point now you've got: 14-24mm...

at that aperture, though, focusing becomes an issue - and i'm pretty sure you'd get more accurate results with the rangefinder. I must admit, though, that while the 1.0 lenses for the m-mount are way out of reach, the Voigtlander 50mm/1.1 seems more viable. to get us back on track with the...

if it wasn't for the first sentence, i could've sworn you were trying to describe a Noctilux. :eek: :bonk: (ducks for cover & runs away)

... beat me to it - they should all be fine in FX.

probably 24-70/2.8 first, followed by 70-200/2.8

captivating - great colours!

great shot - i like the framing a lot.