Some filters, memory cards, monopod, extra batteries and of course a bigger camera bag!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What do you shoot with?
- Thread starter The Bad Guy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some filters, memory cards, monopod, extra batteries and of course a bigger camera bag!
Good points ...except why do you need more memory cards
Because I'm gonna shoot more! Also the D300 takes CF cards not SD. I bought an adaptor which does the job (plus had a couple of 4gb CF cards donated).
I agree with Paul (though I'm sure many responding to this thread are wishing this forum still had the down vote option).
I understand the curiosity regarding what gear other people are using. But taken outside of the context of the images being produced with that gear, the answers are largely meaningless.
See an image you like, reasonable to ask with what gear it was shot (though that is often still the wrong question as more important is *how* it was shot using that gear).
Possible exceptions include "shooting light" vs carting around bulky gear (including lenses, strobes, tripods, etc.). Another possible exception is using an IR converted body, as that radically changes the images you can produce.
But for everything else, the generic "what gear are you using?" is the wrong question. The better question is: "I love this image you produced, what gear did you use and how did you create it using that gear (and why did the gear make or break the image)?"
Again many will lament the lack of a down vote option with my response, but I don't see the point of threads like this. Sorry.
maybe you should transfer the files to a hard drvie inbetween
Sometimes there is no in between. I recently bought some 64 GB cards just to handle a single shoot.
A D700 and sometimes a D800 from the neighbour, still prefer the D700 for the bulk and sturdiness.
Lenses: A good bag of old AIS primes from my FE2 (I have to put film in that one again), and one modern lens: the most amazing one Nikon has ever made: the 85mm 2.8 PCE. The best portrait lens I ever had on any camera (beating the crap out of Canons 1.2 USM 85mm too!), yet it turns a DSLR in to a from-the-hand shooting system camera that can do amazing shots without the usual cumbersome setting up and the need for tripods.
Lenses: A good bag of old AIS primes from my FE2 (I have to put film in that one again), and one modern lens: the most amazing one Nikon has ever made: the 85mm 2.8 PCE. The best portrait lens I ever had on any camera (beating the crap out of Canons 1.2 USM 85mm too!), yet it turns a DSLR in to a from-the-hand shooting system camera that can do amazing shots without the usual cumbersome setting up and the need for tripods.
Personally I'm not a big fan of down voting anything, but I'm glad you and Paul are in agreement.
Perhaps you two should co-author a thread?
If you do, I'd like to pitch the thread title - "Threads We Don't Find Worthy".
Just don't put anything in the first post apparently no one reads the first post of a thread.
OMG, not another unworthy threads thread...
- Do you shake your milk before pouring it?
- Another which vehicle would you get thread
- Do you turn wood?
and my all time favourite...
I dont rememeber the BFG9000 having AF.Image
BFG 9000. Large scope and vast distance range. Also has auto focus features for the stray enemies.
OMG, not another unworthy threads thread...
- Do you shake your milk before pouring it?
- Another which vehicle would you get thread
- Do you turn wood?
and my all time favourite...
No never.
A DB9.
Not since school.
In case you were wondering.
I already have more cameras than I know what to do with, but I still want one of these. Occasionally I see kits come up for sale at almost tempting prices, but not quite.
For the money, the Mamiya 7 is outstanding value. $1200-1500 for a body + 80/4 lens, which will outperform virtually any lens on any system.
canon eos 5d mark III
awesome i really like it
battery life isn't that big of a problem but you would need an extra on the field
awesome i really like it
battery life isn't that big of a problem but you would need an extra on the field
- Panasonic GX7
- Panasonic 20 mm 1.7
- Panasonic 14-42 3.5-5.6 power zoom
- Panasonic 45-175 4.0-5.6 power zoom
- Sigma 60mm 2.8 Art
I had been a Canon SLR/DSLR for 20 years, but got tired of the size and weight. The GX7 came along last fall and it was the right time for me to switch. It was like going from a PC to a Mac for me. Many advantages, no disadvantages for my needs/style. It has been a very good experience so far. The micro 4/3 system is fantastic. Wonderful still and video quality. The power zooms are great for video.
----------
There is nothing wrong with asking this question. Utter BS. Give us a break... Jesus...
Last edited:
Every now and then I do write-ups sort of along those lines:
http://www.ocabj.net/category/behind-the-shot/
My main cameras are my Nikon D700 and D7000, both gripped. I also have several lenses, both auto and manual focus, but my favorites are:
85 1.8G - portraits
70-200 2.8 VRII --- portraits/wildlife with TCs
70-200 4.0 VRIII --- all-rounder
50 1.8G --- rarely used, but every kit needs a nifty fifty
24-120 VRII -- travel lens
24 1.4G -- environmental portraits/groups/low light/landscape
14-24 2.8 --- landscape, groups, RE
I use teleconverters --- 1.4 & 2.0, however I need a prime telephoto lens so my next lens purchase will be the 300 2.8 AFs II or VR.
85 1.8G - portraits
70-200 2.8 VRII --- portraits/wildlife with TCs
70-200 4.0 VRIII --- all-rounder
50 1.8G --- rarely used, but every kit needs a nifty fifty
24-120 VRII -- travel lens
24 1.4G -- environmental portraits/groups/low light/landscape
14-24 2.8 --- landscape, groups, RE
I use teleconverters --- 1.4 & 2.0, however I need a prime telephoto lens so my next lens purchase will be the 300 2.8 AFs II or VR.
Nice collection. I wonder why you have a 70-200 2.8 and 4.0? Surly the 4.0 is redundant now you have the 2.8?
Thanks, AF. I originally purchased the 2.8, and returned it due to its heft. I got the 4.0, and also loved it, but felt that for professional work the bokeh was a bit lacking, so back to the 2.8 I went
.I am really torn regarding the two lenses because in terms of IQ, they are both very close, with the bokeh nod going to the 2.8 for professional work. However, there are times that I need a lighter kit, and the 4.0 is hard to beat. I also hate selling lenses, so that doesn't make my decision any easier.
At this point, based on the distinct advantages that the two lenses possess, I can justify keeping both at the moment. Luckily, AF, I don't have a significant other to answer to
At this point, based on the distinct advantages that the two lenses possess, I can justify keeping both at the moment. Luckily, AF, I don't have a significant other to answer to
Luckily my wife is very understanding. I didn't really have a hobby for years, so I think she understands. Plus I bought my stuff really cheap through work, so I could sell my glass for more than I paid for all my gear.
I have the 70-200 2.8VR and the 70-300mm 4.5-5.6. I'm not sure why I need both as with the 2 x TC it's a better reach and IQ with the 70-200. Maybe I'll keep it for now for when I don't want to carry the weight.
Hi Apple Fanboy --- my comment about not having a significant other to answer to was made tongue-in-cheek --- hope you didn't take offense. Of course, married people should discuss major financial outlays with each other, unless they have unlimited income
.haha --- maybe if i had a significant other to answer to I would have SOLD the 70-200 f4 before buying the 2.8, and not have ended up on the horns of a dilemma concerning these two fantastic lenses
I have not owned, nor used, the 70-300 but people who have used it seem to think it is an acceptable walkabout lens, so based on the sweet deal you got on your gear, I would definitely hang on to it. However, please take my advice with a grain of salt as I can't seem gather up the courage to part with my lenses