wilco23 wrote:
You need to go gym and build muscle to use it
Actually it's not that bad (lens is approx 2.5KG IIRC). I've used it for long periods and it's never been a problem. I've also had it for over 15 years, normally using it with the R8 prior to digital, so maybe I'm just used to it.
I have an R 50/1.4 E55 and a 180/4 both adapted for a Sony a900. If I want to post pictures that are on my desktop but not on a website, how can I do it? None of the icons on the left of this screen seem to allow me to do it. Thank you.
Mikal, you cannot upload directly to FM unless you have a membership, as crazeazn says. If you don't want to do that, then you need to "host" your image (i.e. upload them) somewhere else, such as Flickr, or other places.
I just picked up a Leica Elmarit-R 135/2.8 (second version, Leitz Canada, c. 1974) so my CY 135/2.8 wouldn't get lonely in the unpopular focal lengths corner. I've had one of these before, but foolishly let go of it during an "only the best lenses ever" phase. This old design holds up very strongly in contrast, detail, and general brilliance of image. Its flaw is displaying all kinds of CA (lateral CA red/blue edges, purple fringing on highlights, green/magenta defocus), but usually in a non-harmful way. Some photos, from the harsh SoCal midwinter:
zhangyue wrote:
Derek, 2nd one is great. They are great photo though I don't feel they are sharp enough. your photos cover wide from bird to city to landscape and portrait, and they all wonderful.
thanks, i think i need to use a different downsizing algorithm for my birding shots. i made a new general use one that i've been using since i got the NEX-7, but it seems to be destroying the fine detail in birds. i agree these both look a bit soft, but look pretty sharp at larger sizes.
mpmendenhall wrote:
I just picked up a Leica Elmarit-R 135/2.8 (second version, Leitz Canada, c. 1974) so my CY 135/2.8 wouldn't get lonely in the unpopular focal lengths corner.
This is slightly OT, but I would be curious how you would rate the Sonnar compared to the Elmarit. I'm currently considering picking up a Sonnar 135.
Ron Pfister wrote:
This is slightly OT, but I would be curious how you would rate the Sonnar compared to the Elmarit. I'm currently considering picking up a Sonnar 135.
I haven't had enough time with both to do a detailed comparison; I hope to get around to that, and be able to report back results in the near future. What I can say now is that neither is a significantly better or worse performer than the other --- they're both good lenses, that share the limitations of their similar design era.
