Post Your Photo Setup [V4]

[Robbb]

i made bad experience with x-rays.
took a huge bag full of film with me, in my carry-on bag, mostly kodak and fuji 400 colour film and some t-max400 on a short distance flight inside europe. (i believe the security checks in europe are way weaker than in the us.)
but anyway nearly every film has that typical x-ray damage in wave form. even the unexposed rolls that i exposed a few months after the x-ray treatment still got that wavy pattern albeit not that strong as the already exposed films.

[austrian]

Thats what happens to people who have to much money and can' decide.

[Lucas!]

[Brendan O.]

Can this thread title be changed to 'evoke jealousy thread'?

[JFax]

Thats right Lucas. I got a bag with film checked in by mistake. The "expert" they called in to the lab when I complained about the quality of the prints had he negs under the loup and confirmed it as x-ray damage. They however still gave me like 30% off since I wasnt happy with the results.

Miiiiiiiiiiiight have been the machine though, had a few rolls from Hong Kong with similar problem which I had not checked in, just hand carry.

[lukepeeters]

Yeah them glasses must cost alot.

[Pffffff]

Lucas is that black tape for brighter focusing screen(I'm not sure how it's called, maybe rangefinder coupling?)?

[scott]

It's supposed to stop the rangefinder field from getting blown out from harsh light pointed directly at the camera. It'll actually make the frame lines appear darker though.

Some people notice it. I've never had an issue myself though.

[Lucas!]

yeah, scott is right. it's pretty much just do avoid getting it blown out.

i tested it back home and cut the piece just small enough to avoid getting the framelnes dark(35mm) but still increase the contrast in the patch and making the 135 or 90 wichever you see when yo have the 35mm frameline up go a little bit darker

[Jambar]

Thats what happens to people who have to much money and can' decide.

both yours? or works?

[austrian]

haha. good question.
canon work
nikon life

[Dick]

Thats what happens to people who have to much money and can' decide.

What body do you prefer?

[austrian]

d700.
Both have their advantages, but the d700 is just better in my opinion.
The AF on the 5d simply sucks, compared to nikon's.
Also the handling of the nikon is way better, except for choosing single af-points, you can do that faster and easier on the canon.
All in all, the canon is a really nice camera, the video-option is reaaaally nice, but if you don't need that, the nikon is just the better camera.

[brian itzaina]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchforsale/5270232990/" title="IMG_7257 by veloreality, on Flickr">http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5122/5270232990_f0389b4f2f_z.jpg" width="640" height="480" alt="IMG_7257" />
http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchforsale/5269623771/" title="IMG_7262 by veloreality, on Flickr">http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5084/5269623771_9156aa91ab_z.jpg" width="640" height="480" alt="IMG_7262" />

[Dick]

d700.
Both have their advantages, but the d700 is just better in my opinion.
The AF on the 5d simply sucks, compared to nikon's.
Also the handling of the nikon is way better, except for choosing single af-points, you can do that faster and easier on the canon.
All in all, the canon is a really nice camera, the video-option is reaaaally nice, but if you don't need that, the nikon is just the better camera.

Honestly, I'm biased with Nikon. I've used plenty of Canons and they never felt "right" to me. I just thought I'd get your input seeing as you are the owner of both and have plenty of experience with them. A d700 is on my wish list as of late, no idea when I'll be getting one though.