NB23

Because people shoot what they see but they don’t actually see what they shoot, I much prefer the acronym WYSIWYG. When you start seeing the scenes as they are, and not as what you think they are, you often realize that what you were going to shoot was not worth it. Wysiwyg.

Exact

I used to get the exact same results with my DC-nikkors 105 and 135. Play with the controls and you’ll get there easily. Now if you like using SLRs or not is an dferent thing. But you’ll be able to know if you can live with the Look or not.

I am in the photo business for a long time now. And there is no other profession that has been as violently raped as the photography field, by its consumers. People brush their teeth and yet, they don’t become dentists. People spread margarine on their bread and yet they don’t start dreaming about opening a restsurant. People drive cars and they don’t define themselves as pro racers Men shave and they don’t define themselves as Barbers.. Like the time My equipment got stolen and when I explained the situation to the police officer, her immediate reaction was “i am a photographer too”. She defined herself as a photographer although she was a police officer. Now that was pathetic. And they are all like that. Everyone is a pro photog: buy a good lens and start charging. You tell the amateurs that they should take photo classes and what is their answer to you? “Rules are meant to be broken”. They all think they’re the next Avedon with their D70 and zoom lens. Out of every wedding I shoot, I create about 5 photographers. The guests see me work and they decide it’s cool and a fee months later they have become photographers. Even quite a few brides. In my 15 years career and more than 500 weddings shot so far, I have inspired (and created) at least 2500 “photographers”. I’ve seen it all and I could write a book on the subject, with a few hundred examples. But I am not a good writer.

This is a silly comment.Since when does a filter size determine wether a lens is great or lesser? Do you truly think the E60 is any different? Yeah, “others” have reported but this is the internet and anyone is an intergalactic expert (directly from their basement, and probably typing while only wearing their underwear). It’s funny how anyone can be a photography expert only because they own a piece of equipment. But no one calls themselves a Chef after spreading Margarine on their toasted bread. And let me tell you, I m being nice with my analogy. — Typos.

It was very clear.

Future Thambar owner?

I prefer the Erical. It’s much more velouté on all fronts.

... ok... but what about the Asph?

If you want to do things intelligently, and you should, you have to ask those 650 fellows if they appreciate cmos sensors (M10, D5, SL...). If those fellows are honest, 638/650 will answer yes. And so you’ll realize that it was a pathetic attempt.

It is an AMAZING lens. It was getting low in price... we are maybe witnessing a simple market correction.

Man, you should use iso 102,400

I’m not bored, I’m not rich, and I want one. Maybe I just have good taste?

Will obviously come one day.

Nothing new here. You either embrace it or not. I love using my Wollensak verito LF lens. And this Thambar is exactly that: a 100 year old design purposely made for portraits ala 1930''s Hollywood style. I'd love to own it but 2 things stop me. First: I am not selling my Nikon digital equipment. It's a supremely performant system. I'd switch to digital M for work but I still don't think that the M10 cuts it as a pro camera. At least it's less pathetic than the M, M9 and all the other M-type BS cameras but I'm not yet convinced. In other words, if the M10 was a true pro camera, I'd use it as my pro system with a Thambar on it. And then there is the price.