Jump to content

mike_h

Members
  • Posts

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Member Title
    Neuer Benutzer
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Country
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You shouldn't make assumptions about things you clearly have no knowledge of. Over and out. I hope your certainty never turns to wet gear one day.
  2. Keep it civil thanks Jeff. Just because your experience differs from mine, you assume that what I say is nonsense or that I did not take care to adjust the bag correctly etc. The contrary is true. I have no axe to grind with Billingham bags. However the wholesale assumption that a single bag manufacturer makes the perfect set of bags is of course demonstrably false. Does that mean that Billingham bags are not fit for a good many purposes? Of course not. But it is important to understand their shortcomings. If you are interested take a look at the photo of the 445 at Billingham's site. You will note in Billingham's own picture that the main flap does not cover the main zip at the ends. This is also so in practise. The 445 is by definition therefore not waterproof in anything but light showers. The zip is not a specialised waterproof zip therefore it will leak if subject to water and if it's not covered by the flap it will eventually be subject to water. All of this series of bags have this fault. In fact its a purposeful design feature so that the bag can open well and the zip be tucked away for ease of access - a nice feature. The test of course is to spray lightly on the bag with a hose and you'll find the zip leaks. I've done it with my 225, it leaks. My message is not that Billingham bags are useless, but that they, like all other bags have shortcomings and limitations. If you are going to carry important gear in them then it's worth knowing what those shortcomings and limitations are.
  3. So there we have it - two different and equally valid experiences of the same bag. All I'll say is that the bag in discussion isn't suffering a one off fault. It's like every other Billingham Hadley Pro I've ever seen. Every owner is at risk of the same experience. I hope when it happens to others they don't have a few K of expensive gear in it. The only fault would be to assume that the Billingham bags are waterproof - the fabric is great, the structure leaves things to be desired - in anything but a light shower.
  4. The issue is that call it what you like, when we set off the bag was properly closed and covered, however the design allows it to move like that in use. Never again :-)
  5. In contrast my now aging Brady Gelderburn is carrying its usual load in this picture - iPad in sleeve, keyboard, notebooks aplenty, coat, umbrella, various road warrior cables, cords, chargers, battery packs, wallets, security passes, medications etc. It's heavy. The flap, as you can see is covering both the main zip and the front pocket zip. It's not a totally waterproof setup but it has never, ever leaked in any way. I also use an Ortlieb Day Shot and a Soft Shot - the latter a good small shoulder bag. They look ugly by comparison but they are 100% waterproof.
  6. This photo is of the very same Hadley Pro. It has very little in it - adding more makes matters worse. The "gusset fastener" on the outer pock is released and the main closure straps are at about the halfway hole. As you can clearly see water is free to flow into both the front pocket and the main pocket.
  7. This has precisely nothing to do with Billingham bags. As Jeff has pointed out Billingham (with their canvas bags) along with makers such as Brady use two layers of canvas bonded to a rubber membrane and then the seams sealed. A perforation of the membrane is required to let water through. What almost certainly happened in this case is that water entered because the flap design is sub-optimal. Once inside the canvas did not let the water out, it was nicely waterproof.
  8. It is canvas, not fibrenyte. I don't think it's the material, though it might be. I'm more inclined to think it's the way the flaps etc are designed.
  9. I've had Billingham bags for years...and I'll never buy another. My wife and I walked home in a rain storm not so long ago. She was carrying a Billingham Hadley Pro. I was carrying a Brady Gelderburn. When we got home we emptied half a litre of water out of her - properly closed and not old - Billingham. The inside of the Brady and all of its pockets except the rear pocket - for obvious reasons - was completely dry. So Brady only for me, except if I want really good but ugly protection then it's an Ortlieb Soft Shot or Day Shot.
  10. About 3 years ago, I chose the MP instead of the M7. I was adding another M to my M4-2 and the MP won the day. It is a piece of pure photographic sensuality using that camera. Yes I know it's just a light-tight box....but there's something about it. As for the meter: every time I get a roll of transparency back and see the spot-on exposures I know that Leica did something right with the meter. Either is a fabulous camera, take your pick and enjoy it. Regards Mike
  11. G'day Kenneth, I reckon that it's worth getting a tiny bit scientific here in order that you more quickly get to taking photographs that please you. Just briefly put the handheld meter back in its case and leave it there. Then get a fresh roll of film and methodically work through a series of shots - gentle overall light, backlit, front lit etc. For each shot take first a frame at whatever the M6 meter tells you and then bracket by half stops - -1/2, -1, +1/2, +1. Sometimes it helps to have little signs to put in the shot so that you have reference to what the exposure was. When the shots come back you can then begin to form a view of what pleases you and in which situations. It will introduce some clear personal rules which will help you get more good frames. Later you can introduce the handheld meter through a similar process - including incident vs reflected. My apologies if I am trying to teach Grandma how to suck eggs. Regards Mike
  12. Hi Kenneth, I'm not going to try and give you a technical answer, but rather a "user" answer. I have Leica lenses from the 70s, early 80s and then a modern aspheric as well. For me the change seems to be incremental. The biggest difference - and this is a generalisation with all the limitations of such - the older lenses appear a little "flatter" in their rendering and the modern is "crisper". By "flatter" I mean with less contrast and in some cases with a tiny amount of softness. By crisper I mean with greater contrast and a tiny edge in sharpness. The modern aspheric often brings oohs and aahs when people see a print. It seems to have a little more bite. Then again I get the same response from people about pictures from the Zeiss Biogon on the Hassleblad SWC/M and that's by no means a recent lens. I'm happy to own and use all of my lenses. If you are after a crisper rendition then the modern aspherics seem to have a little edge but a big difference in price. Happy photography. Mike PS: as a bit of an afterthought. You may well find 35 and 50 too close together. If you are thinking about another lens then you might care to think about a 90mm next, perhaps then going to a very wide like a 21 or to the 50 later. Of course such matters are like politics and religion - subject to strong personal bias. For me the 50 is the least used lens with the 21 and the 90 sharing the honours followed by the 35. M
  13. I'm in agreement with this. I've got a Gitzo G2227 and it's a great tripod. It's not small but if it will carry anything larger than an M it needs to be solid. The other great tripod is the Leica tabletop tripod with the large ball head. An amazing tripod for its size. When I can't be bothered with the Gitzo I take that one along. Regards Mike
  14. Depends what you like. If you don't mind having a bag that's packed like a jigsaw puzzle then maybe you could fit that kit into the Hadley Pro. I tried the HP and didn't like the form factor or the size. I'm not into satchels. I like a bag that is a little lower in the height department and is big enough to have some flexibility and yet not so heavy or bulky that you can't lug it around all day. I eventually came up with the Billingham 225. It takes 2-3 M bodies with half a dozen lenses and the film, cleaning kit, flash, warm jumper, water bottle and lunch you require for a day out. It's got a place for your passport and other docs and it doesn't kill you when you lift it. Nor is it so large as to be a pain to move around with. I also use it to carry Hasselblad gear with or without the Ms. A good all round bag that is easier to work out of than the Hadley. Regards Mike
  15. G'day gdi, I don't think it matters what lens was used for that shot, IMHO the background detracts from the image. Background should be background, particularly if we choose to have it OOF. In this case it is intrusive and therefore not really background. Regards Mike
×
×
  • Create New...