I'm coming out the closet

[TehStranger]

Yes, it must be horrible to be a supporter of the only SA team to have ever won Super Rugby, and the Currie Cup more than any other team ever.

Only horrible if you know what most of the rest of S.A. think of you.

Meh, it's easy to support winners. Doesn't make the vast majority of the supporters annoying as all hell to the rest of us that just want to enjoy a good bit of rugby.

Anyway as gay as the Bulls are I think we're going off topic slightly.

 

[Spontaneous Interruption]

Cuming out the closet becomes a camera brand becomes rugby becomes gay Bulls. Yip... I definitely don't get this photography section.

 

[zululami]

The funk?

 

[Nanfeishen]

Boring, if you really want kinky then you need to be Pentaxian, we come in both screw mount and bayonet :twisted:

 

[TehStranger]

Boring, if you really want kinky then you need to be Pentaxian, we come in both screw mount and bayonet :twisted:

The veritable trannies of the photography world.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Yes, it must be horrible to be a supporter of the only SA team to have ever won Super Rugby, and the Currie Cup more than any other team ever.

Lions (Transvaal) won the first Super 10 competition.

 

[GreGorGy]

Lions (Transvaal) won the first Super 10 competition.

You are right - we should say SANZAR-Era Super Rugby (when it became a real league) and ANNUAL Currie Cup (also when it became a real league, IIRC)

 

[bwana]

It's a camera brand and most semi-serious SLR togs are either in the Canon or Nikon camp.

The better the photographer the less they care.

 

[TehStranger]

The better the photographer the less they care.

True. The majority still fall into either camp though (in terms of gear they use).

 

[bwana]

True. The majority still fall into either camp though (in terms of gear they use).

True - they are the two most popular brands but some of the also-ran brands produce better cameras that are often more affordable… even though you will never see them in the end zone at a rugby match.

I'll probably never switch as long as I'm buying my own equipment because it's a hassle I don't have time for.

 

[TehStranger]

True - they are the two most popular brands but some of the also-ran brands produce better cameras that are often more affordable… even though you will never see them in the end zone at a rugby match.

I'll probably never switch as long as I'm buying my own equipment because it's a hassle I don't have time for.

Yeah, the cost and inconvenience of switching brands (especially if you've invested a decent amount of money in kit) is prohibitive. I shoot Canon (with a fair bit of kit) while my SO shoots Nikon (with a fair bit of kit) because we both invested into the brands before meeting. Consolidation of gear would benefit us immensely, but it's a headache I'm not looking forward to.

 

[Bosvark@]

Not talking to you ever....

 

[Nanfeishen]

True - they are the two most popular brands but some of the also-ran brands produce better cameras that are often more affordable… even though you will never see them in the end zone at a rugby match.

Besides affordable ,often slightly more features in comparable price ranges as well as offering versatile options.

i.e. With Pentax i can use my 50mm f/1.2 lens from my K1000 film camera and put in on my K-3 , while also being able to take my Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 SP AF XR Di LD Aspherical IF Macro and pop it on the K1000.

I am no professional, and not big on sports photography , so you probabily will never see me in "the end zone of a rugby match" , but i do enjoy the verstality.

 

[bwana]

Besides affordable ,often slightly more features in comparable price ranges as well as offering versatile options.

i.e. With Pentax i can use my 50mm f/1.2 lens from my K1000 film camera and put in on my K-3 , while also being able to take my Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 SP AF XR Di LD Aspherical IF Macro and pop it on the K1000.

I am no professional, and not big on sports photography , so you probabily will never see me in "the end zone of a rugby match" , but i do enjoy the verstality.

I'm not sure I understand the importance of this - lenses from canon film cameras work just fine on my dslrs. I think Canon has been using the same EF mount since the late 80s?

 

[tRoN]

Oh no. Not again!

 

[Nanfeishen]

I'm not sure I understand the importance of this - lenses from canon film cameras work just fine on my dslrs. I think Canon has been using the same EF mount since the late 80s?

Sadly, some of the icons of camera history in the A and T series of Canon film camera's were rendered instantly obsolete with the introduction of the EF mount.
With the resurgent interest in film cameras, i just think its a great pity because Canon has some absolutely beautiful classics.

 

[garyc]

I'm not sure I understand the importance of this - lenses from canon film cameras work just fine on my dslrs. I think Canon has been using the same EF mount since the late 80s?

Pentax make a point of their in-body image stabilization. This allows all old lenses (including screw mount with adapters) into IS lenses.

 

[Progenix Oj101]

Nikon has also used the F mount forever, late 1950s I think.

 

[bwana]

Pentax make a point of their in-body image stabilization. This allows all old lenses (including screw mount with adapters) into IS lenses.

Fair point.

Nikon has also used the F mount forever, late 1950s I think.

And? Newer is better - didn't you get the memo?

 

[Progenix Oj101]

I should've quoted, I was replying to

i.e. With Pentax i can use my 50mm f/1.2 lens from my K1000 film camera and put in on my K-3 , while also being able to take my Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 SP AF XR Di LD Aspherical IF Macro and pop it on the K1000.