How does this make you feel /p/?
wow, a camera, never seen one of those before.
regular
is there some reason to do this, or is it just for the lulz?
why would this make me ragelumix gf1 is not a bad camera, having that camera with this setup and walking down the street would make you president of awesome
>>800922 president of awesomean island in the ocean of spectacular
>>800925>ocean of spectacularmore like SPECULAR, amirite???
Like someone doesn't know how to appropriately pair equipment.But it doesn't affect me, so whatever?
>>800933This post was the highlight of my day.
why would a flash bracket make me rage?
>>800908What's the trigger on that? It looks like the part that goes on the camera itself ALSO has a sensor?Pretty sweet.
excellent
>>800908>How does this make you feel /p/?Like the age of digital photography has produced a lot of rank amateurs who have never spent any time in a darkroom.
>>800908you know how 2:30 in the afternoon feels right?
>>800966is 5 hour energy a popper?
>>800908Killing the whole idea behind u4/3.
>Like the age of digital photography has produced a lot of rank amateurs who have never spent any time in a darkroom.yeah. this.
>>800966B-Ballin' And It Feels So Good
>>800978This, if I were to every buy a Micro 4/3rds it would be to essentially have a P&S with interchangeable lenses and a few other features (although it would be a tough sell over an S90 or G11). But if I was going to end up making it that big and bulky I would just take my dSLR setup out and about.Then again to be fair this picture was probably just taken for shits and giggles.
>>800977fine print says as much caffeine as a cup of coffee. sounds like a ripoff to me.
couldnt care less
That it's either some rank gearfag shooting perverse camera porn, or some guy who needs long telephotos who sensibly decided to minimize the size of his body to compensate for his maxi-size lenses.Reminds me of a picture I saw of James Stanfield with a little FM2 or something and a giant supertele on the front.
>>800908Those slaves are so ridiculously fucking good.
>>800908Okay, the flash I can understand, but how the fuck does a Nikon G lens work on this when it lacks an aperture ring?
>>801138There's some very expensive adapters that I know of from Nikon F mount to Canon EF that retain electronic aperture control. No reason I know of why one from F to Micro Four Thirds couldn't be built.
didnt think you could do that because of the flange distance on SLRs
>>801299huh?
well you cant go from a rangefinder lens like an m.42 to a SLR body because they dont focus past about 2 metres.so i assumed it would be the same, similar, the other way round with a SLR lens on rangefinder or similar like the GF-1.
>>801302>rangefinder lens like an m.42M42 is an SLR mount genius.You can mount anything on m4/3 with the proper adapter and keep infinity because the flange distance on m4/3 is shorter than any other popular mount.
>>801302>rangefinder lens like an m.42BZZZZT...incorrect answerNikon has the longest backfocus distance among SLR systems and Micro-FourThirds has the shortest (I know it's not an SLR system but whatever). Basically it's the most compatible combination out there, disregarding the electronic aperture business.
>>801310Wow you're a fuckin nerd, I didn't understand any of that.
>>801319> herp derp
>>801319Too right I'm a nerd, I've worked in the industry since 1997
>>801310well, I do understand that, and it still makes no sense. part of it is incorrect and part of it is irrelevant, all of it is bullshit.sounds like random gearfaggotry to me. ignore him.
>>801326Actually, it's 100% correct.
>>801324"in the industry" meaning working counter at a one-hour photo? It is 'flange focal distance' you are speaking of, not 'backfocus distance', and even so the statement makes no sense.
>>801328no, it isn't. go the fuck away.
Wal-mart's one-hour photo: In the industry!
>>801331> The M4/3 are the most adaptable digital SLRs ever produced because they have an unusually small lens back focus, which in turn allows room for adapters to adapt more lenses to the M4/3 format than is possible to any other digital format so far.http://www.cameraquest.com/adp_micro_43.htm
>>801310>herp durp, i can use big words i don't know the meaning of, i is a pro
>>801331u mad? :3
>>801334exactly how does that have anything to do with gearfag trying to drag nikon into it? especially as 'most compatible'?it was bullshit. you got called on it. let it go, dude
he madEXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePaint.NET v3.5.4Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpi
That short of FFD and BFD would make about ANYTHING compatible. Nikon would actually be at the end of the list for good matches for just that reason.
>>801334The fact that that website say that m4/3 (a sensor size) is a digital SLR (a type of camera) removes all their credibility.Also there is no such thing as "most compatible", something is either compatible or it isn't. It's like saying someone is "more gay", they're either gay or they're not.
