GAS GAS: Please Share your Latest Acquisitions Big and Small

Is this too small?
IMG_20250111_214652.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
An as good as new Oly 100-400 with an extra new 1.4 Oly teleconverter for 900 Euros. Usual commercial price roughly 1600 Euros. One happy buyer.
Congratulations, that's one hell of a deal. I paid for my Oly 100-400mm 1.100 £ and for the Oly MC-14 250 £ both used but in excellent condition (until they met me of course 😛 )
 
DSC_3661.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


The newly released Viltrox 35mm f/1.7 reached me via pre-sale. After some rather varied experiences as of late, I kept quiet about this.

However, I needn't have worried: The lens is well made, fully functional and renders quite a nice image (though I have precious little to show for it - it cold and dark outside, and not much to photograph in here, though I did find something).

Not-so-fun backstory: Viltrox actually didn't put my name on the address label! It took quite some effort to have the post deliver the parcel to me - as a matter of fact, I had to go and fetch it from a storage facility because I was at work when they attempted their second delivery. First time something like this (the left-off name) has happened to me ...

M.
 
jjc.jpg

The body of the new X100VI is almost identical to my previous V and I was able to move my Nisi protective filter onto the VI (hence why there are some small scratches on the front of the new camera's lens). But the V's JJC grip would not fit (threaded tripod hole is in a different location) so I bought and installed a new JJC grip. Just as reasonably priced and well made as the last one. I use the grip because it's a convenient way to re-locate the tripod hole so I can install my PD Capture Clip "foot" so that it doesn't interfere with the operation of the SD card door. Also, in the winter, it makes it easier to hold the camera while wearing gloves.
 
View attachment 523679

The newly released Viltrox 35mm f/1.7 reached me via pre-sale. After some rather varied experiences as of late, I kept quiet about this.

However, I needn't have worried: The lens is well made, fully functional and renders quite a nice image (though I have precious little to show for it - it cold and dark outside, and not much to photograph in here, though I did find something).

Not-so-fun backstory: Viltrox actually didn't put my name on the address label! It took quite some effort to have the post deliver the parcel to me - as a matter of fact, I had to go and fetch it from a storage facility because I was at work when they attempted their second delivery. First time something like this (the left-off name) has happened to me ...

M.
From what I can gather, there seems to be some consistency across the range of Viltrox products and although I don't yet own any of their lenses, I think I'm a fan. The only reason I haven't got any of their lenses to date is the priority I place towards the rangefinder system, but that 16mm F1.8 now thankfully available for Nikon Z, looks to me to be "the one", particularly given Nikon don't do a native prime lens like for the system.
 
My latest, rather big, acquisition, is a Canon Pixma Pro-200 A3+ inkjet printer.

I was rather surprised by how much more detailed and more color-accurate this prints than my previous A4 six-ink Epson XP8500.
To test my new printer, I did a comparative 5"x7" print on my new Pro-200 (left) and my old XP8500 (right), and took a macro shot to compare them:

1000017806.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

With my own eyes, the difference is not nearly as big as in the macro shot. In fact, I was quite happy with the old XP8500.

But there's no denying that the new printer is far more color-accurate. That magenta tint does not exist in the original image (but it's much smaller in reality than the macro implies). And it's more detailed and contrasty, too. The banding on the XP8500 is not visible to my naked eye.
 
1000031848.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Did I mention I am a huge Crumpler addict. Ever since I got my first Crumpler bag (Jimmy Bo 150, in 2010) I have been using them exclusively as my hip holder setups or on short walks over the shoulder like mini-sling bags (my right shoulder can't take large loads from sling backpacks).

I randomly saw an ad on evilBay for this lightly used Crumpler Quick Escape 800 in camo colour with bright red interior for 27 £. I wanted it because I wanted to replace my current (same model) bag as it has a hole near the zipper and it can let rain in.
1000031849.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I don't know how it happened but I don't always feel safe with the bag in bad weather because of it. The bag has rainproof construction (to a certain degree) and it has a pocket at the bottom with a rain cover for heavy rains too.

And I just couldn't refuse a colour scheme that I love very much. So, at the moment I have the Jimmy Bo 150 (one zoom lens + camera or 2 primes + camera), the Quick Escape 600 (2 small zooms + camera or 3 primes + camera), and 2 Quick Escape 800 (1 large zoom, 2 primes/small zooms + camera or 3 primes, flash, diffuser and camera or 2 cameras, 2 zooms and 2 primes).

PS. The difference between the older Crumpler Jimmy Bo series and the newer Quick Escape (discontinued for most sizes) is that Quick Escape have the rain cover in a pocket st the bottom (for the 400 size and up).
 
During the whole black friday hulabaloo, I picked up a refurbished Canon R10 to drive an urban walking around kit. I had it out a couple of times last week with an EF-S 15-85 lens. Newer, smaller, native RF-mount lenses are probably in its future.

LE_16-0159.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


LE_16-0748.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
View attachment 523679

The newly released Viltrox 35mm f/1.7 reached me via pre-sale. After some rather varied experiences as of late, I kept quiet about this.

However, I needn't have worried: The lens is well made, fully functional and renders quite a nice image (though I have precious little to show for it - it cold and dark outside, and not much to photograph in here, though I did find something).

Not-so-fun backstory: Viltrox actually didn't put my name on the address label! It took quite some effort to have the post deliver the parcel to me - as a matter of fact, I had to go and fetch it from a storage facility because I was at work when they attempted their second delivery. First time something like this (the left-off name) has happened to me ...

M.
A little addendum about the Viltrox 35mm f/1.7: This is now "officially" my stay-on lens for the Nikon Z fc - it's optically at least as competent as the Z 28mm f/2.8 SE, a lens I like a lot, but find slightly bigger than necessary, considering its rather modest specs. The Z 28mm may be even more versatile due to its even shorter MFD (0.19m vs 0.33m), but the one-and-a-half stops of additional light gathering capability is more useful to me, and it's not as if a 0.33m MFD is bad for a 50mm-e (53,5mm-e, more precisely) lens.

Both lenses render a nice image, but the Viltrox has clearly more attractive OOF rendering - and I suspect that it's not only because of its faster maximum aperture: It's very well corrected for CA, whereas the Z 28mm, while not bad in absolute terms, sometimes shows some LaCA and does suffer a bit from LoCA. The Z 28mm also a little soft ("glowy") at its MFD - the Viltrox isn't.

The only other lens that comes close in terms of usefulness is the tiny TTArtisan 27mm f/2.8 - it makes the Z fc jacket pocketable in a pinch, but it's no match optically for either of the admittedly bigger lenses already mentioned. Its vintage vibe makes shooting with it fun, though.

I like all three lenses, and if I was forced to choose, I would probably still pick the Nikon, but for my current preferences and objectives, the Viltrox is it. I didn't expect this to happen, so am all the more happy with this outcome (I'd already chided myself for buying another prime for the Z fc), especially since this little warrior is far from expensive, and I actually think it's somewhat sturdier than the Nikon, too.

M.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 523978
Did I mention I am a huge Crumpler addict. Ever since I got my first Crumpler bag (Jimmy Bo 150, in 2010) I have been using them exclusively as my hip holder setups or on short walks over the shoulder like mini-sling bags (my right shoulder can't take large loads from sling backpacks).

I randomly saw an ad on evilBay for this lightly used Crumpler Quick Escape 800 in camo colour with bright red interior for 27 £. I wanted it because I wanted to replace my current (same model) bag as it has a hole near the zipper and it can let rain in.
View attachment 524012
I don't know how it happened but I don't always feel safe with the bag in bad weather because of it. The bag has rainproof construction (to a certain degree) and it has a pocket at the bottom with a rain cover for heavy rains too.

And I just couldn't refuse a colour scheme that I love very much. So, at the moment I have the Jimmy Bo 150 (one zoom lens + camera or 2 primes + camera), the Quick Escape 600 (2 small zooms + camera or 3 primes + camera), and 2 Quick Escape 800 (1 large zoom, 2 primes/small zooms + camera or 3 primes, flash, diffuser and camera or 2 cameras, 2 zooms and 2 primes).

PS. The difference between the older Crumpler Jimmy Bo series and the newer Quick Escape (discontinued for most sizes) is that Quick Escape have the rain cover in a pocket st the bottom (for the 400 size and

A little addendum about the Viltrox 35mm f/1.7: This is now "officially" my stay-on lens for the Nikon Z fc - it's optically at least as competent as the Z 28mm f/2.8 SE, a lens I like a lot, but find slightly bigger than necessary, considering its rather modest specs. The Z 28mm may be even more versatile due to its even shorter MFD (0.19m vs 0.33m), but the one-and-a-half stops of additional light gathering capability is more useful to me, and it's not as if a 0.33m MFD is bad for a 50mm-e (53,5mm-e, more precisely) lens.

Both lenses render a nice image, but the Viltrox has clearly more attractive OOF rendering - and I suspect that it's not only because of its faster maximum aperture: It's very well corrected for CA, whereas the Z 28mm, while not bad in absolute terms, sometimes shows some LaCA and does suffer a bit from LoCA. The Z 28mm also a little soft ("glowy") at its MFD - the Viltrox isn't.

The only other lens that comes close in terms of usefulness is the tiny TTArtisan 27mm f/2.8 - it makes the Z fc jacket pocketable in a pinch, but it's no match optically for either of the admittedly bigger lenses already mentioned. Its vintage vibe makes shooting with it fun, though.

I like all three lenses, and if I was forced to choose, would probably still pick the Nikon, but for my current preferences and objectives, the Viltrox is it. I didn't expect this to happen, so am all the more happy with this outcome (I'd already chided myself for buying another prime for the Z fc), especially since this little warrior is far from expensive, and I actually think it's somewhat sturdier than the Nikon, too.

M.
I just got the TTArtisans 27mm for my X-E2. I like it a lot more than the original XF 27mm. It's quieter and it has the aperture ring. So far I'm liking the output. And I know I shouldn't say it, it looks pretty good on my mostly black XE2. Sleek little nicely built lens.
 
Sadly, it turns out that a 31.5" (says 32" on the box) monitor is simply way too big. It felt like sitting right in front of the TV!

I need to do some more research what to get. My previous monitor was (okay, is) a 24" slightly curved Samsung model with 120 htz refresh rate, but only 1080p. I'd like at least 1440p, and probably around 27". If I can find 100% sRGB, higher than 60 refresh rate, and (maybe) HDR for a good price, I'll probably go for it.
 
Sadly, it turns out that a 31.5" (says 32" on the box) monitor is simply way too big. It felt like sitting right in front of the TV!

I need to do some more research what to get. My previous monitor was (okay, is) a 24" slightly curved Samsung model with 120 htz refresh rate, but only 1080p. I'd like at least 1440p, and probably around 27". If I can find 100% sRGB, higher than 60 refresh rate, and (maybe) HDR for a good price, I'll probably go for it.
I went back and forth between 32 and 27, I ended up with a Samsung 27" 2 1/2 years ago and I am happy with that. This is what I ended up with.
 
Back
Top