Nikkor

Post some samples of that blurryness. If it's only happening at infinity it's obviously a problem with the adapter.

A good speedbooster increases resolution.

You can always take a stills photo to check focus.

21mm f4, looks fun.

Another nice thing about the deal is the fact that samsung is THE display manufacturer, so maybe they come up with some real nice EVF.

Lol marco, did anybody buy the ef-m? No, and its consumer not professional. But canon does have a pro mirrorless line, it's the C line, and guess what, it's EF mount.

As if nikon with an established brand wants to alienate their users by having them handling adapters on and off and don't make money selling lenses so a bunch of guys can use canon fd lenses from their grandpa

Shure that's why they have their own patents of lenses with speed boosters built in. OMG http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2015-03-03

Cmon stop the wishful thinking. I change lenses all the time as most people with dslrs do, I don't want to have 10 adapters, putting them on and off while changing between camera bodies (no, people will not throw away their old nikon cameras). If they make a short mount they will make it short for good. They won't use samsung contacts either, imagine what a pain in the ass having legacy samsung contacts, nikon contacts, two different softwares running, compatibility errors,etc... Wishful thinking.

Why make millions of people buy adapters because a few people own samsung lenses, makes no sense at all. Even if they don't go with the F mount, why choose a mount designed for APS-C sensors if you can make a larger one and skip the problems that sony is having with the e-mount (shadowing)

This doesn't have to be the case, in fact it could be the other way around. Let's take the nikon fe for example. This camera is as small as it can get without becoming too small. The only problem facing a digital Fe is making the sensor electronics plus screen thin enough. Wide angles are the only lenses that benefit from short flange distances, if you remove the mirror in that hypotetical Fe you can place optics inside the camera and come close to the sensor, on the other hand longer lenses would benefit from this aproach as they would be 3cm shorter and balance better, for very long lenses this is meaningless, but who wants to use such long lenses on a small body. And then the reality check, the current sony FE lineup isn't really small, they are closer to DSLR lenses as they are to tiny leica m stuff, so having 3cm of that lens sticking inside the body would make things more compact. The only problem with this approach is the current placement of electronic contacts on the g lenses. Nikon made such a lens 50 years ago, it's the nikkor-o 21mm. http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/RF-Nikkor/RF21mm/index.htm

I sincerely hope nikon does not take the NX mount, they need a nice short mount for speedboosters or with a larger diameter and no plastic stuff between the mount and the sensor so the speedboosters can recess into the housing. They might even use the F mount if they find a way to make the screen, sensor electronics,etc... thin enough. This would actually make the most sense, wideangles that penetrate, and long lenses that balance nicely.

This is actually good news.

If you are not taking your pills because they are too big to swallow you can crush them in two pieces and swallow seperatly. If they come in capsules you will have to ask your psychiatrist to give you a reciept for smaller pills. Just ask, don't make a fool out of yourself and start enjoing life with other people.

Andrew lives in the hipster capital Berlin. But I've seen your bike sooo... and the filmconvert filters taking pictures of people in the fields and fleemarkets....

Black and white needs proper exposure and focusing, errors will stand out more than in Color. By errors I mean that if you nail it, it looks great, if you don't it looks "only gray". In fact, not only exposure and focusing errors will stand out, but also every single aspect of the image. If you shoot something without contrast, there will be only gray, in color you have colors, maybe the face is warmer the rest is blue and it will pass as a low contrast image, in black in white it will be just gray. When you have a lot of white, it also looks crap,etc... When we talk about that cinematic comes from proper lighting, composing,etc... and not so much the gear it's because in color these differences between poor and good carft don't stand out that much (if they would stand out that much we wouldn't be talking about it and take it for granted), in black and white it's more obvious. You need to have a wide range of tonalities, proper lighting, proper blacks, highlights in the right place, faces have to be in the very right spot of exposure and eyes need the white specular point, if they don't have it people will look dead (this is true always, but repeating it again, in black and white it's obligatory). If you have a true monocrome sensor you can use color filters, they will be part of the "lighting".

But the difference between a 60D (he owns one) and a 7D is very small.

But the 5dmkii only if it's not real sports because the AF is kind of lame.

Buy manual glass, and yes you can have cheap and good quality. I have a d800 and the tyical af lenses ,135 2,28 1.4, 85 1.4, 70-200 2.8,etc... But since I got manual lenses, I mostly leave the AF stuff at home, it's big and clumsy, and my eye sight is good enouh to focus by eye. The a7rII is even better for is, you have an evf, and you have access to all lens mounts, minolta, fd,etc... Sell that ugly zoom (you can adapt your canon zoom) and spend those 600pounds on a complete manual setup. (Thats what I would do) i don't understand the part where you say your photography has taken a hit, if I understand correctly you were using the canon 60d before, with no special lenses.

Get an ND filter that is smaller than the filter thread of the lens (the size will be an artistic decision, but it must be smaller), take the glass out and glue it somehow to an UV filter that threads into the lens. This should give something soap bubble like, you have to find a way of glueing the filter with no residues (look for tutorials about recementing lenses). That's my idea

Shoot it and return it, bahahaha amazon fuck you.

I have this feeling the camera you already have is good enough for a webseries

There is a difference, because film is made of millions of small random dots that aren't even the same size. If you ever have watched a 6x6 slide projected it's pretty insane, it's a different feeling. Add 24fps to it and you get even more. But yes, nobody is going to complain, specially being negative film, 24fps and motion blur.

Diffraction limited only ones

I guess so, but don't say it out loud, I want to buy an iscorama 54 for cheap sometime. The second point is that basically the further away the aperture is from the optical center, the more problems you get with vignetting, even if the aperture is large enough. I also found that when I place my isco ultra star back element touching the taking lens front element, the fieldcurvature blur you get at the top and bottom of the frame suddenly vanishes and the image gets very sharp.