Tim Sewell

Thanks for the advice guys. I found a nice condition A7R2 with 4 batteries for a good price on eBay this afternoon so I've bought it. It will be nice to look through some lenses with the FOV they used to give back in the day! Apparently the S35 4K is pretty good, so my go-to EF-S 17-55 will possibly get some use if I ever use it for video not on a gimbal or a jib.

Now *that* has piqued my interest!

Thanks for the tip on batteries - I was wondering about that. I've got 2 E-EF adapters - a Commlite and the locking Metabones one, so I'm hoping I'll get AF when I want it. For the Super Taks I've obviously also got a E-M42 dumb adapter. Sadly I sold my M lenses quite a while ago after a brief dalliance with an M4-P.

Thanks for the thoughts Mark. I understand what you're saying and the thought of staying APS-C had struck me. I decided not to for two reasons - one is that for anything more considered than a family video I tend to use my Super Takumar set, so I've no shortage of FF lenses that I'd love to use for stills (they just don't do it for me for stills on the Olympus's M43, even boosted). I've also got a lovely Tokina 24-70 2.6 (the Angenieux one) that I don't use as much as I'd like on the FS5 as it's not wide enough at one end and unstabilised at the other! I think the lens would be lovely on a FF sensor. The other reason is that I just don't like the form factor on those 6### series cameras. So I'm putting you down as vote number 2 for the A7RII!

Out of budget. I am leaning towards A7Rii, but my knowledge of these cameras is limited, hence the question. Thanks!

Since getting my FS5 mk1 I've decided to go Sony for my stills/occasional video use (currently using an Olympus EM-1 mkii, which I'm selling to finance this). I don't want to buy anything new and as my requirements for this are more on the stills side than video I'm happy to go for an earlier model. Within my budget are the following: A7 A7ii A7R A7Rii A7S Which one would the EOSHD hive mind recommend for the use cases above?

I'm looking to buy shares in a new camera company that makes cameras specially designed to take flattering pictures of people with foot injuries. Oh-limpers.

I'm going to start a company making chocolate-bodied cameras and I'm going to call it Fudgefilm. Over(h)eating may be an issue.

It's already showing on the US Sony site: https://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-cameras/ilce-1

That's a fantastic tutorial and the difference the technique makes, even to well-exposed footage, is very noticeable.

I can only speak from my own experience, but the experience of grading the 10 bit HD output from my FS5 is very different (in a good way) to that of grading the 8 bit HD I used to get from my C100 (I've had both the Mk2 and the Mk1). Loved that Canon colour, but given that the artistic vision I'm pursuing involves quite extensive grading as I chase the elusive 'film' look (my ideal would have my footage looking like a moving 35mm still print) the lure of 10 bit on the FS5 was too much to resist. Simply, it holds up to the grade in a way that the Canon's recordings just couldn't - in terms of artefacts, banding and grain.

Australia is a continent, with huge natural resources, thousands of miles from anywhere else. Canada is half a continent, next door to the biggest market in the world, and if you think that neighbour exerts no influence on Canadian policy-making, you haven't been taking notice. New Zealand is the most remote developed country in the world and the USA is the world's richest economy. The UK is a small-middling tiny island, riven by some of the worst (entirely home-grown) inequality in the developed world, on the shores of the world's second richest economy, which also happens to be an existentially-important market for our exports. 80% of those exports are services, the continuation of which will rely on us satisfying EU standards across almost the entirety of our own economy. Up until January 1st 2020 we had one of the most important says in the formulation of EU policy and regulation. We now have none. No say at all. When the EU brings in new regulations or laws that impact the sectors in which we rely on our exports to them - most sectors, that is, we will have to adhere to them or face sectoral disasters, complete with job losses and bankruptcies. Took back control there, dincha? I'm dipping out of this thread now, as we're only re-prosecuting the same old arguments. You Brexiters don't have and never have had a single cogent argument in favour of leaving the EU, save for nonsense about sovereignty and patriotism. Your victory was built on lies and ignorance, fuelled by racism and will benefit nobody except the already-wealthy. Your arguments are glib, ill-thought-out, facile and mostly easy to debunk or disprove. Your yearning for simplicity, in a complex world, is bringing us close to ruin and you'll be remembered, every one of you, as fools led by charlatans and rightly damned across decades to come.

I had a bloody good go at killing it in 1994/5: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111151/

"We want our country back!" Heard on the streets and airwaves of both the US and the UK during a large part of the last decade. I've rarely heard any person of colour say that in either of those countries, I think because the country those using the phrase want to return to is the one where being a white British/American man gave you an inbuilt advantage even greater than that which we (I'm a white British man) still have. People who have had privilege and preference (even when they would vehemently deny having had them), when they lose them, feel that they're being badly treated and oppressed. So they want *their* country back.

Yeah - except for the groups of cops every 10 metres with massive sticks!

I'd just like to be able to shoot some video in non-deserted situations with my FS5, that I bought during the first lockdown!

Quite. I was there at the time (grew up in Birkenhead and latterly Toxteth) and I saw the results of the historic trashing of Liverpool of which that was just another episode. I was at my Mum's friend's flat by the Rialto when mates of her daughter's rushed in to tell us that people were coming on to the streets after the beating of two local lads in a cop van in the city centre. It was a wild few days; mind you, afterwards you could barely tell the difference up Parliament Street, since it had still looked like a fresh bomb site before the riots - there were still huge flattened stretches left over from WW2 - in 1981! - that told anyone willing to keep their eyes open just how much of a fuck successive governments, mostly Tory, gave about Liverpool and the North. Anyone, *anyone* who thinks the Conservatives will help working people anywhere, let alone in 'the provinces' is either too young to remember or too dumb to understand what's been in front of their faces for decades. It certainly wasn't the fault of the EU that 9 out of 10 of the most deprived areas in the EU are in the UK, yet the very people who helped sustain that 'world-beating' performance are those who were believed when they campaigned to remove the only barriers to them continuing it. Anyway. We're entering a period where a lot of people are going to suffer, while a tiny few will prosper mightily. Maybe those who are still convincing themselves that Brexit and the Conservatives are going to usher in a golden age will, after a few years of that, start to understand that they've been conned. But I'm not holding my breath.

They're going to get what they voted for. Good and hard!

To say that both phenomena stem from similar origins is not to say that British leavers would necessarily have voted for Trump - that would be simplistic. Besides, he's a particular kind of American figure of a type that most British people find intrinsically unappealing. I think it's safe to say, however, that many British Leavers - were they Americans who had grown up in America and were in similar socio-economic situations in the USA as they are here - would be in the category of voters who could be expected to be Trump voters. British Leave voters were more likely to be older, white, less educated, hold more reactionary views and be less economically active than Remain voters. A similar profile to Trump voters in the USA. Anyway, whether or not that's the case - in both countries, people who felt their worries weren't being listened to voted for things that will inevitably make their lives even worse after believing the lies of extremely rich and well-connected politicians who actually couldn't give a flying fuck about them.

That's the thing that would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic. The anti-elitists' answer to their woes was to elect a 'billionaire' to the US Presidency (who filled his cabinet with other billionaires, who promptly gave themselves a massive tax cut at the expense of programmes designed to help those at the bottom and in the middle), while in the UK they elected the most old-Etonian-heavy cabinet in living memory (while also ditching our most important and valuable international alliance at the behest of a bunch of public schoolboys). Yet apparently it's bad form to characterise Leavers and Tory voters as numbskulls and racists.

Yes. Exactly as EU legislation has to be debated and passed by directly elected MEPs. The Commission can't just dictate legislation and see it passed into law. The overall direction is set by the Council (made up of elected national ministers), the Commission basically works out how to achieve what it's asked for and the resulting proposed legislation is debated and passed (or not) by the parliament. If the legislation requires treaty changes then it has to also be approved by national parliaments, which makes the whole thing somewhat more democratic than what goes on in Westminster. In other cases, legislation proposed independently by the Commission has to be approved by the Council as well as the Parliament. By the way, you've made quite a lot of very definitive statements judging the democratic nature or otherwise of EU structures, I'm surprised that rather than categorically knowing how the UK's structures (that you posit are superior) you are having to fall back on 'presuming'.

The UK Civil Service - analogous to the Commission - has the ability to propose legislation and there is no way to vote them out. This demonstrates the problem - right from the outset - of Brexit discourse. Most of it is rooted in ignorance of how the EU actually works.

One of Brexit's results will almost certainly be Scottish independence (and who can blame them? They were told in 2014 that voting to stay in the UK would protect their EU rights and Single Market membership - both of which have now been removed from them despite their having decisively voted to remain in the EU). The loss of those Scottish seats, combined with our antiquated first-past-the-post electoral system will make it a lot easier for the Conservatives to remain in power for as long as they keep the South East happy. The north, the midlands - well, it's not as if they're not used to being ignored by central government, is it? At least in the EU those regions had access to billions in regeneration funds - you may well say that those funds were the UK's contributions, re-routed by the EU - but just watch to see how much of that cash gets 're-routed' by the Tories. The fact is that all those who voted to 'take back control' are in for a surprise - the control won't be taken back by them, it's being taken back by those who hated the fact that there was a higher level of regulation that meant they couldn't get a worker's right removed here and an environmental regulation there removed by having a quiet word with a chum in a private club. They'll no longer have any barrier to whatever they wish to do in order to further enrich themselves. The mostly non-working people (look it up - one of the highest correlations with a Leave vote was economic inactivity) who voted to leave have bequeathed those of us who still have to work with a couple of decades of declining rights, incomes and environmental protection, while handing the Rees-Moggs of this world yet another mouthful of gold. At the end of the day, you didn't need to know much about the EU to figure out that Brexit would screw everyone but the rich - you only had to look at the collection of crooks, spivs, chancers and nutjobs who were front-and-centre of the Leave campaign. But sure - it's going to herald a new age of localised democracy and levelling up - Michael and Boris said so, so it must be true.

This, I think, is the crux of our problems in the West currently. Seriousness is no longer either a requirement nor a virtue in elected politicians. Especially in the Anglosphere (with a couple of exceptions), we've taken to electing deeply unserious people who, even worse, are completely insulated by wealth from the results of their witless tinkering.

Appreciate what you're saying, but I guess we sure would like to be going into a 3rd lockdown after 25 deaths than after 70K+. There's governmental incompetence and then there's 21st century UK Conservative Party governmental incompetence!