Jump to content

FastFreddy2

Members
  • Content count

    3,865
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    113

FastFreddy2 last won the day on September 2

FastFreddy2 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

216 Excellent

5 Followers

About FastFreddy2

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 09/19/1956

Profile Information

  • Country
    Somewhere over a rainbow
  • Occupation
    Loafer
  • Sex
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

52,622 profile views
  1. Photo's ..... The Big Question.

    Google suggests the wine that old would not be pleasant to drink. I would guess the "value" is the unopened bottle?
  2. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    Someone found some offcuts? Les Dawson (her dad) will be turning in his grave. Talentless no-hoper, pumped up with fillers and living her life in front of as many cameras as she can get interested. Google tells me, "media whore" is a real thing.
  3. Photo's ..... The Big Question.

    I'm not overly happy about it either, but there is no "risk" of imminent loss, if you can remember what one of my past/current interests might be. I won't remind you here, since I choose to be as discreet as possible about it. I would much rather the money was invested in 'bricks and mortar', but as I've mentioned before, I don't have enough to have a second home to use for investment purposes. There is a long term plan to resolve that .... But I get distracted. In my youth (a very distant memory) I was taught why old stuff becomes more valuable: value being in the amount of demand, and bearing no relation to original cost. In this example, a bottle of wine made by anyone anywhere in the world, is unlikely to cost more than £4. My lesson involved something like a Mini Cooper, or might have been a Lotus Elan. I could not understand why cars getting older, could sell for increasingly higher values? As was explained to me: They were made in a finite number. Crashes, and general dilapidation meant their numbers decreased. Fewer vehicles with (over time) increasing demand (through reputation or legend) meant demand increases. If demand increases in a dwindling supply, prices rocket until demand begins to fall off. A fellow welder I worked with circa 1978/79/80 once told me, if he had stored all the Austin 7's he'd buried in his gardens over the years, he'd be a millionaire. Only today I read how a McClaren F1 stored for 20 years, will likely fetch a record sum when it goes to auction. I too can't understand why wine would become more expensive over time, but I understand the mechanics of it. A coupe of years ago, I sold a bike frame that I knew as soon as it was delivered, was never get used by me. I owned it for over 15 years, and only Mrs F complaining that our wedding photo's weren't on a wall anywhere, stopped me mounting that frame on a wall. I see beauty in some odd things I suppose, but sometimes I just like to look rather than use.
  4. Photo's ..... The Big Question.

    They did claim "UK stock", which I guess can be checked with serial numbers, prior to purchase? I too would steer clear of grey imports. With branded names, you are paying for warranty and backup. That's of little use in the UK if the camera has to be shipped to China for repairs. My heating engineer mate came very unstuck with a phone bought in that way. Returned for repair, never saw it again. PayPal (180 day guarantee) was not interested. I've a real thing for detail. I'm hoping the lens I plan to buy over Xmas (assuming I don't change direction go for the G80 and 12-60 lens kit) will greatly improve the image quality of my pictures. At the moment I use a 20mm lens (40mm x 35mm film equiv) which is fine for the bulk of the pictures I take, but I want to get a portfolio of digital work going. Primarily in B+W portraits, which I love. (Old romantic.) Even some landscapes look more dramatic in B+W I think. (Nod to Mr Adams.) The Sony is off the option list for you as you've a compliment of Canon lenses, but one of the things that attracted me, was it's abilities at low light levels, beating many of those already well known for their low light capability. Low light/low noise I should say. Much of my 'alternative' interest is in scenes involving the darker side of life. Not necessarily as a self-satisfying voyeur (though this is not excluded), but more as a social history reporter or recorder. This might not be wholly necessary, with the advent of good quality camera phones, but I have always had a creative urge from as long as I can remember. (Suppressed childhood?) Fortunately the Sony has all the aesthetic appeal of a house brick, which is making a purchasing decision very easy to make. (Or not make, in my case.) The Alpha 7R II camera, looks to have been styled by an ex-Praktica employee. Function over form .... As you well know, pushing ISO upward often allows an image that otherwise wouldn't be possible. Not just because of low light levels, but small aperture lenses. I'm pretty sure I've never owned a lens with a wider aperture than f1.4 despite me liking to use differential focusing for isolating an aspect of an image. I'm pretty sure this can now be done in post with the right software? Which leaves me able to use slower (cheaper) lenses, even with the Alpha - if it ever has a face lift! But with an f4.0 lens I'd be pushing it to capture most candids with the G5, which is why I bought the f1.7 20mm to get me going. Reading this is might seem unlikely I would spend £600 on the Sigma lens, but it (the lens) tied to something like the Alpha has (as you've said several times) the ability to match medium format film, and that being the case, I would spend that money. Perhaps I should take a closer look at a Nikon 610? Or just buy the lens I plan to, and see what I can do... So once again, models?
  5. Photo's ..... The Big Question.

    "Spare cash" need not be lying around, it might be invested. It's still 'spare', (ie ISA) as indeed might liquid assets sat in a bank account. Conversely, cash lying around, could be lying there waiting to be used to pay a bill/debt. (And for most people usually is.) The condition of the money I mentioned, is both. It is money with no requirement or need to be spent, save what I choose to use it for. And it is literally lying there. £460 on my bedroom floor, £100 on the kitchen table and a four figure sum in a cupboard. There is a five figure sum, "spare" but not lying there, languishing in a bank account. I wasn't talking about spare liquid assets sat in a bank account. The nuance in my original prose was made using inverted commas, indicating cash lying around is; 'spare': as in having no debt, or bill, or likely imminent need demanding its use. If I chose to, I could quite literally walk into a camera shop tomorrow and buy any of the 2-3k cameras mentioned without making a dent or ripple in any financial plan I might or might not have. I don't know that I've ever gloated over anything, much less an object. I thought many of those buying mega-expensive wines were treating them as investments? My problem is the reluctance to spoil something that looks perfect. (Brand new.) I even bought a used bicycle in the hope it would get me out on a bike more. So far, it hasn't worked. I am working on resolving that though. (My resolution might be slightly thwarted by my having listed the bike on an auction site, that produced more interest than I was expecting .... Ho-hum.)
  6. Photo's ..... The Big Question.

    I suppose handling them both will be an indicator as to which you will like long term. When I first held the Lumix G3, it was incredibly difficult to handle because holding it nearly always opened up a menu.... It went back as John Lewis was still in the throes of their "happy" campaign with no declared limit on returns. I only had it for a short while but it went back and JL were happy to take it back. (Nuts.) Keeping that camera would have been a big mistake. I completely understand the 5DR S option, if image detail is the main criteria. Large starting image size, and since Canon have intentionally clipped where the ISO rating can be pushed, I would think this camera is tilted toward the best quality image possible, with no compromise. The faintly ironic thing for me ..... I've helped run multi-million pound businesses (planning) on computers with hard drives less than a fifth of the image size created by one photograph the camera produces. And I used to sell (used) 20mb hard drives circa 1997, to home PC builders at computer fairs. Not that you are sure whether to buy, but this popped up earlier. Looks like a pukka company too. Or .... Since they don't have a retail outlet, maybe not so pukka.
  7. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    I may have found another suspect ...
  8. Photo's ..... The Big Question.

    There is of course a big difference between your needs (working pro) and mine (VERY part time enthusiast). The handicap I have, is 'spare' cash lying around doing nothing. I get to do a lot of window shopping. And even when I buy, I tend to avoid using because I get so much pleasure looking at my purchase. I should become an art dealer ....
  9. Photo's ..... The Big Question.

    Saw today, some landscape photo's taken with digital. Quality was really rather good. Here is one: Photograph by Kenneth Rennie. Some more by him here: https://www.ephotozine.com/user/kmrennie-123151/gallery/photo/fiji-sunset-2-35296853/ Looking into his equipment, I find time has moved on and newer cameras are even more expensive than the one he used on the linked album. In fact looking at a camera that ticked every box I might want to see ticked (full frame no low pass filter blah blah blah) I looked at a body circa £2500. And a decent lens at £600, or any (upward) figure you care to think of ... I may be sticking to the Lumix G5 for a while, though the Lumix G80 has some advantages.... New lens pencilled in for Xmas, maybe a replacement camera next year. I may need to look into selling some pictures first. Which may mean updating my portfolio .... Any volunteers for some modelling work?
  10. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    If I could be sure you lost it 30 years ago, having seen the sample picture supplied, I'd be asking my sister-in-law who she had to make that outfit with it. She's much, much bigger now (head like a football) but thirty years ago, I really would be asking her about that picture.....
  11. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    As a reasonably young (impressionable) man, I remember -vividly- reading a magazine article about Vidal Sassoon's eldest daughter Catya. She was living the L.A. dream being wealthy, attractive and owning a family name that made her welcome in all the 'right' places. By the time of the article, she was 15, and already had a drug and alcohol addiction problem. He father was born into "dirt poor" circumstances, was homeless as a child and spent time in an orphanage, was evacuated from London during WWII... I can't imagine a more disparate start to their respective lives. He died at 84, she died at 33 (addiction related illness). Reading the article all those years ago, drew a conclusion in my mind that while having "everything" might seem attractive, in itself it produces problems poorer folk like me don't have to contend with. At the moment I am again reading about many 'celebrity children' being spotlighted, currently cherished by the sycophantic media who will be the same organisations, that will report every stumble and fall as these children fail later in life. It's quite sickening. You know that's not an usual comment I see written about her. "Looks better dressed than undressed". I quite liked the dress in the first picture though.
  12. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    Katie Price aka Jordan. She is a grafter, and someone who likes 'pretty' hunks. I am concerned about morals, especially when children are involved. Someone who seeks to be in the limelight as much as she does, ought to be showing themselves to be a good role model, or not be given media attention. There is enough evil in the world already, without encouraging it. She lives in a bubble, and quite likely doesn't understand nor care, how others will be tempted to follow her example. "Hey look at me. Act like a whore, and get rich!" Not the lesson children/young people should be taught, especially not her own children. She once published a picture of her (then circa) 10 year old dressed and made up as a sexually active adult. It may be she was 'made up' to be like "mum", but then publish the image? I flat out don't agree with making children look like adults in any situation - ever. It's just not a safe thing to do. More meds, and off to bed.
  13. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    Lady Victoria Hervey. Someone better known for being in a state of partial dress ... In the news recently for being part of a threesome with two other celebrities you probably don't know.
  14. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    Not only; "not quite a lady", but someone who has earned a great deal of money from the sex industry, one way or another. A symptom of our "media" society. I have no idea why such a seemingly immoral person becomes so wealthy, and gets regular air time on British TV.
  15. 'Wet look' or shiny leggings?

    Not quite leggings .... Not quite a lady ....
×