Fancy a custom paint job for your camera
Some people need to get a real job
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwZ_RleZ9Bw&feature=player_embedded#
or
http://www.diyphotography.net/how-easy-would-it-be-to-custom-paint-a-nikon
I had to laugh at him when he got a shock ;D ;D ;D
Well. What else have you got to do this weekend?...I'll see you in the shed!
Looks like an audition tape for a Top Gear presenters job.
Graham. :)
Or you could just order a proper camera :) Fetch me my dark glasses (http://www.adorama.com/alc/blogarticle/11893)
Interesting to watch, however I will not be having a go with my camera
Thanks
Sandy
Am I the only person who thinks coloured cameras are well cool? I'd defibitely pay more to have one (but not the pink), and I think the Pentax idea will totally catch on.
No different to all the other types who wear the latest camera as a badge.
My 350D was the silver (Jessops only) one. Can't say I really liked the colour, and wouldn't pay for a different colour.
I see my camera as a tool and not a fashion statement. Well cool? Nah.
But as for the Pentax idea catching on, then probably it will, but only for those that think colour is relevant.
LOL, all these comments have reminded me of a workmate. His wife bought him a Sony Coolpix because if was a good deal for the money. Only it's bright red so he refuses to use it. ;D
I think this may ne an interesting discussion.
People are buying the iPad in the US right now, loads of money for a second rate tool that looks cool. Loads of people buy the top of the range Canikon and leave it on Program.
I'll certainly buy a camera that looks right. Ever since Contax got one of the Porsche designers to create the shape of the RTS back in the seventies, we've moved towards using kit that looks cool.
And what about the IXUS? Total cool lines, and a style that has lasted years.
How about cars? I'd sday they're pretty functional (for me, at least). But I'll still choose the colour.
What is cool?
People who need to look 'cool' as you call it are surely by definition not cool, since they feel the need to bolster their image by buying so called 'cool' accoutrement's. The attitude is "If that is considered cool then I must have one so I am considered cool."
I remember reading a comment on a camera that had been recently introduced where it said it looked like something designed in the '70's and for that reason they would not use it. Poor sad sod. :(
Perhaps cool is the wrong word. Looking good - well, there's nothing wrong with that! I'd say many of our purcahses, especially cameras, are made based partly on looks. As I said, the iPad. Totally pointless, but looks and feels great:
The ipad perfectly fits the gap between full sized laptop and phone. The thing is, I call that gap free time and I use it to get on with my life.
http://www.stuartgleave.com/blog/?p=515
All the guys out there - tell me that you don't buy your car based partly on looks. I can say I honestly don't - I'm totally functional when it comes to sepnding thousands of pounds on something to get me from A to B.
Yeah, any car. Just as long as it's pink.
I find it funny that you mention Porsche designing a camera (Or at a part of), implying that its "Cool" then say you have no interest in the design of a car!
I've just bought another car - its a Land Rover Discovery 2.7TDI Se - and yes I've bought it for many reason's, not least of which is that I think it looks good. But the prime reason is that it has 7 full sized forward facing seats and it can go anyware. Yes other cars do the same thing (well except perhaps going anyway!)
And that is much like cameras I guess.
As for the Ipad. How do you know it is useless? I doubt you've tried one, so it is based purely on other peoples views and looking at the specs. Now. I don't say that I don't agree with you, but I said that about the Iphone, but I have now got one and it is a fantastic too. But each to its own.
The concept of cool?
It's a bit like the difference between Fashion and Style.
Style is something you either have or you don't! It's in the way you carry yourself, the way you walk etc. It's nothing to do with the clothes you wear.
You could dress me in the finest Armani suit and I would still look like a photocopier salesman from Rotherham.
Fashion , on the other hand, is something so vulgar it has to re-invent itself every fifteen days.
Graham. :)
Hasselblads are cool........
Quote from: Jonathan on April 07, 2010, 07:40:38 AM
Hasselblads are cool........
Yes. Because they have "Style"!
See post above.
Graham. ;)
Quote from: Graham on April 07, 2010, 07:31:56 AM
Style is something you either have or you don't! It's in the way you carry yourself, the way you walk etc. It's nothing to do with the clothes you wear.
Fashion , on the other hand, is something so vulgar it has to re-invent itself every fifteen days.
Well said that man. :tup:
I've always considered 'cool' as the preogative of the young and immature but now I'm old and immature I think it's cool to walk about looking like an unmade bed. :tup:
Hassleblads may have been cool some 40 years ago but not today, they are just as ostentatious as they have ever been however. Leica for me retains its cool, and perhaps a Rollei.
Now 'TASTE' that another thing.............. ::)
The only time I'm cool is when I'm out photographing wildlife in minus six degrees! :2funny:
Quote from: Oldboy on April 07, 2010, 12:33:21 PM
The only time I'm cool is when I'm out photographing wildlife in minus six degrees! :2funny:
Well, you should put on a coat. :)
Hmmm............
Based on anglefire's comment about the Landrover, the looks are certainly relevant (even though functionality comes first). I'd say that's the same as the choice of colour for your camera.
As for Leica, the old film jobs are superb. The digital ones have mostly been fairly naff (numerous problems with the sensor, having to remove the baseplate to insert an SD card). However, the latest full frame rangefinder is apparently the bees knees.
The M7? Available in a number of colours:
http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/special_editions/m7_hermes/
The orange looks well 'ard to me.
I feel it should be compulsory for Canon telephoto lenses to be in pink, rather than white. Then we'll see how many togs want to show off their expensive lenses.
Quote from: chris@seary.com on April 09, 2010, 08:21:53 PM
I feel it should be compulsory for Canon telephoto lenses to be in pink, rather than white. Then we'll see how many togs want to show off their expensive lenses.
:2funny: :2funny: :2funny:
Chris, the colour of my new LR is silver as it happens - but any colour would have been fine - well any standard colour.
As for pink "L" lenses - if that colour is relevant to assist in the performance, then so be it. They are beige for apparently good reasons.
Quote from: anglefire on April 09, 2010, 10:52:24 PM
They are beige for apparently good reasons.
Errr............. is there a technical explanation for this?
Quote from: anglefire on April 09, 2010, 10:52:24 PM
As for pink "L" lenses - if that colour is relevant to assist in the performance, then so be it.
Don't think the colour is relevant to the performance, any more than the looks of your LandRover are relevant to its performance. Looks are just an extra, as they have been for cameras for many years now. If your Landrover had the same performance , but looked like a Trabant, would you still buy it?
Functionality is most important, but looks also count. For some, looks count more than functionality. Obviously, Sony owners are primarily focused on practicality, as their cameras have the lines of a bulldog chewing a wasp. God those cameras really fell out of the ugly tree!
Strange you should say that Chris, only yesterday, when I had managed to get out for a couple of hours for the first time in many a week, I was sitting waiting for the light to strike a certain part of a hillside when along comes this prat that looked like he had just taken part in a Jessops supermarket sweep event.
Spotting that I was holding a camera he trudged towards me with a cheery grin and said, "Out snapping with the Sony then, ugly little bastards aren't they?" "What sort of pictures do they take?".
"The sort I tell them to take," I replied as cheerily as I could. :)
Quote from: chris@seary.com on April 10, 2010, 01:20:46 AM
Errr............. is there a technical explanation for this?
.
As far as I'm aware it's to reduce the heat build up from the sun. Off white is more reflective than black. Black absorbs heat like a sponge. If the lens heats up it can cause all sorts of problems.
Quote from: ABERS on April 10, 2010, 09:11:35 AM
"The sort I tell them to take," I replied as cheerily as I could. :)
Alan, your always excellent photographs demonstrate that taking pictures is more important to you than the way the camera looks. Your shots have given me a great deal of inspiration, especially on how to achieve a decent mono conversion. And the article in Digital Camera was great, but it really didn't do justice to your superb body of work.
However, do yourself a favour and get something better looking to shoot with. That Sony looks like a cross between a Zenith and a 1970s Philishave. You're losing lots of cool points ;)
Chris, I've looked into this problem many times, and as I said before somewhere, I've come to the conclusion I really need a couple of new lens caps. The one I've got is really old and uninteresting. I have to get at least one more however. I wonder if that chap from yesterday has retrieved the one I shoved where the sun don't shine! ::)
Quote from: admin on April 10, 2010, 09:34:50 AM
Quote from: chris@seary.com on April 10, 2010, 01:20:46 AM
Errr............. is there a technical explanation for this?
.
As far as I'm aware it's to reduce the heat build up from the sun. Off white is more reflective than black. Black absorbs heat like a sponge. If the lens heats up it can cause all sorts of problems.
The technical explanation is "marketing".
There is far more difference between a gloss object and a matt one of any colour. A shiny black object will reflect more light than an matt white one.
This is basic physics. Making your big lenses a different colour to everyone else's is all about show. This is basic marketing.
And I like Zenits, even when incorrectly spelled :)
PS Land Rover's body design department is actually at the local primary school, where they have two wooden bricks. A longer oblong one for the bit the wheels go on, and a smaller oblong brick they put on top, line up with the back of the bottom brick, and paint windows on. And of course, because it is designed by five year olds they end up about twice as big as they should be.
Chris, as Mick illuded, the colour of beige lenses is apparently to do with the heat which affects one of the lens elements due to its composition (Flourite I think). But I suspect that in 99% of situations it makes not a jot of difference and is mostly marketing!
Would I buy a Land Rover that looks like a Trabby? Yes probably - it fits 7 adults in comfort, unlike most 7 seaters which are more like 5 adults + 2 kids at best.
Howard, the design of anything is very subjective. LR's are not the only ones that are basically a squre box - its that way to maximise the space available. As for being twice as big as they need be, see above :)
My defender is actually more like a couple of boxes - at least the Disco has a raked windscreen to reduce the drag!
Cameras are like shoes. Any colour other than black is contrary to the laws of nature.
Graham.
Hey Mark, I know you like the Landies, but a SWB Transit Minibus is a) smaller (well not as wide at least) b) cheaper c) has NINE seats d) is based on only one oblong box so has purity of design function. And it has raked windscreen :)
Just playing devils advocate . . tee hee.
Quote from: Tringle WP on April 10, 2010, 03:28:00 PM
Just playing devils advocate . . tee hee.
And doing it very well. :tup: However, let's not forget the fact that "it's not WHAT you're driving but "what you're SEEN to be driving" - didn't I read the word COOL somewhere? :legit:
Quote from: Tringle WP on April 10, 2010, 03:28:00 PM
Hey Mark, I know you like the Landies, but a SWB Transit Minibus is a) smaller (well not as wide at least) b) cheaper c) has NINE seats d) is based on only one oblong box so has purity of design function. And it has raked windscreen :)
Just playing devils advocate . . tee hee.
I'm sure you are right - and I can play this game for ages :)
However, can the Minibus do this and drive home again?
(http://www.mark.colston-online.co.uk/Days%20Out/Land%20Rover%20Owners%20Show%202008/Off%20Road%20-%20Taken%20by%20www.picman.co.uk/slides/MUD27808.jpg)
And I know its not a Disco - but I've not got it yet and not been out playing - but this was me a couple of years ago!
Oh and my Defender has 12seats :dance:
Jeez Mark, your map reading must be really atrocious; or are the roads in the UK even worse than I remember? :legit:
I hope your 7 passengers have got sick bags ;D
Forseti - you might be right. I personally don't care, I've got a Skoda. ;)
Skoda's are just cheap Audi's! Most of the parts are from the same suppliers!
Sick bags? Nah, my disco comes with air suspension - so the rough stuff will be fine :) Anyway, when off roading, you go as slowly as possible and as fast as necessary!