Trenton Talbot

…and can be used as a source of cordage in case of SHTF!

Mike, by "fortunately" I meant that for me there's no dilemma, no choice to make: the answer is definitely "no". Now, regarding my experience with quick release buckles on camera straps… #1 (splashdown) happened in a very hot weather. The buckle just disengaged on its own – no physical damage or deformation. #2 (another splashdown) happened in moderately warm late spring after great many outings in extremely cold winter weather. Perhaps the plastic buckle didn't like that so it just broke at the loop side (where it attaches to the strap, not the actual clasp). That wasn't a mechanical damage, the material just broke at once. #3 probably was an operator error (I just observed this event, that wasn't me or my camera): the guy tried too hard to open and close the buckle quietly (and he did it often); perhaps that last time he didn't "click it in" with enough authority. By the way – oddly enough, but I had my own moment of "70-200/2.8 falls to the sound operator's console from a balcony due to quick release malfunction", but that was a Manfrotto quick release on a tripod. And in my case it wasn't a RUD (Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly), as the damage was surprisingly minimal. To sum it up: in "quick release" the key word is "release". It's not "quick secure". If you don't expect to get entangled in your camera strap in a life threatening situation, don't use a quick release. Same with the tripod heads: if you seldom have to transition from a glacial pace of tripod shooting to "running and gunning", you don't really need a quick release system.

I will absolutely not trust my camera kit to any buckle system except (maybe) Cobra. Fortunately, all camera-specific quick release systems nowadays are designed with a very high probability of a disastrous event, so for me personally it's a no-brainer: I don't use quick release buckles on camera straps. …But if you absolutely can't stand the non-detachable strap, that's the minimal "quick release" configuration that I recommend. PS: My opinion comes from experience. Namely, 2 camera/lens combos that fell into water on 2 separate occasions (both DOA), as well as a camera (with 70-200/2.8 attached) that fell from the concert hall's balcony right to the sound operator's console. All thanks to quick release malfunctions.

Thanks to this thread, now we know that most of the X-T1 users have at least one eye and some hair

Speaking of replacement straps… If you're more into practicality than fashion, that strap is perfect in just about every way.

As a light vacation reading I suggest Galen Rowell's books (for example, this one or that one)… but these are not ebooks. However, you can have a free taste of Galen's articles here. Just save them to Instapaper or "print" as PDF and save to your device.

Interesting. When I tried my Singh-Ray Vari-N-Duo on Fuji cameras, there was a dreaded X artifact (an X shaped shadow across the frame). I'm not kidding. So my lovely Singh-Ray is up for sale now. The farther away you get the first filter from the front element of a wideangle lens, the more you run the risk of "seeing" a reflection of the white lettering around that front element. If you're after long exposure landscapes, I'd recommend to stick with the fitted regular filters. No compendiums and no step-up rings. One exception from this rule seems to be a 14mm prime: its front element is so small in comparison to the overall diameter that you'll run into reflections only around 3rd or 4th notch of your compendium. Oh, and you can stack a whole bunch of regular (MC, hopefully!) filters on it before you run into any trouble.

Walking in the park with my X100S… spotted this lil fella.

That would call for an integrated dovetail baseplate, too.

Bartender, I'll have what he's having!

The trolling force is weak with this one…

1 million meters? An adapter sized like a good dwarf planet is certainly bigger than some of the 50's!

Just get one adapter for each lens. Most of the M42/Fuji adapters are in a $10-15 price range

…just to complain later on that their husband is a narcissistic moron, and what were they thinking, yadda-yadda.

No. If you were after the "look" of one particular vintage lens, you wouldn't be asking, so the very fact that you did tells us something. If I'm not mistaken, all you want is a cheap and fast 50-ish lens for the sake of background isolation. And for that I suggest… Canon EF 50/1.8, AKA "Plastic fantastic". That lens costs from $50 to $90 used; add a semi-decent adapter ($10-20), and you've got yourself an excellent "background isolator" for less than $100 Creamy bokeh? Check. Sharp? Check. Cheap? Check.

Easy peasy, here's my prediction: both Wide and Zone AF will disable flash… Oh, and you won't be able to use an Eye Detection in any drive/AF mode except for a single shot + single AF.

If you have an unlimited supply of APD lenses for your rolling deal – sure, why not? I'd trade my non-APD for your APD, sell it, buy a non-APD, and repeat the transaction until I have both lenses on hand – "for almost next to nothing"!

Because Internet. If cadavers are allowed, that kind of "still life" and "social documentary" will quickly turn the thread into depressing place where no one else wants to post.

Just ask them beforehand for the permission to clamp a few of your own lights (strobes to be exact) to their ramp; most bands are very open to the idea of better photographs. Then use a rear sync… Oh wait, it doesn't work with Fuji

And what exactly you expect to find there? For most men, a $2,000 pair of shoes looks no different than a $100 pair. And both feel overpriced.

It's called "91º field of view"

This is not a composite

After looking at these daisies, now I absolutely have to cook some squid rings…

Just a thought: let's keep it to living and healthy birds.

Possible. In post I've noticed some strange artifacts that looked like typical oversharpening halos. Got me puzzled for a few minutes until I realized that it's a snow and frost…