prolific.org

It’s not April 1st, is it? Because this is funny enough to make me switch to Nikon.

Crunchgear reports Canon is releasing the Powershot E1, a camera for women. It comes in ‘vanilla white’, ‘aqua blue’ and ‘cotton pink’ (i.e. baby colours), and has fewer ‘unnecessary’ buttons… ’cause the little lady gets confused easily, yes?

The company created the E1 using ‘relaxation, positive feelings and friendliness as the main guidelines for the design of the camera’. It’s ’soft’ and ’rounded’. Like a tampon.

There’s a thought. Stick it up your own hole, Canon.

Red reader, originally uploaded by Caroline.

No, I didn’t need another lens. But I thought it was an ok deal, exchanging my 3rd-hand 50mm + 175 euro for a pristine Canon 28-105mm. It’s the Japanese version, which is supposed to be better than the ones made in Taiwan.

I think it’s a very nice travel lens, as opposed to my rather heavy Sigma EX 24-70. I have to say I like the range, and it’s small enough not to attract too much attention. This one’s coming to Antwerp with me, alongside the 50/1.4 for low light situations.

I took this shot almost immediately after walking out of the shop.

Oh why didn’t I get one of these yonks ago? These Canon photo printers don’t really cost all that much and the quality is just stunning. I splashed out on the ‘pro’ type photo paper and an extra set of ink cartridges that should last me a good while.

It’s fun to play with while I’m recuperating from week that was.

My 70’s 35mm rangefinder -  a Canon GIII QL17 - broke a few weeks after I bought it. The lightmeter’s kaput. I love this camera because it’s tiny and inobtrusive and has a fucking great lense attached to it. I’ve been wanting to get a new one and I’ve got a (low) bid on one going on at the moment. Six hours to go and no bids but mine as yet. Weird, as these cameras are hot property. I may get very lucky. Not.

There’s another camera from that era, that’s very similar: the Olympus 35 RD. They’re quite rare, but I’ve found one and am sorely tempted. It’s a ‘buy it now’ item.

I had a low bid going on a (digital) refurbished, unit only, Canon G5, but someone’s trying to steal it from under my nose and has driven up the price to a frankly ridiculous amount for a camera that comes without any of its paraphernalia. (It uses the same battery as the EOS 300d, so I don’t need a charger or software anyway.) I may end up overpaying for it now as I was drawn into this silly bidding war. Update: And yes, of course I won this one. I’m happy, but not as excited as I’d be over a vintage camera. This G5 will take over business formerly handled by my Ixus, the picture quality of which is just too disappointing compared to SLR. The G5 makes a good prosumer ‘back up’ camera.

Christmas bonus, eh?

There are too many lenses too chose from, enough to drive a camera enthusiast crazy. But I think I’ve got it narrowed down. I’m looking to buy a 20 or 24mm prime (i.e. a fixed focal length, not a zoom) in New York. It’ll be good to capture the city and should become my standard ‘walk around’ lens. Good zooms (Canon L-series, i.e. not the consumer type) are too expensive for my budget and consumer zooms are too soft for me as I’ve become used to the quality generated by my 50mm and 85mm Canon primes.

These are my options:

Canon 20mm/2.8 | Canon 24mm/2.8 | Sigma 20mm/1.8 | Sigma 24mm/1.8

If it’s all about saving $$, I should pick a Canon lens. The difference between prices here and in the USA is quite a bit more than $100. There’s not as big a difference for the Sigma brand. Around 30 to 80 dollars (though they do come with hoods and tube cases. Canon is stingy on them.). It seems from the many tests and opinions I’ve read that the Sigmas out-perform their Canon counterparts for these particular focal lenghts. I reckon I’ll end up with one of the Sigmas, whichever feels the best on the day. They’re prettier too. Always important.

If money was no option, I’d probably get the Canon 16-35/2.8 L.

Also gots me one of these rapid Sandisk cards.

My third time at Artis Zoo this month gave me a case of something that must be quite similar to penis envy.

The first two times I shuffled around the park, my Canon 300d and cheapo 80-200mm were easily the most advanced system there. People stepped aside and told their children not to get in the way of the lady taking photographs.

Yesterday, besides the army of digital point and shoots, there were at least four individuals carrying serious ‘glass’. I found myself stealing glances of their massive tools whenever they lined up next to me, ready to snap critters in the small mammals area.

I could live with the very large man who at least shared his 10D and impressive image stabilised length - (possibly a 28-300mm L series) with his equally large son.

But the two young girls who were both sporting 70-300mm’s on identical analog EOS cameras really made me and my system feel a little inadequate. Even the guy with the 28-200 Tamron had me question my photographic virility due to its range and, well, girth.

I cycled home chanting ‘It’s not the size, it’s what you do with it’ like a mantra. Then spent the rest of the day clicking through online shops, comparing and scribbling down prices.

Welcome to the newest member of the family, a Canon QL17, a.k.a. Canonet GIII. It’s a 1970’s rangefinder camera, with a 40mm/1.7 lens — sometimes called a ‘poor man’s Leica’.

It’s gorgeous. Although the case is pretty knackered, the camera itself is in pristine condition - no scratches at all. It was recently serviced and the seller threw in a new battery and a rubber ring to make it fit (the original mercury batteries are no longer made). It works completely manually too.

Canonet deserves to go on holidays with me, but although it is quite small, it’s heavy enough to kill a large man. Hmm. Maybe that’s an extra reason to bring it.

Dear Messrs Canon & Co,

this weekend I had the opportunity to try your EOS 300 D camera.

I have only one question for you: Can you make one that fits my - not freakishly - small hands? I am afraid this model it’s too big for me to take pictures with comfortably.

Sincerely,

St P.