Just Say “NO” To the Fancy Bag

Little bit of humor here.  Ok.  Maybe not.  I’ve said it before both here, and elsewhere these man bags such as the Billinghams, and the other fancy bags do have a place in the workplace, but not in the field.  Quite frankly I never seen any of these hipsters who carry these fancy uncreased bags around cosmopolitan town even going out into the field in their tight-ass pants, and loafers.  Oh. Sorry, ranting again.  Give me a break guys.  Buying a camera bag, a lousy camera bag for $300 dollars and up, to put it down in dirt and mud, and snow, or wet sand and saltwater?  No.  Not for me.  And I doubt any of these fancy bag toters do either.  Many just want to look cool as they slowly extricate their fancy cameras out of the well-oiled bags to take that selfie, or the foodie shot, then Oh so cool, slide the camera in for another week of storage.  Give me a break.

Now, here in the photo is a true working bag.  This bag cost me $29.95.  It’s canvas.  Cloth.  Period.  Inside is a 3 velcro pocket Jill-E insert for $10.00.  See all that gear?  That’s what I packed yesterday for a short day hike into a bamboo forest. It has SIX (6) pockets just on the OUTSIDE!

I’ve included some images here so you can see what can be accomplished with minimal gear.  Oh, BTW, all of these images, and many more are already for sale on Shutterstock as of 5:00am Sunday morning. Yeah. I’m fast and the X-T1 files, couples with the amazing lenses don’t require a lot of post.

So, if you want to look like a coffee-shop dwelling Brooklyn broke hipster who shoots food, and selfies, go ahead and get yourself a Billingham, or “billingmuch” as I call them, if you want to make yourself useful get yourself a real bag.  Try the think tank series.  Either that, or get the hell out of my way as I make my images.

Thank you.  Rant over.  I’ve now taken cover and am ready for the rebuttals as to how great these expensive bags are other than for image enhancement, like botox…


Do you See a Problem here?

Well?  Do you?  I was reading some guys blog this morning and he has bashed the Fuji 18-55 before; and he was at it again.  I don’t get it.  I use the 18-55 all the time.  It’s almost a go-to lens.  I shoot stock, I shoot for pay, I shoot for me.  I use the 18-55.  I’ve made and SOLD 30″ x 20″ matted and framed images made with the 18-55.  So I have to wonder if he is just passive-aggressive, or he just has a Fuji problem.

The image here I took this morning as I was walking in a parking lot.  Nothing spectacular but the texture and colors caught my eye.  I used the 18-55.  I am betting I can sell that in stock. No problems.  This image was imported from the camera to my iPhone as a 3MB file.  It has had NOTHING done to it.  Nada.  Zip.  As far as I’m concerned it’s pretty darn good and sharp.  Imagine if I worked on the Raw file???

On a related note I do own the 23 1.4, and the 35 1.4 plus the Zeiss 12 2.8.  Are they sharper than the 18-55?  Yeah. Probably.  I would expect to be sharper or I would have returned them!  But as a stand-alone lens, the 18-55 is just amazing.  To call it a “kit lens” is a disservice to Fuji.  This is just my 2 cents worth but I’ve been using the 18-55 since I bought it bundled with the X-E1 back in February 2013.  No complaints here; as a matter of fact, in a couple of weeks I’m headed out on a stock shooting trip and the 18-55 will be mounted on the X-E1 and sitting on the seat next to me.

Fuji X-T1, 18-55 @55mm (the supposed bad area of the lens) F8, 1/320th second grab shot in a parking lot.
Fuji X-T1, 18-55 @55mm (the supposed bad area of the lens) F8, 1/320th second grab shot in a parking lot.

This is the full 3MB file.  (Click for a larger view)

More of my work can be seen at Drama King Images and at my Flickr Feed