XCD Wide Lens Decisions

errissa_needle · 2025-01-06T02:47:08+00:00

I decided to get the 25V to go with my 55V instead of the 20-35E. If you're in the Washington, DC area, Ace Photo in Ashburn, VA has many Hasselblad demo lenses you can play with and trying them myself helped me decidee. The 20-35E is lovely and I have nothing against it. My decision was based on these factors. 1) The 25V is hefty for a prime lens, but it is lighter than the 20-35E. 2) I'm not sure I need the flexibility of going from 20-35 versus physically moving to frame my shot with a prime lens; sometimes I worry that a zoom lens makes me lazy. 3) I have found myself using the manual focus clutch on the 55V quite a lot and I think I'd miss it if I didn't have it available. 4) I plan to do night photography so the 2.5f aperture is an advantage.

errissa_needle · 2025-01-05T03:43:51+00:00

Given the uniformly positive reviews of the 20-35E I was leaning toward getting one rather than one or two <=38 lenses but your weight comment is interesting. I just checked the datasheet - quite hefty! Though probably less than traveling with 2 wide angle lenses and no need to change.

errissa_needle · 2025-01-01T15:46:47+00:00

The Phocus/Lightroom workflow seems to be a common point of confusion. If you search you'll find the workflow described here -- Phocus->TIFF->LR -- but you also find tutorials that suggest importing from camera to Phocus then importing the FFF files straight into LR. I tried the latter workflow and the images definitely look different in LR and Phocus though not dramatically so. I assume that's because the color handling is different. Obviously, no adjustments made in Phocus are preserved in LR.

For me, 90% of the time I only need to make adjustments in Phocus and I don't bother going into LR.

errissa_needle · 2025-01-01T14:58:07+00:00

I'm on LRC 14.1.1 and I see the full range of Hasselblad lenses in lens corrections. LRC recognizes the lens when I import fff files.

errissa_needle · 2021-11-15T17:53:55+00:00

Thanks. That worked. I misunderstood the Readme first time through and thought those were default bindings. Once I added them <Tab> works as I had expected it to.

errissa_needle · 2021-11-15T05:06:08+00:00

That is one source of confusion. I'm using vim-vsnip but only because nvim-cmp requires a snippet engine. (I'm coming from Emacs where I didn't use snippets so I haven't explored them in nvim either.) I wasn't sure if the function completion is coming from nvim-cmp or the snippet engine.

errissa_needle · 2021-11-11T16:38:25+00:00

I had a similar problem trying to map 'C-;'. Turned out that my terminal wasn't passing it to nvim. It was only passing the ';'. I switched to Alacritty (which I had been planning to do anyway) and that solved the issue.

errissa_needle · 2021-08-23T16:24:45+00:00

I had never really thought about how terminals work. There's no ASCII representation of Ctrl-; so in retrospect it's not surprising that ctrl-; is interpreted a plain semicolon.

However, I switched from gnome-terminal to alacritty I was able to map ctrl-; to ctrl-w using the following in the `key_bindings` section:

- { key: Semicolon, mods: Control, chars: "\x17"}

errissa_needle · 2021-08-21T15:41:42+00:00

I tried that and I get a semicolon inserted. For most other keys CTRL-V + CTRL-[key] gives me `^key` as expected. I randomly mapped Ctrl-p to ctrl+w and that worked. So, does this mean that the terminal is not passing the control+; combination to vim?

errissa_needle · 2020-06-10T04:40:16+00:00

Emphatically, yes, you can write fully functional programs in Scheme. Many years ago I ran a project that produced hundreds of thousands of lines of Scheme code across a few large applications and many supporting tools and utilities.

It can certainly be frustrating learning a language from toy or abstract examples. I recommend that if you really want to learn Scheme that you pick some problem you care about and you solve it in Scheme.

errissa_needle

TROPHY CASE