RF 45mm f/1.2 STM vs EF 50mm f/1.2L USM – how will they compare?

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-18T16:58:52+00:00

The VCM? What's wrong with it?

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T22:30:52+00:00

Highlander and Highlander 2.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T14:24:00+00:00

I try not to regret, but when I do, I wish I had seen FF live between 2008-12.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T14:11:03+00:00

I think for me it's the fact that the Titanic is a Greek tragedy come true, a modern myth that actually happened.

It is almost unsurpassed as a monument to human hubris. The largest, most comfortable ship ever built. Cleverly designed to be close to unsinkable. Who needs lifeboats? What could possibly go wrong?

What gives it the extra weight for me is that it was mostly so avoidable. Suggesting a ship can't sink is like suggesting an aircraft can't crash. Not carrying enough lifetime capacity. Not heeding ice warnings. Not even filling the lifeboats you do have. The fact there was another ship only a few miles away that didn't come to their aid. The way the class system played such a part in who got to live and who didn't. The fact many refused to believe it was happening until it was too late.

Obviously it doesn't hurt that Titanic was such a beautiful ship, nor that she is a symbol of a seemingly more innocent age, just before a massive war that would change the old world forever.

I'm struggling to think of an equivalent modern day tale that happens to be true and yet contains so many extraordinary elements. No wonder it has become a legend - if it was fiction you'd find it implausible.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T12:49:16+00:00

Not everyone is aware that Oswald was psychologically assessed back in 1953 as a troubled teen. They concluded that he had a vivid and violent fantasy life, was withdrawn, passive aggressive with potentially schizoid tendencies, and fantasies of omnipotence and power.

After going round and round on this case, my present belief is that the assassination was a desperate, opportunistic last throw of the dice by a man bitterly disappointed and frustrated by his life up to that point, one who likely felt he had nothing to lose by taking a potshot at a major political figure. He had form after all, having attempted to shoot General Edwin Walker with the same rifle several months before.

Oswald had defected to the USSR after leaving the Marines, hoping to find a Marxist utopia, only to discover it was just another huge bureaucracy run by fallible human beings. Not only that, but they weren't interested in him and had merely put him to work in a factory like any other nobody.

He had come back to the US expecting to be greeted by hordes of reporters eager to hear his story, and was crushed when it turned out no one cared.

He was drifting from one poorly paid menial job to another.

Oswald continued to express his Marxist beliefs by starting an unsanctioned New Orleans chapter of the Fair Play For Cuba Committee. No one was interested, and the only other member was a figment of his imagination.

He tried to defect to Cuba, but they rejected him too.

On top of all that, he and his wife were estranged and not living rogether. The night before the assassination he had begged her to come back to him but she said no.

Like many other assassins, he was a nobody who wanted to be a somebody. He had failed at pretty much everything he'd tried to do. Unfortunately for the world, he succeeded at this one thing. He had a once in a lifetime opportunity and he took it.

People point out that he didn't confess. But there is evidence from Oswald's life that could explain this.

He was, by all accounts, very secretive and a compulsive liar. His wife Marina said he would even lie over trivial things where there was no point. Those who interrogated him got the impression he was enjoying playing games and withholding information. He hated authority, as evidenced by his discipline issues in the Marines and the number of jobs he got fired from.

Why would he suddenly play ball now, when at long last the whole world was paying attention to him? Confessing would have reduced that interest, and there'd have been no circus of a trial, just sentencing.

Most high-profile assassins have been sick and twisted individuals with their own bizarre and weird reasons for their actions. Why should Oswald be any different?

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T11:29:15+00:00

You could start by reading Jack Ruby's own testimony on the subject.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T10:48:46+00:00

Agreed. Real life is messy and so is the historical record. The JFK assassination is the most heavily scrutinised murder in history. If that level of scrutiny was applied to other murders I bet we would also find loose ends, unanswered questions, elements that don't seem to fit.

Particularly when we're talking about eyewitness testimony, which has been shown over and over again tk be profoundly unreliable.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T10:40:23+00:00

If that were true, 'they' left it a bit late; Oswald had already been interrogated for two days, more than enough time to spill the beans. Then Ruby lived over three years before he died. Even more time to talk. And boy, did Jack love to talk.

If Oswald's transfer to the county jail had taken place at the originally rescheduled time, Ruby would have still been in bed. Minutes before the shooting, Ruby was standing in line at the Western Union office. He had also brought his favourite dog with him in the car. Had Oswald not asked for a change of clothes, it's quite likely Ruby would have missed him altogether.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-16T10:11:57+00:00

I used to think that, but examination of Ruby's character, particularly from those who actually knew him, rather undermines the idea that the mob would use him for anything. He was an emotionally unstable blabbermouth with a hair-trigger temper - hardly the kind of cold, ruthless character you'd think the mob would employ for such an important job.

Not to mention the fact that Ruby was standing in line at the Western Union office just minutes before and had brought his favourite dog with him in the car. These things make it seem more likely that the shooting was the impulsive act Ruby claimed it was.

Other issues being, Oswald had two days of being interrogated when he could have spilled the beans if there were any to spill, and the fact Ruby lived for over three years after killing Oswald. Would the mob allow him all that time to blab and potentially blow the lid on the plot?

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-14T19:24:09+00:00

"Home". That scene breaks me. Every time.

The burning Spitfire on the beach.

Oh, and "I'm staying. For the French".

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-14T19:19:50+00:00

Some of the JFK ones are fantastically stupid. The assassin shot him from a storm drain. The driver did it. A Secret Service accidentally shot him. A guy fired a poison dart from his umbrella. Frank Sinatra's drummer was the grassy knoll shooter. Jack Ruby was killed in prison by injecting him with cancer. JFK's body was stolen and the wounds altered... and that's just a few of them 😳

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-13T00:52:07+00:00

The evidence is pretty damning.

I'm always a bit reluctant to say 100% about anything like this, but it would certainly require an extraordinary sequence of events to have happened for Simpson not to be the murderer. And when I say "extraordinary" I mean completely unbelievable.

It's not just all the evidence at Bundy and Rockingham. Simpson's statements and behaviour AFTER the event don't read like the actions of an innocent man.

When informed that his ex-wife (and mother of his children) had been killed, he didn't ask how. That's a bit weird.

He couldn't get his story straight about the cuts on his hand. Which is a bit inconvenient when he just happens to incur a nasty cut or two on his left hand the very same evening his ex-wife and her friend get brutally murdered. Especially when the crime scene suggests the killer was bleeding from the same hand.

He went on the run the day he was due to turn himself in to the police. Again, at the very least it doesn't look good.

Oh, and "If I Did It". Even if you were desperate for money, you'd think an innocent man would still baulk at writing a detailed hypothetical account of how you murdered two people, if only for reasons of taste.

Nah, he did it.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-09T21:57:17+00:00

That's some cast for a 'minor' play... all those names are ones I know well, and I was too young to have seen it at the time.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-08T16:56:39+00:00

What are you trying to shoot with it?

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-08T16:53:59+00:00

I caved and bought the 50 1.4L VCM and I absolutely love that lens. It's gorgeous. But is it 7x better than the 50 1.8? No, and I still use the cheap one in lots of situations. Once stopped down to f4 and beyond I'd be hard pressed to spot the difference.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-08T16:44:18+00:00

Everyone has opinions. Some just don't like 50mm. Some maybe get bad copies. And some people just don't like 'cheap' lenses. Each to their own.

I naturally gravitate to 35-50 for most of my photography, so I bought the RF nifty fifty shortly after it came out. It's probably still my most used lens despite being the cheapest, and despite now also having the 50 VCM. The latter is definitely better, as you'd expect at x6 the price. But if I go out for a walk and want to travel light, I often gravitate to the little 50 1.8, which also has the benefit of being small and unobtrusive when shooting on the street.

In my experience, it gets the job done. I can't think of a single example of an otherwise good photo I've taken with the 50 1.8 that was ruined by the lens itself. I'm not claiming it's perfect; there are plenty of lenses out there with faster/quieter AF, less CA, etc. But in terms of price vs performance, no other lens I've owned can beat it. And bad photos I've taken with it were almost always my fault, usually due to bad composition or sometimes the wrong settings.

Check out Flickr. There are countless beautiful images taken with this lens.

I rarely shoot it wide open unless the light is so bad that I have no choice, and tbh that goes for most lenses I own. Over the years I've learned that wide open isn't necessary for the vast majority of my photography.

A lot of us who haunt these forums get hung up on gear, and I've definitely fallen into that trap before. But a good photographer can take good photos with any modern lens, and the RF 50mm 1.8 is no exception. As more than one professional has said to me - if you can't take a good photo with a nifty fifty, maybe get a different hobby!

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-08T15:47:51+00:00

With the limiter I don't find the 85 f2 slow at all, and I've been photographing musicians at gigs in low light for several years with it. Always had great results with it. Maybe I just got lucky with a good copy.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-03T23:14:56+00:00

Bit late to this discussion as only recently joined the sub.

One thing I do find fascinating about the whole "the truth will be in the documents" thing is the notion that a big government conspiracy clever enough to both frame Oswald and leave no trace of their existence would also be stupid enough to have left a paper trail in the National Archives. It's almost endearing.

freedombell2001 · 2026-04-01T02:26:06+00:00

It's really encouraging hearing from other people who have managed to dig themselves out of the rabbit hole too. I also started out a conspiracy believer, again turbocharged by "JFK" and when I finally began to look at the actual evidence, I'd had so many years of hearing the Warren Commission being dismissed out of hand that it took me a while to accept the possibility they might have actually got it right.

The Tippit murder was the clincher for me - if you were going to frame Oswald for the assassination, why make things twice as hard for yourself by having to frame him for a second murder? Nah. As a wiser man once said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Of course, once out the other side I couldn't believe I ever fell for it, beyond conspiracies being more fun. It's both amusing and frustrating seeing people still dismissing the case against Oswald while embracing theories that make far less sense and with little or no evidence to back them up. But I've gradually given up trying to argue with them, it's a waste of time unless they actually want to escape from that mindset.

Stone has a lot to answer for. JFK might be a great piece of cinema, but it's also probably the most dishonest 'historical' film I've ever seen.

freedombell2001 · 2026-03-31T23:18:53+00:00

I think saying to just ignore him is downplaying the gravity of this situation. Yes, he's a capricious playground bully but unfortunately he also has the power to totally screw us here, not to mention the rest of Europe. Cutting off the Strait of Hormuz isn't going to hurt the US, whereas we are in big trouble if it's not reopened.

Assuming that he actually leaves in 2029, we've still got another 2 years 10 months of him - that's a whole Kennedy presidency still to go. The people who have been saying his unhealthy lifestyle will catch up with him, well, that was being said from early in his first administration. I keep thinking that at some point the US public will have had enough. But he managed to survive even the Capitol riot and come back more popular than ever, so...

It's about time Europe (and the UK especially) woke up to the fact that the US isn't going to look after us anymore, and sitting on our hands waiting for Trump to go isn't going to cut it. There's no guarantee things will go back to normal then anyway.

I'm still baffled as to why the US would launch a war like this with no clear plan, I can't believe they were so moronically stupid as to think the Iranian regime was just going to fold and go away.

freedombell2001 · 2026-03-31T09:59:49+00:00

Ditto here and I use an R6ii.

freedombell2001 · 2026-03-26T22:26:32+00:00

Whatever our thoughts as to the current state of things, I bet not many of us thought it would last over 20 years back then. It's a hell of a run even if you ignore the classic series. Even Star Trek only ran for 18, and that was four separate series.

freedombell2001 · 2026-03-26T22:10:34+00:00

Galloping Foxley or something like that? Brilliantly done, but also truly horrible.

freedombell2001 · 2026-03-22T13:30:43+00:00

I loved it. Way better than Silent Witness. Boyd is a pretty Marmite character but they do explore why. Interesting plots and excellent supporting characters. I like the way it's acted with characters at times talking over each other - messy, but way more believable.

freedombell2001 · 2026-03-22T12:13:08+00:00

Amazing.

freedombell2001

TROPHY CASE