Mr.Meerkat

Unfortunately GDRRiley already convinced me so GM it is (definitely didn't have a bias towards the GM in the beginning either) 🙃. Managed to successfully low-ball, I mean negotiate down one and at the price I purchased it for, it was pretty near touching distance from retail 17-28 pricing (note: price listed in OP is grey market, add £200 for retail) so I'm pretty happy to throw pricing out of the equation in this case, especially if the 35mm side is satisfactory where it just outright replaces my 35mm f1.8 (I stop it down 85% of the time anyway). 
 
I guess the biggest driving factor for me, from wanting to sway away from the 17-28 is how for me specifically, the focal range is just too limited where I'll personally struggle to use it in a single lens setup. This means it's now competing against the cheap f2.8 primes that cost a third to half as much, such as either the Sammy 18 or Tammy 20, which are also smaller and even lighter. 
 
The 16-35 on the other hand actually does cover my most used FL range of 30 to 40mm where for me, although lens vs lens, its heavier+bulkier, this is basically a moot point as I can actually go single lens with the GM. 
 
I guess "really really need that 35mm on the wide end" applies here 🙃
And yes, I've definitely haven't put some additional thoughts into this. 

Finally, after ordering in February. Worth the wait though.
Could finally install the new desk pad along with it...
 
Getting other keycaps with my layout tomorrow, hopefully they'll fit well... switches are nice clicky blues.
 

 

 

 

 

 

IMG_0118.mp4  

yeah thats often a tactic. I try my best not to sell on ebay, I use gear specific sites because they take a lot smaller cut.

I tend to send out lowballs on older gear or gear that I see is way above market rate
missing accessories is often a way to get a good price but thats mostly for bodies. not so much for glass

Hey all, I'm currently looking at some UWA lenses and am bashing my head against the wall a little in deciding what I want to do. It will be paired with my A7R2 and the planned usage is a little landscape and currently, have a trip planned up north, which will involve the northern lights. I have however short-listed 4 lenses, all at completely different price points. 
 
1. Sammy 18mm f2.8, £260 
- Cheapest option
- Super light (145g) 
- Has variation issues (made worse by how I have confirmation bias from the two Sammy lenses I've previously owned both were incredibly soft and didn't focus correctly)
 
2. Tamron 17-28mm f2.8, £580
- Is affordable
- Performs well
- Limited range for a zoom
 
3. Sony 16-35mm f4, £620 
- Very useful zoom range
- Performs quite well, unless you're looking at the 35mm-side (not so sharp)
- F4 could be a little tricky to compensate for the northern lights (we'll see I guess?)
 
4. Sony 16-35mm f2.8, £1300 
- Again, very useful zoom range
- Great performance as a whole albeit soft on the 35mm-side 
- A bit expensive but am thinking of selling my 35mm f1.8 to compensate for the cost
 
Of course, there's also the 14mm and 20mm f1.8, which are both utterly beautiful but f1.8 will probably be overkill for me so rather drop down to the f2.8s for either a lower price or some zoom action. 
 
Now, someone persuade me one way or the other! 

I do have a 24-105 so the 17-28mm could work pretty nicely but then again, I've been tempted by the 16-35 2.8 for such a long time now, I think you have just convinced me to get the 16-35 2.8. Only caveat is the cost, which as photography is just a hobby for me, it's a little too steep at the moment so the 18 2.8 could be a good stop-gap, giving me something wider than 24mm@F4.
 
Nonetheless, I guess in the near future, I'll be adding a third lens to my collection that I would have spent more than the body itself...

The trip is going to be 2 weeks long. As for renting, I'll be looking at approx £250~ if I were to rent a 16-35 2.8 for the whole trip, which at least based on the way of how my brain works, I'd rather try to get a good copy of the Sammy 18 2.8 for virtually the same price. As for just trying it for a day or two, I usually would say yes but it doesn't negate the desire of wanting an UWA for the trip nor does it negate the monetary issue (which is less can't afford and more not wanting to dip into savings right now as I've already done so for a sigma 100-400 😅). 
 
That I do know, at the rate I'm buying (and selling) lenses, I will have been able to buy an A1 😂

no point int renting for 2-3 days. 250 for 2 weeks sounds about right
keep dipping into that savings for glass
 
lol

to me its ether 17-28 2.8 from tamron for its low cost but decent performance and I'd assume by the time you reach 28mm you got a lens like 24-105 or 24-70 to take over
or the 16-35 2.8 that extra mm on the wide end you'll notice and its a great lens
 
could also just rent the 14mm 1.8

?? a RX480 is better than a RX470 which in turn is better than a 1050ti...I don't see any issues with his statement  

Let me begin with how some Amazon reviews do seem to contradict what I'm saying so it could be that I got a bad sample of the K&F tripod however, unfortunately, my review/opinion will not change and will be based on the sample I received.
 
Summary:
I've been looking at some affordable super-lightweight carbon fiber tripods, which I've narrowed down to the Suiri 5C and K&F concept BA225. Purchased both off amazon, had a play around with both tripods and given there's a distinctive lack of information regarding affordable travel tripods, I decided to make a relatively brief write-up of these two tripods. The result is one is being returned tomorrow whilst the other genuinely feels much higher quality than the price implies. 
 
Brief description of each tripod:
First the K&F BA225. 
It's a very feature rich tripod. You can unscrew one of the legs and convert it into a monopod. It has a 2-section centre column, which both are adjustable. 5-section legs and the included head isn't the smoothest but it's adequate, the carrying bag included is really nice. It is 1000grammes (tripod+ball head), based on my scale anyway. It's slightly smaller than a 2L bottle but a bit bigger than a 1.5L bottle. 
 
Secondly, we have the Suiri 5C. 
It's a pretty "basic" carbon fiber tripod. 2-section centre column with the outer tube fixed and the inner tube adjustable. 5-section legs and the included head is buttery smooth but it only has one knob for tightening both pan and ball, which makes it rather unusable. The carry bag included is clearly for a larger tripod and is frankly a bit nasty (cheapo drawstring bag). It is 850grammes (tripod+ball head), based on my scale. More or less same size as the K&F concept. 
 
Initial impressions:
Suiri 5c, the build is utterly amazing. Yes, the included head isn't great (only because it's not very usable, nothing wrong with quality) and the carrying "case" is really not good but, it's pretty clear all the money was spent on the actual tripod. Buttery smooth joints with zero flex. The twist locks are metal and are utterly amazing in how they feel, nicely rubberised, not scratchy, super smooth, solid as a rock once tightened. Oh, also when you do a half-turn on the twist locks, the legs will drop out with gravity. It's not the most stable tripod but given it's literally only 850grammes, that's expected given how light it is. 
 
K&F BA225, it's such a feature-full tripod. You can convert it into a monopod, you can flip it upside down, it is wayyyyy more adjustable than the Suiri, is still pretty light and the included carrying case is amazing in quality (plus is specifically made for this tripod) but, there's one major issue, the build quality is not good. The joints are not smooth, they have a tendency to stick and let's not even begin on the twist locks. They're extremely scratchy, don't seem to be particularly solid (you can push it in a little even with it super tight) and the leg sections all seem to flex at the twist locks. I'm not confident it would last all that long. Oh, also, you cannot get the legs to drop with gravity no matter what you do. 
 
Comparison:
Features: Well this is a easy point for the K&F. Wayyy more adjustable and can be converted into a monopod. 
Stability: This is a pretty important factor for a tripod and yes, the K&F is more stable. However, given both have hooks, it can be partially negated by simply hooking a bag or anchoring something to the hook on the bottom. Nonetheless, point to the K&F. 
Weight and size: Given these are travel tripods, weight and size is very important. I am going to call it a draw as although the Suiri is a bit lighter, the K&F does have noticeably more features so it balances each other out. They're pretty much the same size. 
Build quality: As you can see from the initial impressions, it's pretty clear which one gets the points. However, as the difference is so drastic, I'm going to award the Suiri 2 points as it deserves it. 
Price: Well, the "MSRP" for each tripod is £80 for the Suiri and £110 for the K&F however, I only paid £65 for the Suiri and £100 for the K&F but nonetheless, even factoring a smallrig head (£20) to the cost of the Suiri, it's still cheaper, point to the Suiri. 
Overall: K&F has two points, Suiri edges out with three points
 
Verdict:
Well this was easy. I was expecting myself to agonise over which tripod I would like to keep but when the difference in quality is more than night and day, I don't need to. The Suiri is lighter, much-much-much better built and even with a smallrig head, it is still cheaper so at least to me, it's a no-brainer. I will be keeping the Suiri and returning the K&F. 
 
 

Let me begin with how some Amazon reviews do seem to contradict what I'm saying so it could be that I got a bad sample of the K&F tripod however, unfortunately, my review/opinion will not change and will be based on the sample I received.
 
Summary:
I've been looking at some affordable super-lightweight carbon fiber tripods, which I've narrowed down to the Suiri 5C and K&F concept BA225. Purchased both off amazon, had a play around with both tripods and given there's a distinctive lack of information regarding affordable travel tripods, I decided to make a relatively brief write-up of these two tripods. The result is one is being returned tomorrow whilst the other genuinely feels much higher quality than the price implies. 
 
Brief description of each tripod:
First the K&F BA225. 
It's a very feature rich tripod. You can unscrew one of the legs and convert it into a monopod. It has a 2-section centre column, which both are adjustable. 5-section legs and the included head isn't the smoothest but it's adequate, the carrying bag included is really nice. It is 1000grammes (tripod+ball head), based on my scale anyway. It's slightly smaller than a 2L bottle but a bit bigger than a 1.5L bottle. 
 
Secondly, we have the Suiri 5C. 
It's a pretty "basic" carbon fiber tripod. 2-section centre column with the outer tube fixed and the inner tube adjustable. 5-section legs and the included head is buttery smooth but it only has one knob for tightening both pan and ball, which makes it rather unusable. The carry bag included is clearly for a larger tripod and is frankly a bit nasty (cheapo drawstring bag). It is 850grammes (tripod+ball head), based on my scale. More or less same size as the K&F concept. 
 
Initial impressions:
Suiri 5c, the build is utterly amazing. Yes, the included head isn't great (only because it's not very usable, nothing wrong with quality) and the carrying "case" is really not good but, it's pretty clear all the money was spent on the actual tripod. Buttery smooth joints with zero flex. The twist locks are metal and are utterly amazing in how they feel, nicely rubberised, not scratchy, super smooth, solid as a rock once tightened. Oh, also when you do a half-turn on the twist locks, the legs will drop out with gravity. It's not the most stable tripod but given it's literally only 850grammes, that's expected given how light it is. 
 
K&F BA225, it's such a feature-full tripod. You can convert it into a monopod, you can flip it upside down, it is wayyyyy more adjustable than the Suiri, is still pretty light and the included carrying case is amazing in quality (plus is specifically made for this tripod) but, there's one major issue, the build quality is not good. The joints are not smooth, they have a tendency to stick and let's not even begin on the twist locks. They're extremely scratchy, don't seem to be particularly solid (you can push it in a little even with it super tight) and the leg sections all seem to flex at the twist locks. I'm not confident it would last all that long. Oh, also, you cannot get the legs to drop with gravity no matter what you do. 
 
Comparison:
Features: Well this is a easy point for the K&F. Wayyy more adjustable and can be converted into a monopod. 
Stability: This is a pretty important factor for a tripod and yes, the K&F is more stable. However, given both have hooks, it can be partially negated by simply hooking a bag or anchoring something to the hook on the bottom. Nonetheless, point to the K&F. 
Weight and size: Given these are travel tripods, weight and size is very important. I am going to call it a draw as although the Suiri is a bit lighter, the K&F does have noticeably more features so it balances each other out. They're pretty much the same size. 
Build quality: As you can see from the initial impressions, it's pretty clear which one gets the points. However, as the difference is so drastic, I'm going to award the Suiri 2 points as it deserves it. 
Price: Well, the "MSRP" for each tripod is £80 for the Suiri and £110 for the K&F however, I only paid £65 for the Suiri and £100 for the K&F but nonetheless, even factoring a smallrig head (£20) to the cost of the Suiri, it's still cheaper, point to the Suiri. 
Overall: K&F has two points, Suiri edges out with three points
 
Verdict:
Well this was easy. I was expecting myself to agonise over which tripod I would like to keep but when the difference in quality is more than night and day, I don't need to. The Suiri is lighter, much-much-much better built and even with a smallrig head, it is still cheaper so at least to me, it's a no-brainer. I will be keeping the Suiri and returning the K&F. 
 
 

Let me begin with how some Amazon reviews do seem to contradict what I'm saying so it could be that I got a bad sample of the K&F tripod however, unfortunately, my review/opinion will not change and will be based on the sample I received.
 
Summary:
I've been looking at some affordable super-lightweight carbon fiber tripods, which I've narrowed down to the Suiri 5C and K&F concept BA225. Purchased both off amazon, had a play around with both tripods and given there's a distinctive lack of information regarding affordable travel tripods, I decided to make a relatively brief write-up of these two tripods. The result is one is being returned tomorrow whilst the other genuinely feels much higher quality than the price implies. 
 
Brief description of each tripod:
First the K&F BA225. 
It's a very feature rich tripod. You can unscrew one of the legs and convert it into a monopod. It has a 2-section centre column, which both are adjustable. 5-section legs and the included head isn't the smoothest but it's adequate, the carrying bag included is really nice. It is 1000grammes (tripod+ball head), based on my scale anyway. It's slightly smaller than a 2L bottle but a bit bigger than a 1.5L bottle. 
 
Secondly, we have the Suiri 5C. 
It's a pretty "basic" carbon fiber tripod. 2-section centre column with the outer tube fixed and the inner tube adjustable. 5-section legs and the included head is buttery smooth but it only has one knob for tightening both pan and ball, which makes it rather unusable. The carry bag included is clearly for a larger tripod and is frankly a bit nasty (cheapo drawstring bag). It is 850grammes (tripod+ball head), based on my scale. More or less same size as the K&F concept. 
 
Initial impressions:
Suiri 5c, the build is utterly amazing. Yes, the included head isn't great (only because it's not very usable, nothing wrong with quality) and the carrying "case" is really not good but, it's pretty clear all the money was spent on the actual tripod. Buttery smooth joints with zero flex. The twist locks are metal and are utterly amazing in how they feel, nicely rubberised, not scratchy, super smooth, solid as a rock once tightened. Oh, also when you do a half-turn on the twist locks, the legs will drop out with gravity. It's not the most stable tripod but given it's literally only 850grammes, that's expected given how light it is. 
 
K&F BA225, it's such a feature-full tripod. You can convert it into a monopod, you can flip it upside down, it is wayyyyy more adjustable than the Suiri, is still pretty light and the included carrying case is amazing in quality (plus is specifically made for this tripod) but, there's one major issue, the build quality is not good. The joints are not smooth, they have a tendency to stick and let's not even begin on the twist locks. They're extremely scratchy, don't seem to be particularly solid (you can push it in a little even with it super tight) and the leg sections all seem to flex at the twist locks. I'm not confident it would last all that long. Oh, also, you cannot get the legs to drop with gravity no matter what you do. 
 
Comparison:
Features: Well this is a easy point for the K&F. Wayyy more adjustable and can be converted into a monopod. 
Stability: This is a pretty important factor for a tripod and yes, the K&F is more stable. However, given both have hooks, it can be partially negated by simply hooking a bag or anchoring something to the hook on the bottom. Nonetheless, point to the K&F. 
Weight and size: Given these are travel tripods, weight and size is very important. I am going to call it a draw as although the Suiri is a bit lighter, the K&F does have noticeably more features so it balances each other out. They're pretty much the same size. 
Build quality: As you can see from the initial impressions, it's pretty clear which one gets the points. However, as the difference is so drastic, I'm going to award the Suiri 2 points as it deserves it. 
Price: Well, the "MSRP" for each tripod is £80 for the Suiri and £110 for the K&F however, I only paid £65 for the Suiri and £100 for the K&F but nonetheless, even factoring a smallrig head (£20) to the cost of the Suiri, it's still cheaper, point to the Suiri. 
Overall: K&F has two points, Suiri edges out with three points
 
Verdict:
Well this was easy. I was expecting myself to agonise over which tripod I would like to keep but when the difference in quality is more than night and day, I don't need to. The Suiri is lighter, much-much-much better built and even with a smallrig head, it is still cheaper so at least to me, it's a no-brainer. I will be keeping the Suiri and returning the K&F. 
 
 

Yep, Dexxter was always the very first person to answer 90% of "troubleshooting" or "build help" threads. He kinda replaced the 2016 squad who were the usual suspects in giving inputs to those kinda threads. 
 
Nah, in 2017, I had already stopped being all that active and quite a lot of the more active 2015/2016/2017 members had either moved on or stopped being so active. 
 
I myself will probably continue writing pointless status updates and lurk around.

Meh, they both kinda died off the day they became mods. To be fair, most become less active publicly once they become mods. 
 
You were indeed! Alongside the likes of Enderman, chinchilla dorito boi, Scaley dragon ect. but ya'll have all remained relatively active. Ofc, you can't forget zMeul as well, deffo didn't get into some heated and petty debates with him back then 😂

for me as long as @sub68doesnt leave im fine 😜 

Yep, Dexxter was always the very first person to answer 90% of "troubleshooting" or "build help" threads. He kinda replaced the 2016 squad who were the usual suspects in giving inputs to those kinda threads. 
 
Nah, in 2017, I had already stopped being all that active and quite a lot of the more active 2015/2016/2017 members had either moved on or stopped being so active. 
 
I myself will probably continue writing pointless status updates and lurk around.

Yep, Dexxter was always the very first person to answer 90% of "troubleshooting" or "build help" threads. He kinda replaced the 2016 squad who were the usual suspects in giving inputs to those kinda threads. 
 
Nah, in 2017, I had already stopped being all that active and quite a lot of the more active 2015/2016/2017 members had either moved on or stopped being so active. 
 
I myself will probably continue writing pointless status updates and lurk around.

Yep, Dexxter was always the very first person to answer 90% of "troubleshooting" or "build help" threads. He kinda replaced the 2016 squad who were the usual suspects in giving inputs to those kinda threads. 
 
Nah, in 2017, I had already stopped being all that active and quite a lot of the more active 2015/2016/2017 members had either moved on or stopped being so active. 
 
I myself will probably continue writing pointless status updates and lurk around.

Meh, they both kinda died off the day they became mods. To be fair, most become less active publicly once they become mods. 
 
You were indeed! Alongside the likes of Enderman, chinchilla dorito boi, Scaley dragon ect. but ya'll have all remained relatively active. Ofc, you can't forget zMeul as well, deffo didn't get into some heated and petty debates with him back then 😂

Meh, they both kinda died off the day they became mods. To be fair, most become less active publicly once they become mods. 
 
You were indeed! Alongside the likes of Enderman, chinchilla dorito boi, Scaley dragon ect. but ya'll have all remained relatively active. Ofc, you can't forget zMeul as well, deffo didn't get into some heated and petty debates with him back then 😂

There are two views to this issue...
View A: Consumers and mobo manufacturers should be the ones that decide whether it's supported or not, AMD you shouldn't have a say. 
View B: Given lack of BIOS chip storage on most 300 series mobos with not so good VRMs, the BIOSes being "beta" (i.e. it could brick your mobo) or cut down significantly (which complicates things such as X370 not being able to support first gen Ryzen, especially with no rollback features), it could be argued this is beneficial to consumers. 
 
I'm personally on the fence but am leaning more towards view B. Why you ask? There's already been a lot of negativity in regards to 300 series motherboards back when the 3000-series chips were released. Those BIOSes were already heavily, heavily cut down with support dropped on many CPUs and if they were to add support to 5000-series CPUs, it means even more streamlined BIOSes and even more CPUs dropped from support, which is also bad for the consumers as when 300-series don't support 1000-series, it will piss people off (a lot). 

There are two views to this issue...
View A: Consumers and mobo manufacturers should be the ones that decide whether it's supported or not, AMD you shouldn't have a say. 
View B: Given lack of BIOS chip storage on most 300 series mobos with not so good VRMs, the BIOSes being "beta" (i.e. it could brick your mobo) or cut down significantly (which complicates things such as X370 not being able to support first gen Ryzen, especially with no rollback features), it could be argued this is beneficial to consumers. 
 
I'm personally on the fence but am leaning more towards view B. Why you ask? There's already been a lot of negativity in regards to 300 series motherboards back when the 3000-series chips were released. Those BIOSes were already heavily, heavily cut down with support dropped on many CPUs and if they were to add support to 5000-series CPUs, it means even more streamlined BIOSes and even more CPUs dropped from support, which is also bad for the consumers as when 300-series don't support 1000-series, it will piss people off (a lot). 

I'm fine with it.
AMD never promised support for x370, and officially only promised support for 5xx series chipsets then agreed on b4xx chipsets due to consumer demand.
If they let Asrock make updates for x370, every x370 motherboard buyer would put pressure on the other manufacturers and ask for bioses and complaint that they're greedy and don't release bioses to make more money out of new boards, which is bad.
 
Most x370 motherboards had small size bios chips, which can't even contain the microcode and all the stuff needed for new ryzen processors, so they'd probably have to drop support for ryzen 1xxx processors and a lot of those boards don't have bios flashback feature, which means if something fails during bios update, you're screwed.
 
Also, the x370 boards - majority of them - have bad VRMs ... bad as in poor heatsinks and only 4-6 phases with average mosfets ... decent for up to a 8 core cpu, but forget about a 12-16 core cpu on it.
A lot of manufacturers weren't sure about how good AM4 processors would be and they preferred to focus on paying SLI licenses and fancy heatsinks and rgb instead of vrm and io features.
 
 

let me introduce you to OnePlus