WakeWorld

WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Video and Photography (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=87667)
-   -   What's in your bag? (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=723958)

wakeripper 08-08-2009 12:34 PM

I know many of you shoot more than just wake so i'm wondering what is in your bag. I've been shooting a friend of mines band alot recently and even did some of their promo shots. With my recent tibia break and decision to jump even further into the photog deal i want to expand my gear. I'm thinking some prime lenses, definitely a fisheye and well an upgrade in camera bodies. I'm just wondering what is in your bag and or gear suggestions?

wakedad33 08-08-2009 12:55 PM

Canon 40D <BR>Canon 400mm f-5.6 <BR>Canon 70-200 f-4.0 <BR>Canon nifty fifty f1.8 <BR>Tamron 17-50 f-2.8 (love this lens) <BR> <BR>When I'm not shooting wake stuff, I'm getting into shooting wild life, pretty fun (and challenging)

clubmyke 08-08-2009 5:07 PM

canon 40d <BR>70-200 f4 IS <BR>24-70 f2.8 <BR>50 prime f1.8 (ie nifty fifty) <BR>Canon speedlite 550 II

caskimmer 08-08-2009 7:55 PM

I'd get in trouble for bragging about what I'm currently shooting with <img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/biggrin.gif" border=0> <BR> <BR>it's pretty cool though

bradlovellphotography 08-08-2009 8:50 PM

Canon 40D <BR>Canon 5D Mark II <BR>70-200 2.8 <BR>24-70 2.8 <BR>Speedlite 580 EXII <BR>few other goodies

calexan 08-08-2009 10:28 PM

Nothing Special.... First DSLR <BR> <BR>Nikon D90 <BR>18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX Nikkor <BR>70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR AF-S Nikkor <BR> <BR>I also keep my Alienware Sentia 3450 laptop in my bag as well in case i need to view photos or make sure they are safe.

richd 08-09-2009 9:09 AM

Canon 1D3 <BR>24-105 f4 L IS <BR>400 f5.6 L <BR>70-200 f4 L IS <BR>Tamron 90 macro <BR>Canon 1.4X &amp; 2X TC's <BR>Speedlite 430 EX and Macro Twinlite MT24

caskimmer 08-09-2009 10:50 AM

Dedicated still cameras got less than a year before they're obsolete <BR> <BR>RED has forced a lot of people to step up their game.

iamnathanhudson 08-09-2009 2:43 PM

I disagree. RED is all show and no play. They are the ultimate marketing hype machine. Seeing, as the only camera you are able to buy is the RED ONE, with no set date for SCARLET release, I don't believe RED is at all a factor right now. Also, did you happen to notice that there is no sound. I'll stick with my EX1 and entry level DSLR (a200) for my bag. I have to say though, I wouldn't mind getting the Nikon D5000. I got a special place in my heart for Nikon. So, keep dreaming RED and I'll keep producing footage and pictures. I feel bad for those a year ago who thought they would see the SCARLET only to have it never appear. <BR> <BR>Don't get me wrong. RED is touting some amazing things, but by no means are they the end all be all.

iamnathanhudson 08-09-2009 2:48 PM

also worth noting. I'm not ruling out RED for future purchase, however, I don't agree with their marketing practices. I'm glad I didn't wait on them to follow through on their claims. I would have missed out on a lot of opportunities.

08-09-2009 2:56 PM

I don't know about stills, but most of the video I've shot on the RED is amazing. It was probably the biggest attraction at this year's CineGear expo and I've met a lot of ASC guys who speak very highly of it.

iamnathanhudson 08-09-2009 3:49 PM

The RED ONE does have amazing video.

caskimmer 08-09-2009 4:36 PM

Whose talking about buying a SCARLET or RED? Trust me when I say that there are currently <b>plenty</b> of "DSMC" prototypes out there from companies other than RED. (that wouldn't exist if the major players shared your sentiment of RED being a non-factor) <BR> <BR> Why carry both a video <b>AND</b> a still camera when you can be shooting both simultaneously with the same tool? <BR> <BR> <BR>edit: and why does the fact that I'm looking forward to what's coming around the corner mean I'm not also shooting video and photos in the meantime? Pretty sure I just got back from 2 weeks in Cabo doing exactly that <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 09, 2009)

richd 08-09-2009 5:50 PM

What? I thought the Canon 5DmkII was going to make video cameras obsolete!

caskimmer 08-09-2009 6:20 PM

IMO the 5DII video is lacking for most purposes (and it doesn't do both at same time)and not something I'd want to rely on for action. <BR> <BR>By this time next year Canon will have some seriously sick new toys though

iamnathanhudson 08-09-2009 6:44 PM

ok, maybe you misread what i was typing. It wasn't meant to be read in a mean tone or anything. <BR> <BR>I am just saying in response to your quote of RED forcing people to step up their game, that the only thing they have that might put pressure on the camera companies is their SCARLET camera. Meanwhile, it's been how long now and guess what...still not for sale. <BR> <BR>Sure there might be prototypes out there but guess what, THEY ARE PROTOTYPES. <BR> <BR>I don't blame anyone for looking forward to keep on the bleeding edge. And I think your right in thinking that eventually, they may just replace the need for having both, key word being EVENTUALLY. <BR> <BR>And on that note, there will always a market for standalones that will focus on the field they are marketed for with features that cater to that field. Yes, my EX1 can record one frame if i so choose, but it's no still camera at 1920x1080. However, I'd rather use that than ANY still camera to shoot my video. Sorry, there just aren't the professional features on any still camera out there that will touch my EX1. I'm not saying my camera is the best but more or less, I use what is best for my field. <BR> <BR>Meanwhile, this thread was dedicated to what people had now in their bag. It had nothing to do with the flamebait you threw in there after people took the time to list what they were shooting on. I think it's cool if you really are shooting on something new and revolutionary however, your second comment had no place. <BR> <BR>You basically just told everyone else that their beloved equipment is obsolete without really responding to the question of what is in your bag. <BR> <BR>I on the other hand listed what i got in my bag while responding to your RED comment. <BR> <BR>YES I SAID RED BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE COMPANY YOU MENTIONED! Then you turn around and turn it into a discussion as if you talking about other companies. You didn't, or you would have listed the other companies instead of saying RED. <BR> <BR>So instead could you just state what you are shooting on....or just leave the thread alone at that point. Did you seriously think you would make generic claims without calling for some kind of response? <BR> <BR>Also, to answer your question. Why shoot on seperate cameras......Because there is no comparison to the stand alone cameras at this point. AND NO I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT PROTOTYPES. <BR> <BR>And on your "edit" addition..... I didn't mean YOU, I meant, the people who are out there that say they are holding out for the SCARLET. So obviously, you took my response as a direct attack on you which it was not. So what did you use while in Cabo? Please share. <BR> <BR>If I could only tell you how many times I run into people who keep blabbing on and on about the SCARLET and they aren't going to get a camera because it's coming out "soon". Well, meanwhile, they are sitting at home playing video games and jerkin around while I'm out on shoots. <BR> <BR>In this response however, I am picking apart what your saying because honestly, its deserved, you haven't said anything about what your shooting on and you then mention RED, then you turn it around to other companies......and the subject matter is? <BR> <BR>I do think that other companies are getting nervous, however, they aren't that nervous because they would have released something by now to try and combat the RED HYPE!

steve_b 08-09-2009 8:19 PM

Vogue Magazine used a frame grab from a RED for a cover a few issues back. <BR> <BR>RED is and will change video/photography.

bradlovellphotography 08-09-2009 9:00 PM

***IMO the 5DII video is lacking for most purposes (and it doesn't do both at same time)and not something I'd want to rely on for action.*** <BR> <BR>I'll have to agree with you to an extent on this one wardovision. I'm not trying to be smart with my reply either, I may be misunderstanding what you're saying and if so I apologize in advance. The 5D Mark II isn't as fast as my 40D on the water dealing with FPS, but when it comes to picture quality, the 5D Mark II is amazing. I do wish it was a little quicker but I didn't purchase it for my action stuff, mainly my weddings and portraits. In regards to your comment, the 5D Mark II will shoot video and capture images at the same time. One thing I do love about this camera on the water is I can get some video footage at the same time, and the quality is great. <BR> <BR>Just my 2 cents, not trying to take over thread and again, sorry if I misunderstood your original comment.

projectely4 08-09-2009 9:54 PM

nikon d3 <BR>14-24 2.8 <BR>35 f/2 <BR>50 1.4 <BR>70-200 2.8 <BR>105VR 2.8 macro <BR>SB800's

calexan 08-09-2009 10:40 PM

I guess i just dont foresee people carrying around video cameras to take portraits, macro, landscapes, etc... I mean enough that it would make DSLR and P&amp;S's "Obsolete". <BR> <BR>I just cant imagine someone going to video flowers then pulling a still from that video of the flowers, why not just grab a still camera so you can play with focus and various other effects. Maybe in action sports this would be an effective way to get great shots, but the hassle is not really there when the object of the photo isnt moving at sports photography speeds...

wakesurf12 08-09-2009 11:06 PM

1. <BR>D700 <BR>16mm Fisheye <BR>24-70mm 2.8 <BR>70-200mm 2.8 <BR>50mm 1.4 <BR>A lot of SB900 SB800 and SB28's <BR>Elinchrom Ranger <BR> <BR>2. <BR>The RED camera is NOT a video camera. So please stop comparing it to the EX1, HVX and other VIDEO cameras. RED has done a TON for the film industry and yes, people are taking note. Before this camera there was film and then there was video. Yeah, you could use a bunch of hoaky adaptors to make your video look like film, but RED is the first DIGITAL motion picture camera. I could go on for days about this but i am going to stop before I open another can of worms. <BR> <BR>3. <BR>The 5D Mark II does produce some pretty great video and yes, it isn't 100% yet but for some applications it is pretty awesome. I have shot several projects with it and have been pretty impressed.

iamnathanhudson 08-09-2009 11:07 PM

Chance, your boat is straight up sexy the sexiest malibu i have ever scene!!!!!

bradlovellphotography 08-09-2009 11:27 PM

Agree with Nate-O Chance, your boat is SICK!!!

iamnathanhudson 08-09-2009 11:35 PM

Ryan, there's video and film. RED is video. PERIOD! It's all in how the image is captured. The RED ONE is just really, really High Res Video with exceptional depth of field abilities. Just because it doesn't sport the "video" look, doesn't mean it's not video. Just because RED cleverly skirts around the use of the word 'video' doesn't mean it's not. It's a clever way to distance themselves from the ugly connotation that the word 'video' has with the look it has produced over the years. IT'S STILL VIDEO THOUGH! <BR> <BR>I know that the EX1 doesn't compare to the RED ONE and never claimed it to. <BR> <BR>Where did you go to film school? <BR> <BR>Also, if you want to get into technicalities, then why call yourself a filmmaker in your profile? Are you shooting on FILM? Wouldn't the proper term be Cinematographer? <BR> <BR>I would love to see some of your "films". <BR> <BR>So as far as shooting wakeboarding on an EX1 then it would be a wakeboarding video. If shot on 35mm film it would be a wakeboarding film. If shot on a RED ONE then it would be..........? <BR> <BR>Here's an idea, go over to DVinfo.net or Vimeo or even DVXuser.com and make your claim and see how far that gets you. <BR> <BR>Yes I understand what you were getting at. It was a video camera developed to shoot motion pictures so film could be replaced with a digital acquisition format and still retain the look that film brings to the table. But your just dead wrong about it not being video. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by iamnathanhudson on August 09, 2009)

iamnathanhudson 08-09-2009 11:40 PM

also, on the Cinematographer note.....if you shoot action sports, weddings, etc. then you'd actually be a videographer. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by iamnathanhudson on August 09, 2009)

08-10-2009 1:45 AM

The term "filmmaker" doesn't necessarily mean you are shooting on film. It means you are making movies, aka "films", and are involved in more than just one aspect of the process (look up "auteur"). The medium on which you shoot makes no difference, since you are doing the same thing with both (capturing images). <BR> <BR>"Cinematographer" generally refers to a Director of Photography, who, on a film shoot, controls the lighting department(gaffter, etc) and the Camera department (camera operators). Someone who simply captures video, like Nate-O said, is not a cinematographer, but rather a camera operator/videographer, unless they are also acting as the DP. Keep in mind that calling yourself a DP is stretching it if there are no artificial lights involved, since you would not be determining/affecting the lighting for a scene as much as just making due with the ambient light nature has given you. <BR> <BR>Of course, once you get out of a crewed (professional) shooting environment, the lines tend to get blurred due to people taking on multiple roles and improper term usage.

08-10-2009 1:47 AM

Ryan is right when he says that RED (and other ultra-HD cameras) are changing the game. It's pretty crazy.

iamnathanhudson 08-10-2009 3:58 AM

not necessarily, yes the DP is the person in charge of lighting. But they can easily be a DP without artificial lighting. DP's are in charge of all camera operation as well. They just don't physically handle the camera. They are the Director's go-to person. It's the DP's responsibility to make sure the Camera Operator gets it right, according to what the Director wants. But your right in the sense of, if you never have any artificial light then why not just have a really good camera operator and cut out the middle man. More times than not though, in movie making, there will be the need for a Director of Photography. We are taught the a Cinematographer is someone who's job is in the motion picture industry. They make films regardless of what its shot on. I was merely pointing out technicalities in definitions to show my point that the RED ONE is a video camera regardless of it not having the "video look".

calexan 08-10-2009 8:19 AM

haha i appreciate it guys.... its a bitch to keep clean though...

cali_rider 08-10-2009 9:33 AM

........I can say proudly that i am waiting for a scarlet. While i wait i am for sure not dreaming about it or playing video games. Just keep on keeping on. <BR> <BR>Why is the main reason? Because instead of forking out 4 to 5K for a Mark 2 with a lens and what not for a camera that in the long run shoots basically compressed video, it really doesn't serve a purpose for me. <BR> <BR>I want a nice still camera, but if the scarlet is the in between then sweet, if not oh well. Move on. No reason to spend more than i need to. <BR> <BR>Quick note, Red isnt the first digital camera to come out that almost represents 35mm....its the first cam with in peoples price range that does. The Genesis and the Viper are two cameras in the category. <BR> <BR>this thread quickly turned into something off topic huh? <BR> <BR>Funny, funny. <BR> <BR>I will say this, Ryan you are the man. Your a Cinematographer in my book.

caskimmer 08-10-2009 10:07 AM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>Because there is no comparison to the stand alone cameras at this point. AND NO I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT PROTOTYPES.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR>Photographers like Annie Leibovitz don't seem to agree. <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR><blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>So what did you use while in Cabo? Please share.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR>Overindulged in cold beverages while being rejected by much younger women <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>Here's the equipment I own that sometimes goea into my bag(s) <BR>Panasonic HPX-170 <BR>Century Optics 1.6X <BR>CAvision .6x <BR>Letus35mm Extreme <BR>Canon 1DII <BR>Canon 70-200 2.8 <BR>Canon 24-70 2.8 <BR>Canon 17-40 4.0 <BR>Canon 50mm 1.8 <BR>Canon 550EX <BR>edit: Canon 1.4x <BR>set of Pocket Wizard PlusII <BR>2-Vivitar 555 <BR> <BR>go into <BR>2-OGIO Ty Evans <BR> <BR>2 SPL waterhousings get carried by friends <BR> <BR>See why I'm so anxious to consolidate my gear? Traveling is a PITA. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 10, 2009)

caskimmer 08-10-2009 10:33 AM

Oh yeah and a special "wardovision" tripod bracket (where the nickname came from) I made so I can sometimes shoot photos and video at the same time

dcervenka 08-10-2009 10:41 AM

I don't want to piss nate-o.net parked domain off, but after the cat got out of my bag this is what I found: <BR> <BR>Kodak disposable that's about 10 yrs old with 12 exposures left. Super stoked to get it developed since I have no idea what the first 12 pics are of.. (yeah it's only a 24 exposure cam... :-( <BR> <BR>Tamrac fanny pack <BR> <BR>And.. some other gear that VISA sponsored me with.

alans 08-10-2009 10:44 AM

NIKON: <BR>D700 + VG <BR>24-70 2.8 <BR>70-200 2.8 <BR>50mm 1.8 AF-D <BR>SB-600 <BR>F100 <BR> <BR>Canon: <BR>HF-10 <BR> <BR>Pentax: <BR>WP 20

dcervenka 08-10-2009 11:23 AM

Not to hijack this thread even more... but what would the text books call someone that carries all the gear, holds the camera, focuses the camera, logs the footage, edits, does color correction, sets up the talent's itinerary, books flights &amp; hotel rooms, finds music and gets the music rights, puts gas in the boat, runs to grocery store to get foods/drinks, builds the DVD menus and the master disc, manages replication, fulfills distributor orders, sends invoices (accts recv/payable), designs and builds the website for the production, does marketing, designs flyers, posters, etc..?

caskimmer 08-10-2009 11:26 AM

slave?

cali_rider 08-10-2009 11:41 AM

Ha.

alans 08-10-2009 12:37 PM

Substituting your career with your hobby/passion?

08-10-2009 1:03 PM

Kung Fu- In that case, you would be a true "filmmaker" because you are taking on the roles of producer, director, editor, 1st assistant camera, key grip, etc, etc, all the way down to a production assistant. <BR> <BR>Nate-0- I completely agree with what you are saying.

caskimmer 08-10-2009 1:23 PM

film? video? digital? who really cares what's it's called. I care about how things work and look in the real world not some stupid title given to me or my equipment. <BR> <BR>and what's up with calling people out for not going to film school? A lot of the very best in the business never did either, does that make their work any less impressive?

iamnathanhudson 08-10-2009 2:27 PM

Sorry, if I got on my soapbox. Nobody pissed me off, I'm just overly passionate. If you only knew how, much we are to live, sleep, breathe, eat, etc. film, digital cinematography, etc. After working my ass off, and being involved with quite a few shoots, I have come to realize that many that didn't go to school, didn't know key things and often made false claims, spread untrue propaganda for one company over the other, etc. I've had to show some people how to use features on their own camera. <BR> <BR>I've had to step in and correct people who don't get that you can play with color temperature because white balancing everything isn't always the key. <BR> <BR>To explain the latter, I was DP on a project and had laid out all my plans so that everything would be balanced to Daylight. So I set my white balance to 5600k and let it stay there. So when I used tungsten lights, it was designed to look yellow. I had access to pretty much any light you can fathom and by that I mean, any tungsten light up to a 10000w , HMI lights up to 2500w, Kinoflos with any kind of Kino bulb, etc. <BR> <BR>So to get back on topic, I had a morning scene where I had lit with tungsten lights, I had 2 x 2k's going through a window with blinds with 1/4CTO on them to give that beautiful morning orange/yellow feel with a desk lamp that was activated by a 650w (tweenie) tungsten light. So, the cam op luckily thought out loud and said, "I need to White Balance." I explained to him politely that he was not to touch the WB. That the lighting design was based off of 5600k and we were to leave the camera as is. And he still didn't get it that first you don't WB gelled lights and second, that he would be eliminating the color I'm going for if not at the least cutting down on the punchy feel I was going for. He just didn't get what white balance did....he just had been told with no explanation to ALWAYS white balance. So while a formal education isn't needed and many don't have it, I believe it is extremely relevant and can make a huge difference.

scott_a 08-10-2009 3:02 PM

I don't think anybody really cares. <BR> <BR>But thank you for hijacking this perfectly good thread.

caskimmer 08-10-2009 3:06 PM

Biased opinions and mis-information are just as prevalent in schools though. Back in 2004 I had a photography teacher that constantly talked down on digital and how it would never reach the quality of film. Halfway through the semester my EOS-1 died and I resorted to having slides made from my 10D files for the assignments. He was never able to tell the difference until I told him the last day of class. (I would always laugh inside when having my shots critiqued) He then admitted he was flabbergasted at the quality but with the constantly changing file types I wouldn't be able to access my pics in 5-10 years. 5 years later I still have every digital pic I ever took and doing things I wouldn't have thought possible with film. <BR> <BR>Those same arguments are being repeated to discount digital video aquisition (first with DV then HDV and now digital cinema) <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 10, 2009)

dakid 08-10-2009 4:01 PM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>By scott a (scott_a) on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 2:02 pm: <BR> <BR> <BR>I don't think anybody really cares. <BR> <BR>But thank you for hijacking this perfectly good thread. <BR> <BR><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR> <BR>bahahahahahaha!!!!

caskimmer 08-10-2009 4:21 PM

Do threads ever stay on topic?

scott_a 08-10-2009 4:29 PM

In this forum, for the most part, I'd say so.

dakid 08-10-2009 4:31 PM

oh crap! i just read nate questioning ryan's knowledge and skills. now THAT'S hilarious! (not to mention insulting!)

dakid 08-10-2009 4:53 PM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>By Kung Fu Wake &amp; Video (dcervenka) on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 10:23 am: <BR> <BR> <BR>Not to hijack this thread even more... but what would the text books call someone that carries all the gear, holds the camera, focuses the camera, logs the footage, edits, does color correction, sets up the talent's itinerary, books flights &amp; hotel rooms, finds music and gets the music rights, puts gas in the boat, runs to grocery store to get foods/drinks, builds the DVD menus and the master disc, manages replication, fulfills distributor orders, sends invoices (accts recv/payable), designs and builds the website for the production, does marketing, designs flyers, posters, etc..? <BR> <BR><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR> <BR> <BR>david cervenka

dcervenka 08-10-2009 5:22 PM

Joe - You forgot... "Joe Umali", "Ronnie Romero", "Justin Stephens", "Sean Kilgus", "Travis Valtierra", "Spencer Norris" etc.. <BR> <BR>btw - This thread made me realize a few things: <BR> <BR>1) That hi-jackings can happen anywhere! <BR> <BR>2) That I'm not a true photographer, so I sold my kodak disposable and purchased a pin-hole camera! <BR> <BR>3) The some people confuse Wakeworld with the Dr Phil Forums. <BR> <BR>4) Scott A hit the nail on the head <BR> <BR>5) By commenting to this thread I'm part of the problem

iamnathanhudson 08-11-2009 9:32 AM

While I disagreed with what was said, I didn't question his knowledge and skills. I simply pointed out that technically, what was said was wrong. I'm sure Ryan does great work. Please review and tell me where I said anything about his skills or abilities. Read my first post. Re-read it. I was pretty much on topic while responding to the offbeat comment, then we all got crazy about technical stuff. At least, ryan and I did. So yeah, it fell off point. To be honest, it seems that some others decided to get into it and read into what i was saying and putting out there what they thought i was saying. For instance JOE saying i was questioning ryan's skills. Crap like that is what breeds drama and makes things worse. I totally wasn't questioning his skills or overall knowledge. Disagreeing with technicalities, yes i was. <BR> <BR>Ryan, if you felt insulted by my comments, I apologize. In fact, if anybody felt insulted by something I said, the i apologize as it wasn't meant to be insulting. <BR> <BR>Also, you're absolutely right about schools spreading biased opinions as well, but at least they teach us from all angles (at least here they do). My documentary class is all about Panny and Digital Cinematography class all about Sony. They teach you everything about film and digital on all fronts. We get to shoot with 16mm film, 35mm film, EX1's, HVX200's, Film SLR's, Digital SLR's, etc. <BR> <BR>I love posting over here, This section of the forum is the first I go to these days, when visiting wakeworld. So I have nothing but respect for the people who post their experiences, show off their shots, talk about projects, etc. <BR> <BR>-Nate

steezyshots 08-11-2009 10:28 AM

What I want in my bag! <BR><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/531073-REG/Hasselblad_70390531_H3DII_39MS_SLR_Digital_Camera. html" target="_blank">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/531073-REG/Hasselblad_70390531_H3DII_39MS_SLR_Digital_Camera. html</a>


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 9:46 PM.