Fuji XT4; the front aperture ring is electronic; the aperture shows up on the bottom of the rear screen; quite effective!
I still have all my film gear-Hasselblad 501 CM, Leica, Nikon, and contax 35mm. I still think Film is very valid- it is very expensive though !
In a word- the canon printers are really only geared for the microsoft software.I found out the hardway;
My computer bloke, who is extremely good at what he does, spent the best part of an afternoon trying to set My Pixma Pr0 1 up. He did it finally, by going deep; he said that the canon set up manual was the worst he had ever come across. The Pixma pro 1 was possibly the best, and the most awkward printer I ever owned; it was very expensive to run, always wanted to flush the cartridges everytime i used it. I found out that a lot of guys running this model had the same problems; superb output, not worth the hassle and cost to run - they just ditched it.
After 5 years, it conked out, and was not worth the repair cost.
I have the X Pro, 1 And 2; they are brilliant; I bought the X-Pro 1 in 2012, and the model 2- 2 years ago; brilliant .
Not sure about the model 3 though- it's changed a bit.
First is the best- brilliant photo- well done !
I too have the 4490 scanner; it was the best scanner by far, and I had it serviced a while back- I haven't used it for while, but I know it is in first rate condition if I wan't it.
For a DX body, I would suggest a Nikon 28-70 F2.8 AF D. Brilliant lens,not too expensive if you buy the D version.
This argument has been going on ad nauseam, I remember at the start of the digital age, when reared its' ugly head, and attracted a lot of arguments within the Leica fraternity; the perceived wisdom was this; if you were happy with the results by using JPEG, then that was all you really needed; it was felt then, and still is completely
valid now; OK if you felt the need to spend hours in front of a computer screen to get a slightly different image, Fine; but if you were to compare a like image taken using the JPEG format, there really is very little difference.
I did just this to show some Leica enthusiasts, and printed a number of images side by side, without identifying which were which. My point was made then, and is valid now. It is your choice; whatever satisfies you is fine,
no need to be confused- just enjoy yourself.
Go for the D500- its a real workhorse of a camera, and you already have the lens for it !
Well, you are talking to a Leica man; My favourite Leica was always the M6. I used that for over 10 years, both professionally and private. You always got what you wanted, bearing in mind this was essentially a walk around camera, which excelled at its job.
I also had an Leica R8; what a crap camera that was; new, it rarely worked properly, even after several returns to Solms for "adjustment". I got shot of that very quickly. The R6 was superb, as was the R7.
But I got digital Digilux 2; images were good, but It was flawed; it overheated, switched itself on without you knowing, flattened the battery, and subsequently useless. Ok when the flaws were sorted, but you could not rely on it like the M6/R6.
Nowadays the best Leica digital, in my humble opinion is the Leica Q Mk 2. Images are superb, it works, it is always in your hand, and you don't have to think about it- digital version of the M6.
For other work, I use the Fuji X-Pro 2/3. Beautiful cameras- Plus the Fuji XE 2s, and Fuji X100 T.
For wildlife; Nikon D3, or Canon . Horses for courses I guess. But for walk around- Fuji or Leica Q. Hope that helps.
I don't think their Z range has caught on, but this is in the UK- we're funny like that !
Been using Macs forever! Currently using iMac 21", and an old G5 with a Phillips15" display for Printing.
I did have a Canon A3 plus for printing, but this went T up during lock down, and was scrapped. No one seems to want big prints anymore. The iMac is excellent, but if you want the best, a 27" iMac is the one to get.
I have the above lens, and I have found it to be every bit as good as the nikon butterfly lens, and a lot cheaper !