I generally (daily) use a deuter race lightweight cycling backpack, and when I put a dSLR in it i generally stuff a LowePro camera holster in first, or (if I need more space) just wrap the camera up in a scarf or something. When I set out on a proper camera 'expedition' and carry more stuff, I have a LowePro - think it is a Primus 200AW (or something like that) - very nice bag and comfy to wear, and can get a ton of kit in it...

I am the same - you need to go into the menu, first tab where the icon is a camera (as opposed to a movie camera, spanner or whatever), scroll along to the fourth page, select 'Button Customization', then 'AF Button', and then set it to 'AF2'…

Job done

It might be worth looking for a Sigma 30mm f1.4 - I think a new version of that has just come out so I guess there may be some of the older ones on ebay or similar… I have a battered ancient looking one which I got second hand about three years ago, but it's a good performer (and f1.4) - definitely worth a look, sharp as a razor at the centre.

The DA* 16-50 is a top lens, I have been using mine a lot recently, although I did have to send it away for a new AF motor (although it worked for about 3 years before breaking down) - took AGES to come back!.

Another option is at the Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4; I think it's discontinued now, but i got a brand new one a while back (legacy stock all boxed up) for £150, and it's a good lens too. Both zooms are a good deal bigger than a prime though…

Food for thought perhaps

Cheers

Have dropped you a PM

Cheers

Ah… now that's a problem I can relate to!

There is a group on flickr for users of the Holga HL-P…

link

It doesn't have a great number of pictures on there but there are some from which you may get a good impression of it:

Cheers

Nice one Kris, some very nice things said in the magazine as well (and deservedly so).

Top notch

I have the 10-17 fisheye and I adore it, in the right circumstances. I have had a go with the toy fisheye on the Q and was not that impressed… As I recall it did need a bit of effort focussing to deliver sharp results (although that was OK as long as the Q display was zoomed in), but to me it just wasn't 'fishy' enough (if that is an adjective). The 10-17 at 10mm is very cool to my eye, and whilst you're are right it does exhibit plenty of CA, especially at the edges and in high contrast scenes, I have generally found it pretty easy to get rid in post-processing. I just use PSE8 but newer packages with built-in lens profiles can probably remove it even more easily. Personally, for a real fishy effect I would go with the 10-17 every time I think (but maybe that's just me)

Of course, when you take into account the Q body and other lens as well… hmmm

Cheers

Wow what a great set! very accomplished; and the last is tippy top - very cool.

Cheers

Oooh now I rather like one or two of them. A little freaky but pretty cool…

Thanks for the link