I take it we've been drinking?

Nothing too serious, although it quickly kicks any sense out of this missive, does it not? For a few years in the seventies I carried a Canon 35mm camera bought from a photographer friend (who advised me to say I'd picked it up at a flea market should any of the authorities ask me questions) that I'd fitted with a used 105mm lens I bought at Gasser's in San Francisco (which, appropriately, camera and lens, were stolen from a rented storage locker many years later). Is this a reason to acquire another? Yes. No. The 105 is considered a good portrait lens, although I've bought the manual model for use with the F3 rather than the zooty computerized "D" model I'd usually use for anything approaching formal shooting. So be it.

I use the F3 for available light inside buildings and when I'm not in serious photographer mode because it's small and light and I can pretty much fit everything it needs inside a pocket. I wonder, after acquiring all the heavy duty latest gizmos, if I don't end up with a box of disposable point and shoots (that slip into a pocket). No. I don't believe it either.

Friday. First I'd like to get a couple of things out of the way: One, this has been a great week full of energy and lack of dizziness. I bow before the powers that be. Two, it's Friday (hup!). Three, one more week before I take a two week vacation. I have novel thoughts in mind. Novel for me.

I also used the lens for the first time at lunch (another birthday lunch). Very nice. Sometimes you buy these things and you think, well, put it on a shelf, "maybe I'll use it again one day" toying with buyer's remorse. Sometimes you buy these things and you look through the viewfinder and you say "oh god, I remember: heaven!". Well, something like that. That's how it went at lunch. I'm considering buying another F3, but next year, when I'm sane. Or next week, if the energy and attitude hold. Or does that make sense?