golem_bngolem

I'm not concerned whether I know the subject, but as to whether it makes any difference, well yeah, there is a difference. I have no strong preference. I'm glad there are both modes ... broadens my world, my outlook. Frinstintz, some listeners strongly prefer songs with a narrative story in the lyric. Or at lest that the lyrics express something that they care about ... or can sympathise ... or understand ... or can sing along [even silently]. I myself prefer lyrics in languages that I do not comprehend. Then the vocal are like another instrument and I can't be distracted by the narrative content or the whatever the words of the lyrics may be saying. IOW I do prefer the aesthetics, the music, and can focus on that and not be pulled-at by the familiar, the what-I-know, of words in a language that I comprehend. I do like short storys, essays, some poetry, etc as read on-air in some radio shows ... so I do like words and narratives. I just do NOT care to combine them into one thing. I really LIKE having two things, uncombined, to experience separately.

<p>+1</p> <p>You might choose a lens for the Nikon thaz also<br> advantageous to adapt to your crop Canon. 50/1.4<br> is a fine portrait lens on the crop Canon and a very<br> affordable relic to use on the Nikon as a normal lens.</p>

<p>Nikkors with the Q, P, S, etc attached to the name<br> are the verrrrry earliest F-mount lenses. This does <br> not generally mean they are the best ..... not to<br> mention possible mechanical problems, from heavy<br> use but also from lack of use. </p>

<p>"I believe that all the Nikon lenses will mount<br> on any Nikon body without damage " ........ <br> <br> This is dangerously quite false. <br> </p>

<p>One more vote for the Canon 10-18 STM.<br /> <br /> Low weight, low cost, low shutter speeds aided by<br /> the OIS, only exterior moving part is a change in<br /> length while zooming ... focusing is internal, and<br /> it focuses down to 6 inches ... 6 inches from the<br /> sensor, which can actually image the dirt on your<br /> front filter almost in focus ... so thaz as close as<br /> anyone needs to go !</p> <p>It feels cheap, but it doesn't cost much. A Rebel<br /> also feels cheap, so it's not gonna be a shock to<br /> put the two together. I have a Rebel, with the<br /> 18-50, 10-18, and the 24/2.8. It all feels like a<br /> bunch of toys, so I find it entertaining that it all<br /> performs amazingly well !</p> <p>As others have said, it's pretty sharp and nearly<br /> free of distortion. Not bad as to reflections and<br /> glare, either .... especially for an ultra-wide. I<br /> don't have the lens hood and have never had a<br /> problem for lack of it. Lens hoods for ultra-wide<br /> zooms are bulky and only minimally effective.</p> <p>So how do they do it ? Where's the "No Free<br /> Lunch" aspect ? Well, that f:4.5 ~ 5.6 is where<br /> you find that. If you can live with that, lunch<br /> is pretty tasty and very fairly priced, I might <br /> even say it's nutritious :-) <br /> <br /> `</p>

<p>If the animals are rather active, I'd keep shooting<br> full frame. Crop mode crops for you, whether it's a<br> usable composition or not. In full frame, even if<br> the subject is rather off-center, you can still make<br> a reasonable composition. <br> <br> `</p>

<p>The original purpose of a hot shoe cover is to<br> avoid zapping your eyebrow area with a high <br> voltage from a studio flash thaz plugged into<br> your PC terminal which was usually parallel<br> wired with the hot shoe. </p> <p>FWIW, most of my covers are too loose :-O </p> <p>` </p>

<p>I used an app called EOSinfo,exe and<br> it worked for my 5D2 however at first<br> it replied that no camera was seen.</p> <p>IIRC the solution was to have the<br> camera already powered up and USB<br> connected to the powered-OFF PC<br> [win8], ... and then power up the PC.<br> <br> This was "above and beyond" the<br> easy instructions that initially got<br> me no result ... just an intuitive<br> maneuver but it worked. <br> <br> So .... if your simple app is not<br> delivering, try a few typical tricks. <br> Don't be a slave to the exact<br> instructions provided with it. <br> <br> Here's the source link: <br> <a href="http://astrojargon.net/EOSInfo.aspx">http://astrojargon.net/EOSInfo.aspx</a> <br> <br> ` </p>

<p>You can't have live view with the shutter closed anyway.<br> The sensor hasta see the image to deliver the live view.</p> <p>` </p>

<p>Is this shot thru the eyepiece or he body flange ?<br> If it's thru the flange is the lens takig the shot <br> truly on axis as if it were the camera lens " ? Cuz<br> if not the the dots are at diffreing distangces e tothe<br> focuys plane mer takikng the shotand you kow how<br> that goes ...</p>

<p>AWB will fix the color in daylite etc.<br> If you shoot indoors w/o flash, you<br> have added to the burden on AWB<br> to correct the indoor colors, maybe<br> added more than it can fix, plus a<br> small lost of less than 1/2 a stop<br> in daylite, maybe not even a 1/4<br> stop indoors since the color of the<br> filter and the color of the ambient<br> light are extremely close.<br> <br> If I were gonna play that game, <br> I'd use 82 series rather than 81. <br> Outdoors, the AWB will correct the<br> slight cooling effect, but indoors it<br> might actually help the AWB from<br> running out of range, by cooling<br> the tone before the AWB gets to<br> work on correcting it. In this case, <br> you will lose 1/4 or 1/3 stop with<br> indoor lighting, but if you need all<br> the exposure you can get you can<br> just remove the filter.<br> </p> <p>` </p>

<p>No Metabones adapter with or<br /> without optical elements has <br />internal moving parts. Smart<br /> adapters work only on lenses<br /> that have their own internally<br /> powered moving parts and in<br /> reality thaz Canon EF and no<br /> others. <br /> <br /> Unfortunately, the focus of<br /> the statements on the pages<br /> you linked by Metabones go<br /> from specific to global and<br /> back again in a somewhat<br /> confusing manner. No fault<br /> of theirs, it's the fault of the<br /> person reading for not having<br /> enuf prior knowledge to see<br /> where that is happening ! <br /> <br /> What ! ? Did I just "Blame the<br /> Victim" ? Well sort of. Stuff as<br /> we see at the Metabones site<br /> is actually for experienced<br /> video professionals. $400 to<br /> $600 for SpeedBoosters ? To <br /> Fuji or M43 or Nex users thaz <br /> a heap of sheckels, but in the<br /> professional video world it's<br /> just pocket lint.<br /> <br /> Metabones products can be <br /> useful to amateur users of<br /> digital still cameras, and no<br /> law says you can't buy and<br /> use them. But you do wind up<br /> with visitors to Metabone's<br /> site who just might get a bit<br /> confused about the features<br /> of the various products.</p> <p> </p>

<p ><a name="00d33I"></a><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=19592">Jeff Spirer</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Moderator" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/mod.gif" alt="" /><img title="Subscriber" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jan 04, 2015; 08:28 p.m.</p> <blockquote> <p>Nothing new!</p> </blockquote> <p>Can you give an example of that non-newness for <a href="http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/392580/slide_392580_4789160_free.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">this photo</a> from that page. <br> <br> Examples ? Les Krimms, Diane Arbus. There's more but it's late I'm tired.</p>

<p>Many years ago I decided that in my own thinking, and also<br> in certain conversations within a 'close circle', that I would<br> cease to think "Portrait" and substitute "Portrayal". Words<br> can control our thinking and our actions, so this was not a<br> rhetorical "difference without a distinction". <br> <br> Once I had integrated this change into my pics of peeps, I<br> decided that a fortunate possible expansion of the concept<br> might be that pic of *things* could more readily be made<br> as "portrayals" whereas picturing *things* in a "portrait"<br> manner seemed kinda pointless ..... tho not to deny that<br> anthropormorphisizing inanimate objects can often times<br> be a creative exploration.<br> <br> Anywho, we are not always fully or even partially aware<br> of our own intentions. Some portraitists are "portrayers"<br> of the persons, as persons, who they photograph. Others<br> may be using those subjects as inanimate objects for the<br> type creative exploration mentioned above ... or perhaps<br> as some sort of "body double" for a self expressive shot,<br> some kind of disguised selfie. <br> <br> I won't try here to say who amongst well known and well<br> regarded portraitists are doing things which way. I just<br> wanna widen the way we see and discuss our own and<br> other photographers' work. <br> </p>

<p>If you choose to just keep using it and ignore<br> resale devaluation, I'd suggest that you paint<br> the damaged area black. I've done this for my<br> own damaged optics but I must my own were<br> of decidedly lesser scale than yours. <br> </p>