Gary Naka

I thought I could do this before. IS there a way to change the default background color of the forms. Having developed migraine, looking at a WHITE screen feels like I am looking at bare light bulb, and I start to develop a migraine. Being able to change the background to a mid-grey or something less visually painful would be appreciated.

REPLACE the battery, BEFORE it swells too much and that tape loop won't work.

Nope For the way I shoot, a power zoom does NOT work. I have NOT used a PZ on a stills camera that I liked and could use. The only PZ that I ever could use decently, was on my father's Super-8 movie camera. PZs either zoom too fast or too slow. My fingers know how fast I want to zoom.

The M is going where the Nikon 1 has gone . . . poof. Once Canon released the APS-C RF cameras, the writing was on the wall for the M system.

If you are going to clean your computer, I HIGHLY recommend that you do it OUTSIDE. I once cleaned a computer in my bathroom, and when I shot a blast from my canned air, a cloud of dust came up, and dust when EVERYWHERE. YUK. I had to clean the bathroom of dust after that. You do not know how much dust will come out, until it does. Next time I did that was at my wife's office. This time I took the computer outside. And the same thing happened. A cloud of dust came up. This time I just let the wind blow the dust away.

The 24/1.7 + 18-140 would make a NICE 2-lens kit. I just wish Nikon had made a F-DX 24/1.7.

At NIGHT, in LOW light, FAST glass wins. Your kit lenses are simply not FAST enough for night time LOW light photography. In LOW light, your camera also has to have better LOW light performance. Your D5000 has a max base ISO of only 3200. The latest D5600 will go up to 25600. The D5600 has 3-stops better low light performance than your D5000. You can improve your results least expensively by getting a FAST prime, a 35/1.8 or 50/1.8. Next would be to upgrade your camera with a camera with a max ISO of at least 25600. Maybe a used D5600. As has been mentioned, you need to learn how to shoot in LOW light. It is NOT easy. And there will be a point where the light is SO LOW that you CANNOT shoot, without a flash. Gud Luk

Even today's sophisticated "matrix" meters miss the exposure. I have plenty of examples of that. There are times when I switch from matrix to the older centerweight meter. You have to learn your meter. I agree. Take a pic following the meter, then evaluate the scene and determine if you should take another pic, and which way to adjust the exposure. Color transparency/slide is brutally unforgiving of over-exposure errors. I used an incident meter when shooting slides. B&W is more forgiving of exposure, but a blown highlight is still unrecoverable. Been there, done that. Grade 6 paper and a prayer. Depending on the scene, some of my better landscape/sunset pics have been with deliberate underexposure, to darken the scene and make the colors richer.

Sounds like your SD9 is not working properly. The lights on the SD9 should operate as the manual says, and you should get significantly shorter recycle time vs. just the batteries in the flash. After all shorter recycle time is whole reason behind the SD9. If you are inside the return window for the SD9, I would send it back.

Just because it is a digital thermometer does not mean it is accurate. If the digital thermometer isn't calibrated, who knows how accurate it is. In the old days, one of the home calibration methods was: bring water up to about 98F +/- It does NOT have to be exactly 98, just close enough for the next step measure water temp with a mercury fever thermometer, I don't know if you can find a mercury fever thermometer any more. then measure with your photo thermometer, and compare readings. CAUTION-1 This only calibrates the photo thermometer to 98F. The accuracy at a different temp could be spot on, or way off. 98F is 28F warmer than the 70F in the spec sheet above, so there is a LOT of room for the temp accuracy to change. I had a calibrated Kodak process thermometer, that I checked my dial thermometers against. Other thoughts: How is your agitation method? If you under-agitate, that could be a cause of under-developing. Are you using a plastic or SS developing tank? If you are using a SS tank, are you using a water bath, to hold the temp of the tank and developer steady? I had not thought of water change as RJ mentioned. They chemicals into the water, to kill the bugs, and for other reasons. Maybe one of those chemicals might be retarding the developer. Acidic water might be acting like weak stop bath, and slowing down the developer.

The used market comes with time. You will find the older Z6 and Z7, but less so the newer Z5, Z6-II and Z7-II.

If you feel the F4 is heavy/big, do this. I did, and the MB20 lives on the F4.

My two-lens DX travel kit: I use the 18-140 as my GP lens. I partner it with a 35/1.8 for indoor low light use. Caution: As you go longer than 140, you have to consider how big and heavy that lens is. Will it get in your way, as a lens that you carry all day? re: Tamron 18-400. My only concern is how stiff the zoom ring might be. The lens has to push a LOT of lens in/out with about a 100 degree turn of the zoom ring. I could not find/determine how much you turn the zoom ring. That requires a STEEP zoom cam. I would like to feel the zoom ring myself, before making a decision. This comes from a bad experience using a Sigma 17-50/2.8. The zoom ring had a 60 degree throw, and because of that, it was STIFF to turn. Because of that, I did not like that lens.

The OpTech harness holds the camera/lens at 2 points. So if one lets go, the other is still holding the camera. I prefer carrying just one camera, but sometimes you just need to carry the 2nd one. Switching cameras is faster than changing lenses. Been there, done that.

A trap that you do NOT want to get into is to get too granular. Example, then you need Nikon, Canon and likely more subsections under - small format film cameras - dSLR - mirrorless cameras It is a tough balance, if you go granular, you can get very specific. But then that section may get very little traffic, and people stop looking there. Example, I would not make a subsection for Nikon rangefinders. It was before I started in photography, but Nikon did make rangefinders. Maybe that would go under "classic manual film cameras," in a subsection "small format cameras," for ALL the old rangefinders.

The section "Leica and Rangefinders" runs into a similar confusion. Leica makes BOTH film and digital cameras; just like Canon, Nikon and Olympus. And Leica made film SLRs and rangefinders, just like Nikon and Canon. The problem is, we have small and medium format camera brands with product in multiple categories. - Film: Nikon F, Hasselblad 501CM - dSLR: Nikon D700, Hasselblad 501CM+digital back - Mirrorless: Nikon Z7, Hasselblads X2D And there are other brands in multiple categories; Canon, Olympus, Pentax, etc. And these companies eventually ending with mirrorless cameras, or gone. - Fuji makes/made both small and medium format digital and film cameras. There is a section for "classic manual film cameras" But again we have issues. The Nikon-F is a fully "manual" film camera, so it matches the section name. But the F-5 isn't a fully manual camera. Nor are many of the later consumer film Nikons. Better to just label it FILM cameras. Or you need another section for "Modern Film cameras." Add a subsection "SMALL format" cameras, for 35mm and other formats smaller than medium format. Or a separate "SMALL format FILM Cameras" section. And you NEED subsections for "other brands/types" that you do not have a specific subsection for. Exakta, Mamiya, Topcon, 16mm compacts, Minox, etc. We have a "medium and large format" subsection under both "DSLR and Film Cameras" and "classic manual film cameras" This one is just as difficult. See the comment above with Hasselblad in three categories. Admittedly the problem is not simple. But mixing different organizations (camera type and brand) and not accounting for technology migration (film to dSLR to mirrorless) is a problem.

So HOW are dSLR and film cameras similar, such that they are grouped together? And why are dSLRs and mirrorless are NOT grouped together? They are both digital cameras. As it is grouped, there is confusion. If I want to look for a thread on Nikon or Canon mirrorless cameras, there isn't a Nikon or Canon sub section under mirrorless. The Nikon mirrorless threads are in the Nikon section in "dSLR and Film Cameras" 😵 Same with Olympus/OMDS mirrorless, I have to look in the Olympus section in "dSLR and Film Cameras" To ME, it seems to make better sense to have a FILM Camera group and a Digital Camera group. Where Digital = dSLR and mirrorless

I look at the two lenses as different views on a GP lens. I would use the 24-120/4 as my GP lens, at home. I would use the 24-200 as my GP lens, for travel. When I am limited in what I can carry, just TWO lenses, the 24-200 + 35/1.8. For travel, I am compromising on the lens in order to meet the 2-lens limit, I will also compromise on the IQ. I don't need pro quality glass for travel. I would also use it where I want to zoom past 120mm, WITHOUT changing lenses. Just as you would use the 24-120 over the 24-70, to zoom past 70 without changing lenses. As you see, they both would have a reason to be in my kit. If I had to choose only ONE, and I shot mostly at home, I would choose the 24-120. But if it was primarily for travel, it would be the 24-200.

The only thing I could do was to crop the slide using mylar tape.

I use the OpTech dual harness. It works for me. I have not tried the other dual harnesses. I used to use two cross body straps, but when I lift the bottom camera, it lifts the upper strap into my neck. That is why I switched to the dual harness, when I need to carry two cameras. Whichever dual harness you use, you need to commit to their anchor system. Having both Peak Design and OpTech anchors on the camera is a real bother. When I shoot flash, it is with one camera, so I don't use the dual harness. A flash on a flash bracket makes for a bulky enough kit. And I would not let it just "hang."

Since I shoot for the school, I have to go through hundreds of pics for each game. I want KISS. I use the discontinued Google Picasa. It does about 80-90% of what I need, and it is easy, fast and fits into my workflow. So have not had a need to upgrade. I use my "old" Elements 9 once in a while, for editing that Picasa can't do. But it isn't as fast as Picasa when working on LOTS of pics. The old 80/20 rule, I used only 20% of the functionality. I really should upgrade and explore the program more. I use ON1 for the AI noise reduction feature for high ISO sports pictures. The noise reduction is really neat stuff. For general use, Picasa is easier and faster. I use Huggin for making panoramas.

Ugh I've done many sticky labels, but not dried out labels. Now to figure out what White spirit and Methylated spirits translates to in the hardware store.

I would contact "international camera" in San Diego.

Alan, I just checked my Win10 settings, and it only has the strength slider. Which primarily seems to affect color. There isn't a separate brightness control. I think it would be better to let us choose color and brightness separately. Cuz during the day, I would like to reduce the brightness without changing the color.

I found that when I properly calibrate my monitor it is too bright. The problem is, in a photograph, white is only a small percentage of the image. The other colors reduce the brightness of the image. But when looking at a WORD, EXCEL or similar program, 95+% of the image is white. Since I only have ONE monitor, when I calibrate my monitor, I turn the white level down to a level that I can tolerate. So my monitor is not "properly" calibrated for photos, but as close as I can get it. Ideally I would have TWO monitors, one with the brightness turned down for non-photo work, and the second a properly calibrated monitor for photo.