frank uhlig

<p>Your plane will jag and the firework light arches will jag with it. Only possible solution: Use a digital camera capable of 25,000 ISO and expose at 1/32 of the ISO 800 speed, but then the cascades and arches will be short and not show, no arches etc, just short lines of light. You need the firm support of a tripod and the long exposure time to make the view complete.</p>

<p>So: ditch the plane or try anyway. Good luck!</p>

<p>How much resolution do you need? The macro lens will be tops in that department for portraits, but be civil and do not map all crevices of my face, please.</p>

<p>How large do you want to blow the pics up? 30 by 45 inches? or 4 by 6?</p>

<p>What you really need as a beginner is PRACTICE, practise, practise. </p>

<p>Just use either lens and realize that your first portraits (or pics overall) will not be your best over your lifetime: they are early trial shots. In 2 years you will be so much improved in composition, lighting etc that that will become clear to you.</p>

<p>Asking for the best peewee baseball glove is sort of oximoronic, isn't it. Live and learn. Do not listen to any advice, please, not even mine; just do!</p>

<p>By law,</p>

<p>all pinholes ought to be hand made by the user!</p>

<p>So simple and fun to drill a hole into a body cap, paste alu foil over the hole, then prick with a needle.</p>

<p>By law,</p>

<p>all pinholes ought to be hand made by the user!</p>

<p>So simple and fun to drill a hole into a body cap, paste alu foil over the hole, then prick with a needle.</p>

<p>Bumping ISO allows for shorter exposure times (aperture held constant) or smaller aperture (exposure time held constant.</p>

<p>In either case, the exposure remains exactly the same. Why blue should become "bluer" (whatever that may means) is beyond the physics of photography: just a simple, maybe even silly myth.</p>

<p>Well, do your lightbulbs say 250V or near there?</p>

<p>I think most of Britain etc runs 250V as household voltage. What about the 13 amp fuse? That is the safeguard to not burn the house down. The lamps probably do not use more than 5 or 6 amps continuous. What wattage are they rated at? 1000W - 2000W would be quite ok in a house.</p>

<p>Where did you get those lights? From somewhere in GB? Call back!</p>

<p>Why not plug them in and let the light shine ... Or any friends with a bit of physics sense?</p>

<p>The camera that you use also plays a HUGE role in accepatable shutter speed per focal length.</p>

<p>SLRs and DSLRs will suffer from mirror slap vibrations, even on a tripod ...; rangefinder and mirrorless cameras etc will not.</p>

<p>If the wind had had tornado strength, you and the camera would have become airborne, right?</p>

<p>So, how much weaker was the wind? Certainly stronger, much stronger than your tripod configuration can support (unless some coupling was loose ...?). So opt for a stronger set-up; best with arca swiss clamps etc, etc... if you need to get out in the wind again.</p>

<p>The idea of loading down the tripod with your bag is good, except that in strong winds, this bag will swing and thus alter the support again, swingingly .. ..</p>

<p>For those shots there is really no substitute for a good adequate tripod. Your current one does not seem to be up to the task, unfortunately.</p>

<p>I would recommend any such book that your public library has on its shelf. This is quite easy to read up on.</p>

<p>Were you by any chance taking the pic from the front through the windshield? That piece of glued safety glass might have disabled all AF sensor stuff due to its polarizing action on light. Just a thought. </p>

<p>So, please try this again without dog and practice until you figure out how to do this with your gear.</p>

<p>Condensation occurs on colder than the surroundings objects. Period.</p>

<p>So: if you want to avoid condensation on and inside your gear, put your camera etc into a tight ziplock bag inside your air conditioned house, move the "package" outside into the sweltering moist heat for a couple of hours (overnight?), wait a while (hours for the temps to equilibrate) and then remove the bag and shoot happily.</p>

<p>Ok, get busy with a penny, your gear at home and practice with your macro lens, extension tubes, ..., your tripod, lights, ... until you get a satisfactory image.</p>

<p>I am assuming you work digitally, so no cost to you, other than time and sweat. Good luck!</p>

<p>How might the poster compare the ill effects of years with the same polarizer in a subjective and an objective way? Just from memory is not enough. Maybe there now is fungus inside the CP that is barely visible and can certainly not be seen if poster or anyone does not want to replace that admitted dingy filter even as it gets full and ever fuller of scratches ....</p>

<p>If a new CP filter (kept 99% of the time inside the bag) and a hood do not cure the problem, I think the lens or camera mount or ... may have been bumped somewhere in Mex-Afri-USA trips over time.</p>

<p>Gear just falls apart through use, as we all do.</p>

<p>How might the poster compare the ill effects of years with the same polarizer in a subjective and an objective way? Just from memory is not enough. Maybe there now is fungus inside the CP that is barely visible and can certainly not be seen if poster or anyone does not want to replace that admitted dingy filter even as it gets full and ever fuller of scratches ....</p>

<p>If a new CP filter (kept 99% of the time inside the bag) and a hood do not cure the problem, I think the lens or camera mount or ... may have been bumped somewhere in Mex-Afri-USA trips over time.</p>

<p>Gear just falls apart through use, as we all do.</p>

<p>Rather than an album, have you ever thought of a nice photobook instead?</p>

<p>The difference between 1/100 sec and 1/125 sec is small (1/3 of a stop in reality, but this shows the on screen, in viewfinder "adjacent " two default values, I assume). The viewfinder info does not give you the 1/112 sec that were actually used for exposure!</p>

<p>So please look at the more detailed exif files to make sure it was not just the decision difference as to what to display in the viewfinder when the exposure changed - imperceivably from 1/113 and 1/112 sec as the sun turned 1/5th of a degree second between shots. </p>

<p>This would happen, could happen, should happen with any gear, so it is not necessarily a Canon only question.</p>

<p>Jorge, one other not yet mentioned trick is to focus your lens slightly before your main subject at its 20m distance; say focus at 19.6m. Focused at 20m, the background musicians will become blurred when 1m or more off, and so will the ones now at 20.6 m off, and the ones 21 m behind will now be even more blurred, i.e., more out of focus. There is a trade-off here: the actual subject at 20m distance will not be as critically sharp as they would be if focused on correctly.</p>

<p>But other than using a wider 105 mm lens fully open or a lens of longer focal length, nothing will really help you here.</p>

<p>For 1/10 of the price of a Nikon Coolscan 9000, how would the Canon Canoscan 9000F perform, relative to the Epson 700, 750? All on MF film, that is? Does anyone use the Canoscan seriously?</p>

<p>Did you pull the end of the film out before putting it back into the camera? Which frame number is the bad pic? Are there other bad pics? frame numbers? Was the film vintage decades old (bad colors that are not usual with the 45/2 lens at all). Bad development?</p>

<p>What was the shutter speed? </p>

<p>1.8 x 2 = f/3.6 is the two stops smaller aperture from f/1.8.</p>

<p>Do you know how to contact the manufacterer? Maybe just a resoldering job on a couple of mains leads to adjust to 220V internally.</p>

<p>It never hurts to ask the maker!</p>

<p>Shooting people - when caught - gets you in SERIOUS trouble, shooting wildlife - without a permit - does so, too, but to a lesser degree.</p>

<p>Which is harder? I cannot tell, having done neither.</p>

<p>What did you have in mind here, eh?</p>

<p>THey tell you what the camera meter thinks you ought to expose at.</p>

<p>Up iso and see whether you need a new lens at all.</p>

<p>Today my Gossen Digisix was blank except for BAT on the right. I assumed it meant that the battery was gone. When I replaced the battery with a new one, the functions all worked, but the BAT still sits on the LCD on the right.</p>

<p>Does anyone have the manual (I can't find mine)? Does it mention anything about that BAT? How to make it disappear?</p>

<p>Maybe the brand new CR2032 battery is near "dead"? But I measure 3V while the other one is way low...</p>

<p>So, any ideas what is going on here? Or am I just going batty here? Thanks!</p>