snapclick47 wrote:
My concern is with the polarizing filter especially. On the 18-55 I need to first zoom the desired amount, and then put the filter on.. Because the front end rotates with zoom.
On 18-105, the front end is fixed with whatever zoom, so I can put the filter and not worry about adjusting my zoom later, because it keeps straight.
How does it behave with the 18-140?
Cheers!
Sc47.
With zoom or focus? The front of a lens rotating with focusing has been common. (Canon finally seems to be moving well away from lenses that suck in this way.) I've never heard of a lens whose front rotates while zooming, though.
icemncmth wrote:
I agree...I like both brands but I grew up usings Nikon F's...FE...FM FM2T etc.
I grew up on Olympus film SLRs but when I went digital, Canon had the upper hand for astrophotography. Now they're about equal there, too. (Actually, Nikon's ahead now, having recently fielded a FF astronomy-specialized body. Canon, we need a 6Da, are you listening?)
icemncmth wrote:
I may be wrong but for a prime 35mm it is the only lens with VR for Nikon.
AFAIK, you're right, but I'm not that 'up' on Nikon's offerings. I'm a Canon guy. (I don't want to get into a C vs.N. argument. Near as I can figure, the brands are about equally good.)
The main difference beside focal length is that the Tammies have whatever they call their version of VR.
john boots wrote:
Try the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 G less expensive and has great reviews ,I just bought one to use on a D600
'Progressive' politicians.
larrywilk wrote:
What dangerous critters have you been around?
My wife!
CHOLLY wrote:
Mirrored drives and RAID storage systems. :thumbup:
Can still be taken out by a lightning bolt that overwhelms the surge protector.
There's also the issue that despite your data not being particularly valuable to thieves, putting it in with a bunch of other peoples' and corporations' data may make the aggregate worth a thief's effort, and your data may become 'collateral damage'.
James Slick wrote:
I only use "the cloud" for temporary storage and to move files from device to device. I understand that HDD,SSD and DVDs can fail or not last forever. But trusting my stock to persons unknown is worse (to me). Even if trustworthy, no company is "too big to fail" even if they dominate now. Kodak,GM and Westinghouse were once so big as to seem invincible...now.. I'll stick to my phyiscal copies kept in at least two phyisical locations!
Mushroom Cloud computing at its finest.
hlmichel wrote:
When I was running the trial of W10 I needed to format my drive at one point. I off-loaded all of my files to skydrive and Adrive.
Adrive was offering around 50 gigs for free with a 100 gig trial for a couple of months.
I just logged in this morning to retrieve my files and was told that they'd canceled the free option. If I want my files I'd have to pay for them.
There was an option to beg for a week extension which I did. Honestly, I don't remember what pictures I had on the Adrive so I can live without them I guess.
But I just have to say wow. There have been discussions here on the hog about backing up files to the cloud and there were warnings about fly by night storage companies. Lesson learned--until the next time.
When I was running the trial of W10 I needed to fo... (
show quote)
Albuqshutterbug wrote:
I received my Canon lens back from repair yesterday.
The autofocus assembly was replaced and it appears as if they either replaced my front lens or polished out the tiny scratches that were there. I did a few hand held shots of ol man Luna at full zoom.
ISO 100 f/11 1/125th IS on.
Not my favorite time of moon to shoot but it didn't do that poorly.
I'm pretty sure you got a replacement front lens. First, since the front element or group is so vulnerable, the manufacturers make extras. (Actually, they make extras of all of the elements/groups, but more of the front and rear ones because these are the ones in best position to get damaged, being on the exterior of the lens.)
If they had just locally 'repolished' the scratches, there would be patches of uncoated glass on the surface, and an uneven 'figure' on the optical surface.
So, they'd have to repolish the entire surface instead, and test it to make sure they hadn't added any unwanted deviation from the designed curve. Which is merely a pain in the butt if it is a spherical surface and a complete b---h to do on an asphere. If they had to grind and polish more than a very, very, very thin layer off, it would alter the optical correction of the lens element, and therefore the correction of the entire lens assembly. In which case, they may or may not be able to compensate for this by adjusting spacings between lenses and groups.
Also, to get 'like new' appearance and performance, they would have to have applied a new multicoating.
Except possibly for a large element made of an exotic glass, or for a very expensive optical system with no replacement part available, this would generally be more trouble and hugely more expense than it's worth. (It would probably cost much more than just replacing the entire lens.)
EdJ0307 wrote:
My thoughts, also. I would bet if you said something derogatory about somebody like Idi Amin, "whose eight-year reign of terror in Uganda encompassed widespread killing, torture and left the country pauperized," sb and other liberals would call you a racist.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
ken hubert wrote:
It pretty much was until that idiot in the WH dissolved the southern border.
I agree with you about the border and the idiot, but the plague has plenty of reservoirs among our native rodents, so it doesn't really need to come in on wetbacks.