Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: danrob
May 10, 2018 06:10:10   #
My son-in-law, living in Pekin, IL was bitten on the thigh by a brown recluse several years ago. He was actually in bed when the bite occurred. Within 24 hours of the bite, he was hospitalized and for several days it was touch and go as to whether or not he would lose his leg. There was even some concern that the bite might prove fatal. He underwent several surgeries as doctors tried to stop the spread of venom through his leg, spent about two weeks in the hospital and finally ended up with a 4" X 4" divot in his leg. Because brown recluse spiders are rare in central Illinois, medical people had very little first-hand knowledge on how to treat the wound. In the end, he had to undergo several more plastic surgeries to try to restore the look of his leg. The Discovery Channel even did a segment on the story. Actually, quite a scary incident!
Go to
Aug 15, 2017 07:34:59   #
Another very fine lens is the Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens. I've had mine for years and use it on a Canon 80D. It has served me very well, everywhere from Alaska to Florida, California to Maine and I've made some nice images with it. There are two versions of this lens, a VC version (Tamron's name for image stabilization) and an older, NON-VC lens. The older non-VC version is reputed to be a sharper lens and it's now less expensive and is considered the better lens.
Go to
Apr 12, 2017 06:56:54   #
Picasa will handle RAW photos. Although I don't use it all that much, I usually put my photos on two computers, as just an extra backup. Years ago, I did use Picasa and it's still on my PC. Whenever I load pics from the SD cards, I see both the RAW file and the JPG. If one edits the RAW in Picasa, then it will necessarily be saved as a JPG. The editing tools for either RAW or JPG are the same and there's not anything fancy or real deep there, but it is available, or it was in older versions. I realize that it's no longer available for download, having been basically replaced by Google Photos.
Go to
Nov 13, 2016 06:41:50   #
Yes, Photos will handle a raw image, although it is probably not the best choice available. However, it is free, it will do a decent job and will help you learn some of the basic things you'll need to know. Some of the free apps from the App Store (i.e., Snapheal) can be used with Photos on a raw image. Free proprietary programs that come free with your camera (Canon's Digital Photo Professional) can also be used. There are any number of other paid programs in the App Store and other locations that can be used with a Mac (LightRoom, PS Elements, etc.) as well
Go to
Jan 1, 2015 07:07:01   #
Picasa will work with RAW files. It doesn't provide the levels of control as Lightroom, DPP, Elements and/or other programs, but it will allow you to process a RAW file. If you shoot RAW + JPG, you can see the two images side by side before/after you've done your editing. Any edits will be saved as JPG.
Go to
Sep 29, 2014 07:32:02   #
The Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens is worth your consideration. I've had one for several years and used it with both a Canon 30D and 60D and have been very pleased with the results. The constant 2.8 has been wonderful. There is a VC version of this lens, but most reviews indicate that the NON-VC is the sharper lens. It also comes with an excellent 6-year warranty.
Go to
Sep 29, 2014 07:32:01   #
The Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens is worth your consideration. I've had one for several years and used it with both a Canon 30D and 60D and have been very pleased with the results. The constant 2.8 has been wonderful. There is a VC version of this lens, but most reviews indicate that the NON-VC is the sharper lens. It also comes with an excellent 6-year warranty.
Go to
Sep 15, 2014 07:50:03   #
I've got a Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens for my Canons and it's an excellent lens. The f2.8 is constant. I've heard that the VC version of this lens is NOT as sharp as the non-VC.
Go to
Aug 12, 2014 13:12:48   #
You might also consider the Tamron 17-50, 2.8. I've had one for my Canons for years and it consistently delivers great results. I don't know how the Nikon version stacks up, but it's my main lens and I've used it on a Canon 30D and now a 60D. According to reviews I've read, the non-VC is sharper than the VC, plus it's cheaper.
Go to
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.