I believe she originally released this tune, "Lily was Here" in 1989. She calls Denver her home now and it pretty popular around here. Originally from Sweden she came to the States years ago around the time this tune was originally released here.

I certainly didn't mean to imply that you didn't get the buggy picture in Colorado, just wanted to make the point that it was an unusual sighting. I am pleased that you got the excellent shot you did. You may be the only person to have such a shot and I take it as documentary of the occasion and appreciate that you were there to capture it. I will take it as an alert to pay more attention to what's on the side roads when I'm in that area.

I've spent a LOT of time across the southern parts of the state from border to border and seen none of those Quaker buggies. It is not a common occurrence.

Excellent as usual and all very typical of Colorado except the Quaker wagon and while I realize that you likely shot it here, it is not typical of Colorado as the title might imply to some. I have lived here nearly 42 years now, have been to all parts of the state extensively, and have yet to see a Quaker wagon on the roads.

Excellent, all four. Enjoyed them. To recip, here's a woman I like to watch sing and her piano man is a dude enjoying life. See if you agree. ...well not about watching the woman sing but the piano player. Be sure and stay for the dismount. LOL
gessman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCbzWiJLVhk

When you get your gear figured out, if you have some dirt around where you live, rather than use feeders, plant some Salvia plants or use Google to search for plants that hummers like. Hummers fly in close to where they can feed and hover as they look around to make sure it's safe and getting flowers in your hummer pictures is a good thing whereas getting a feeder is not. If you don't have a place for plants in your yard, put them in a bucket and sit them around. Hummers will find them. Here's a couple I got with a Sony a6000 and an adapted Canon lens.

EDIT: Often, if you plant wisely, you can get in a place to shoot hummers so you can manually pre-focus and not have to be so concerned about a really fast focusing lens. Give yourself a little wider swath where the hummer will be in focus when it hovers prior to moving in to eat like f/8 and set auto focus off and just shoot what's in that range you have preset.

So, let me see if I understand this right. When you found out you couldn't enjoy the joke due to self-imposed restrictions, you decided that this thread that other people were enjoying was the perfect place to check to see if your first amendment rights were still in effect? 😃

If you're not interested in sports, why would you open this clearly titled thread?

So, I mounted my $5 garage sale Kalimar 800-1200mm f/9.9 to f/14.9, roughly the equivalent quality of the lens the OP used in this thread, on my Sony a7r3 full frame 42.4 megapixels and shot a tree, in Raw, that is about 50 ft. off my deck to see what it would be with minimal post processing. Camera was tripod mounted on a sturdy Bogen 3063, IS on, and shot was triggered by hand. The first is the middle of a 3 shot bracket at 1200mm f/14.9 and the second is an hdr processed in Affinity with that 3 shot bracket. I processed the Raw files with Photolemur then gave them some minor levels, contrast, saturation, brightness, and shadow then downsized them from 350dpi to 72dpi, no sharpening. B&H sells this lens for $149.95 and there are several on ebay ranging from $100 to $189. https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2047675.m570.l1313&_nkw=Kalimar+800-1200&_sacat=0 The lens is okay to "tinker" with but it is anything but a pleasure to shoot with. If you are meticulous, in your technique, which I'm not,it will probably produce a pretty good shot . The tree trunk on the left was less than 5 feet from the one in center so for 1200mm it is wide open at f/14.9 and it shows in the depth of field sharpness. I would expect to see similar performance out of the one the OP used. No sharpening was applied beyond what Photolemur may have done in the Raw conversion so I'm sure that could be improved on. When you take it up to 100% as it was shot at 350dpi it has green freckles everywhere. Looks like I need to set my time a little better on the a7r3 - wasn't shot at midnight.

(Download)


(Download)

I got a mildly "U" shaped black band across the view in my a7r3 yesterday. It was a hair or some hair-like lint on he sensor. Rocket Blaster fixed it.

So he did. I caught the f/8 to f/16 and missed where he gave the focal length. Thanks. It's about
the same stuff.

I'm old enough that I got some of the old remedies, turpentine and sugar, kerosene and honey, whiskey and honey. Rank stuff, it was, castor oil, cod liver oil, terrible stuff.

I'm thinking the lens pictured is about what we're talking about in this thread although it could be we're talking about an 800mm mirror lens that came with a 2x. The lens in the cell phone pic below is a 800 f/9.9 to 1200 f/14.9. It's an older Kalimar brand. I've dropped a Canon 20d beside it for perspective.

I'll take a couple of shots with this lens in the morning with a high megapixel camera to see if that makes it a better lens or worse, and post 'em on here if I can make out what the subject is.

Appy, could you take a picture of your lens and post it here so we can see what it looks like?

(Download)

It is a feature that aids in focusing, obviously. As you turn the focus ring on a lens, when your subject is in focus it lights up with red, white, or yellow, your choice, to show you when you have achieved focus. It lets you focus on your subject anywhere it is in your view so you aren't stuck with always centering your subject. Peaking is a menu selection and will even work with auto focus if you want to visually confirm you have achieved focus. The brighter and more solid the color is on your subject, the better the focus.

Reserving the right to be wrong, having not seen the OP's lens, it sounds like he is using one of those white $69.95 bazookas about 2 feet long from ebay that have no electronics at all in them. They zoom by loosening a collar release and sliding the two parts further apart on about a six inch long inner extension tube and re-locking the collar in the "zoomed" position while having gone from f/8 to f/16 in the process. They are designed to sell to a person who has seen the big white lens being used by pros at ballgames but has no clue what they were seeing. I have such a lens I picked up at a garage sale for $5.00. It can be tinkered with but will not get real good results. Mostly it confuses the camera which is why the camera reports the lens as it does in the exif data. To a camera it looks like there's no lens attached.