Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Blasthoff
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 40 next>>
Apr 12, 2016 22:37:35   #
gschmitt wrote:
Anyone recommend a particular tripod that is lightweight enough to hike with??


Get the steadiest tripod and best head you can for your money. If it's heavier then others, spend $20-$25 on a decent shoulder strap to carry it. It REALLY DOES make a huge difference and you won't even notice carrying a couple/few extra pounds.
Go to
Apr 12, 2016 22:13:46   #
Trust me on this, you want multi focus readers. Foster Grant makes such reading glasses that retail at about $35 but you can sometimes find them under $20. Walgreens occasionally has a 2 for 1 sale. There designed for reading AND viewing a computer screen or across your desk. They work just as well, if not better, then my $300 "no-line" prescription. Try them once and you'll never go back. Oh yeah, the frames on these glasses are decent quality too.

Ron 717 wrote:
I regularly wear bifocals and find it bothersome to PP photos on my 27" monitor because of trying to get the close vision portion of the glasses focused on different ares of the screen.

I have thought of getting a pair of reading glasses from the drugstore that I believe would enable me to eliminate the bobbing and weaving while trying to focus on all areas of the screen.

Has anyone else run into this problem and what do you use.
Go to
Apr 12, 2016 07:48:53   #
CHOLLY wrote:
Thanks for the replies folks!

Rule of thumb: IF I use MY gear, then there is a charge. But using cameras supplied by others means the only thing I am giving up is my time.

This couple was young... and based on their dress and the vehicle they drove, my first impression was "Courthouse Wedding" and struggling young family.

So in good conscience, I wouldn't have charged them even if they offered.

Another point is to consider is that I was just shooting birds for fun. They saw my camera and lenses and thought I would be able to at least handle their camera.

I honestly think I got as much out of the deal as they did, because in my book of life doing good deeds is a good thing PLUS it was practice for a part-time photographer in anticipation of "the money season".

As Photocraig said above, "what goes around, comes around." :thumbup:
Thanks for the replies folks! br br Rule of thumb... (show quote)


Good for You! Back in the '80's I did a number of Weddings for people who couldn't afford a photographer. Actually, I preferred working for free or at cost as I gained experience. That way there was no pressure on me and the Bride and Groom were ALWAYS happy and the only critic was myself. Just the way I liked it. It was an opportunity to please myself with what I felt was important to work on, which ultimately would better please everyone. I never wanted to have to deal with "paying customers" who might be difficult which, all too often, happens to Pro's in the field. That is why I chose not go beyond that stage and keep it a happy experience.
Go to
Mar 26, 2016 11:23:57   #
Cool! Thanks for the link.
Go to
Mar 22, 2016 06:13:17   #
Jeepers, Creepers, I don't know what your talking about!
Go to
Mar 13, 2016 16:28:11   #
aellman wrote:
I always found winding the film onto the Nikkor developing reel to be life's great physical challenge. BTW, Ilford films are excellent. >>>AL

Threading film onto a standard stainless steel reel is a piece of cake, once you get the hang of it. You can always tell if something isn't right just by "feel".
Go to
Mar 13, 2016 16:03:08   #
aellman wrote:
I disagree with many of the answers to this question. Unless you are Ansel Adams or Joel Meyerowitz, you can get very good results from many labs. The ones that still do film tend to be the best ones.

Google it! "Black and white film developing". I got a lot of good hits, including this one, a guaranteed winner: http://www.ilfordlab-us.com/page/57/Black-and-White-Prints-from-Film.htm

Best of luck. >>> ALAN

Quote:
"Unless you are Ansel Adams or Joel Meyerowitz"?
Hmmm, Really? I never met a negative that couldn't benefit from at least a little dodge and/or burn, print contrast adjustment and at least some slight crop adjustment. Up front, we'll do without any of these.

I'm glad you would be happy without "adjustments", but let's take a look at the price of "mediocrity". Price of film, $5. Develop and "medium" 18 MB scans on CD, $16 (higher res scans $10 additional), set of small prints $12 (5x7's $17 or $10 proof sheet) $5.95 shipping. Let's see, just to develop and receive a small set of prints comes out to almost 36@$39, 24@$36 or $1.09/$1.50 each for 4x6 prints. You might find that acceptable, I don't.
Go to
Mar 13, 2016 14:01:12   #
jimmya wrote:
I frankly don't understand what all the fuss is about. I've been shooting crop sensor Canon for many years and don't notice anything at all about lenses. If I went to full frame, as I'm understanding the conversation, I'd have to stand or zoom closer to get the same image as I did on my crop?
Am I understanding this correctly?

I'll try to simplify. If you are standing at the same spot with two cameras, one with a crop sensor, one full frame. Each camera has the same focal length lens, say 100mm. Visualize the full image on your crop sensor camera. Now, using the full frame camera with the same focal length lens, you would need to move closer or use a 160mm lens to fill the frame with the same image at the same distance.

All of this seems to confuse a lot of people. That's why I myself, always think in terms of magnification rather then arbitrary "focal length" when using different "formats" to visualize how a scene or object will frame in the viewfinder of a particular camera of different format. 1x magnification with an APS-C (crop) sensor is achieved with aprox. 35mm lens. 1x with a FF camera is aprox. 50mm focal length, etc.

What confuses many is that same size images on crop and FF are not exactly identical because the "depth of focus" is not identical at different distance or focal length. To truly be "identical" in depth of focus, you would need to crop the FF image taken at the same "focal length" to match the APS-C image size and enlarge it to match print size. It is easier to think of it as smaller sensors having greater depth of focus or less Bokeh at a given focal length then cameras with larger sensors. Clear as mud now?
Go to
Mar 13, 2016 12:04:22   #
JohnSwanda wrote:
I pretty much agree with that. If you want good results in black and white and not do it yourself, you'll want a true custom printer which might be pricey, and I don't know how many of those are left. B&W film is very easy to develop, you could learn that quickly. But printing B&W has a learning curve and takes some time to master.

As to type of film, I was always a Kodak guy - TMax 100 for slow film, but I liked good old Tri-X better than TMax 400. And then for those who like grain and low light shooting, TMax 3200.
I pretty much agree with that. If you want good re... (show quote)

A couple of points. "If", you did find someone to do custom prints, the cost would greatly exceed the novelty of doing it. Second, while a "generic" method of developing a B&W film is "easy", getting a film, developer, development process including time and temperatures and matching them to a print paper and development to achieve a quality anywhere close to the automated color print process is NOT EASY. I can not express that strongly enough to a first timer. Unless one is committed to taking on the TIME, COMMITMENT and considerable EXPENSE to properly take up the study of B&W film processing/printing, they will find more success and pleasure shooting color film. That is simply a "hard lesson" type of fact.
Go to
Mar 13, 2016 11:14:27   #
Captain Jim wrote:
I am thinking about pulling out my old 35 mm film camera..what is a great film on todays market and where could I ever get it processed..?

If your looking to use your film camera and simply have someone else do your film processing, then you should just shoot color print film. That is the easiest means of getting something pleasing. Anything decent in Black and White is a process of developing and printing yourself, regardless of what anyone else may tell you. Color print film is designed for the automated process, B&W is not and the results will be mediocre at best. I did tons of B&W and Color in my day and understand both.
Go to
Mar 2, 2016 08:31:24   #
Apaflo wrote:
RTFM when all else has failed.

D3100: pages 26 and 63.

D7000: pages 38, 97, and 100.

There is no micro-prism nor a split screen focusing aide for the very simple reason that they are inadequate on a modern DSLR and significantly inferior to using the AF system, even with old manual focus lenses.

Incidentally that is true on the most recent film cameras too, as Auto Focus has nothing at all to do with digital vs. film.

Bull Pucky! That sounds like crap straight out of marketing literature.

I had my first Nikon dslr less then a week and I was shopping for a micro prism spit image rangefinder screen. First Hand Experience, "it's the ONLY way to fly" with MF lenses. If I had to depend on the erratic green light, I would, and in fact DID, put it down in frustration. There is GOOD reason WHY split image rangefinder screens were used with almost all MF cameras, because they WORKED! You can use the "green light" to confirm focus if it turns you on, but I'll be damned if I'd want to use it to "find focus" on a steady diet. I would also strongly disagree that the reason they're not used on auto focus cameras is because they are "inadequate", that's pure horse hockey. The reason is to keep the finder from being cluttered unnecessarily for most users and possibly because the center split image "may" affect "center spot metering" slightly with some lenses.
Go to
Feb 27, 2016 10:37:35   #
balticvid wrote:
I understand that the Lacrosse 1000 has solved any overheating problems. I only recharge my batteries
at 500 max. The batteries were barely warm.
Does anyone have the 1000. I'm new to this.
Thanks, Walt

What they did is fix the heat overload protection so it will temporarily shut off BEFORE it melts down.

Charging at a rate of 1/4 to 1/3 of battery capacity, which is what your doing, is both safe and best for longevity of batteries. Yes, they should barely get warm. At 700-800 mAh charge rates they should get noticeably very warm, but not hot. You should also keep an eye on the heat of the charger itself. I charge larger capacity 2400 mAh AA cells @ 800mAh to keep charge time closer to 3 hrs rather then 6+ hrs and the batteries do get warm but the charger I use doesn't. If charging overnight it's prudent to always use the lower charge rate when time is not an issue.
Go to
Feb 27, 2016 09:31:18   #
Peterff wrote:
Thx for the detail. That's what I was looking for. Appreciated.

As an addendum to my post I said,

"I myself, have always had some question as to the robustness of the internal circuitry of the LaCross."

I would support that claim with the fact that the overall max current handling capacity of the LaCross is only 3000 mAh as opposed to the 20 Ah (6.5x more) current capacity of both the Opus and MaHa units.
Go to
Feb 26, 2016 18:50:31   #
Peterff wrote:
Can you clarify better in what ways please?


While the LaCross and MaHa are very good chargers, they each have their quirks. The Maha is an excellent charger except for its archaic and tiresome interface which has been in need of being re configured for years. The LaCross actually had some very serious heat related issues a few years ago that have been corrected in as far as safety goes. However, there still is a design issue in that the batteries don't have a lot air space around them and tend to get get hotter especially when charging at higher rates. I myself, have always had some question as to the robustness of the internal circuitry of the LaCross.

All of these chargers have "evolved" and been improved over time. The Opus is relatively new to the market but their chargers have been evolving VERY rapidly in comparison. Firmware revisions of the Opus have come quickly to the point that the interface and options are MUCH more refined over the MaHa. I bought an Opus BT-C2400 a few months ago with rev.2.2 firmware and it's a pleasure to use and monitor and heat isn't even close to being a issue. At about $20 less it's a no brainer in my book.
Go to
Feb 25, 2016 10:05:31   #
DirtFarmer wrote:
When using rechargeable batteries, pay attention to the charger as well as the batteries. A good charger will help keep your batteries in good shape. A cheap charger will leave you frustrated with short battery life and other battery problems.

The cheap chargers that used to come with AA batteries would charge the batteries in pairs, sometime 4 at a time. You could not charge an odd number of batteries at once because the batteries were charged in pairs in series. That was a problem for me since my SB800 used 5 AA cells. Since they were charged in series, if one of the pair filled first, the charger would shut off, leaving the otner battery with less than a full charge. That meant you were always pushing one of the batteries beyond its limits when you were using them. Thus the shortened battery life.

I got a MAHA charger that does 8 batteries at a time. It charges them individually, so when it's done, all the batteries have a full charge. I can use it for 1 battery, 2 batteries... up to 8. Whatever I need.

There are now several of those chargers on the market. MAHA is one of them. LaCrosse has gotten some good reviews.

The chargers aren't cheap, running in the $50-75 range. But they're worth it if you're depending on your batteries. One of those chargers and a couple sets of Eneloops and you should be all set.
When using rechargeable batteries, pay attention t... (show quote)

The "new kid" on the block of "smart chargers" is Opus, the 4 battery models 2100 and 2400 with latest firmware are only $30-$37 and they ARE better then either the LaCross or MAHA units. I have an Opus 2400 myself. They also make the 3000 series of chargers that have the added capacity to ALSO charge specialized lithium rechargeable cells.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 40 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.