Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Leitz
Page: <<prev 1 ... 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 ... 246 next>>
Jun 1, 2015 18:09:51   #
boncrayon wrote:
Is there a module to adapt a SunPak Auto622 Pro to my Canon T3?


The trigger voltage is 6 Volts.

http://dpanswers.com/roztr/volt_finder.php
Go to
Jun 1, 2015 17:50:19   #
Uuglypher wrote:
Does anyone have a D.I.Y. formula for LPD Developer?
How do its action and its results compare with a standard...say...D-76?

Dave


D76 is a film developer. Do you mean Dektol?
Go to
Jun 1, 2015 16:12:16   #
juicesqueezer wrote:
Yes, he did say two didn't he!


Your excitement is entirely understandable! :)
Go to
Jun 1, 2015 15:54:46   #
kimbop wrote:
I have a problem that I can't seem to resolve. A polarizing filter is stuck on a UV filter so tight that I can't separate them.
Can anyone suggest a way to loosen them?

Would using cold water help? Possibly putting them in the freezer section of the refrigerator is another possibility (like we used to loosen a tripod in the winter after it was brought indoors and the heat swelled up the leg locks--actually we just put the tripod outside on the porch for an hour our so depending on the temperature). The two filters were given to me by someone with "very strong" hands! I don't want to damage them as they cost quite a bit to replace.
I have a problem that I can't seem to resolve. A p... (show quote)


If the UV is in front, could be that the previous owner screwed it on tight to protect the polarizer and didn't intend for it to come off.
Go to
Jun 1, 2015 12:57:50   #
juicesqueezer wrote:
Nikon 70-200 f2.8; 50 f2; 28-70 f2.8; 14-24 f2.8 for landscapes!


Good to know I'm not the only one who doesn't understand the new math!
Go to
May 31, 2015 21:35:10   #
Leitz wrote:
Congratulations!! You have won the grand prize! (Haven't yet decided what the prize is, though! :lol: )


Well, that backfired! I refuse to believe that in 8 pages only one understood the simple answer to the original question! The joke's on me, and I'm laughing along with everyone else.
Apaflo, your prize must go by kayak, so it may take a bit! :lol:
Go to
May 31, 2015 15:04:16   #
Apaflo wrote:
Here is your "test":

'take a picture at ISO 12,500 set from the "base range." Now see if you can set ISO 12,500 from any other range.'

I know of no camera that has the option of shooting at ISO 12,800 using two different methods to achieve that ISO.

The "test" isn't possible.


Congratulations!! You have won the grand prize! (Haven't yet decided what the prize is, though! :lol: )
Go to
May 31, 2015 14:18:35   #
[quote=PCity]
singleviking wrote:
You boys seem to have drifted from the original thread significantly. It started by asking about the noise comparison between a cropped 24 MP and the Full Frame 24 MP Sony sensors (which BTW, do not have the same size photocell receptors). Now you're arguing about the definition of a pixel.

As the originator of the Question raised, yes, things seem to have gotten out of hand.

In summary, simply what I was trying to find an answer to was -

" But, all else being equal, is there a significant difference as to whether the ISO comes from the base range or the extended range?

Stated another way - Is there a differnce if I use (say) an ISO of 12,500 from the Base range, or 12,500 from the boosted range?"

I have received some responses that directly addressed the question raised, although some a a different slant on their response.

As things developed, responses have gone out in all directions. :-(
You boys seem to have drifted from the original th... (show quote)


If you tried the little experiment I suggested (page 1, 3rd response), you have your answer. :)
Go to
May 31, 2015 14:10:34   #
lance0749 wrote:
I'm surprised that Nikon does not have electronic contacts. I bought a Neewer brand but had to send it back because I could'nt separate 2 rings.


Personally, I don't find autofocus very useful for most close-up work, and would not buy such a tube of any brand. The Nikon PK tubes are about as high quality as one could wish for. Mine have had considerable use for over 30 years and are as tight as when new. I consider it money well-spent.
Go to
May 31, 2015 11:44:40   #
Mark7829 wrote:
Excuse me, there is no big ND filter out there that does not provide a color cast, and for that matter all polarizers do as well. Blue is the color and easily correctable and expected. The yellow and magenta casts found in Cokin are from inferior production. You should also add in distortion and vignetting as well. Beginners can't tell the difference. Many will respond, "It works for me". "I don't have a problem with them". However, if you expect great results and visit wonderful places in outdoor and landscape photography. You really don't carry Cokin.

Lee's clip-on foundation system is great and beats the screw-on/push-on filters. Let me explain further. It is nearly impossible to focus let alone view an image through a 10 stopper. With Lee you focus, view, set and then clip-on the ND, snap and clip-off. With a Cokin type, you screw on the adapter and then push on the ND. If your lens has any creep that push on action will change your settings. I am not going to risk that.
Excuse me, there is no big ND filter out there tha... (show quote)


Just checked my Cokin filters, and by gum, you're right on the colour cast. The polarizer and graduated neutral density are neutral, but the 82a has a decidedly blue cast, and the 85b is a sickly orange! They'll be in the bin tomorrow.
Go to
May 31, 2015 11:27:30   #
Gendarme wrote:
All this said, and as a shiny new owner of a D7100 (it is shiny new as well), the first place I look for any issue with my pics is the shutter activator. On any brand of camera, the shutter activator is very complex and can cause numerous issues. The same system also controls all of the camera settings as well so it is not always easy to know exactly where the problem is, but 90% of the time it will be somewhere in the shutter activator.

I will now sit back and duck! :-D


Would you insinuate that user participation is required? For shame!! :lol:
Go to
May 31, 2015 10:20:42   #
raypep wrote:
I realize the wisdom of your response for certainty but this did not stop the active discussions earlier in the year. More generally, my question calls on the experience of the members here as to how long the price of a camera holds firm as newer models are released.


We all like guessing games. :)
Go to
May 31, 2015 09:16:42   #
raypep wrote:
In the beginning of the year, there was active discussion on the price of the Nikon 7100 dropping once the 7200 came out. The newer model is now out and the price of the 7100 has come down to $899 for the body only , down from $999.
Is that the drop people expected? Will there be further reductions in the near future? It appears the release of the newer model has not made much of an impact on the 7100 price.


That would be a question more appropriately addressed to Nikon. All anyone here can offer is an uninformed opinion, myself included.
Go to
May 31, 2015 09:10:12   #
Fotomacher wrote:
I bought a 300mm f/4.5 AI-s lens about 4 months ago for $200. Compared it with the 300mm f/4 and found that it was very very close in IQ and CA on both my D300s and D700 bodies. The manual focus is not a big problem for me and the non-CPU lens feature of Nikon bodies allows for Aperture priority shooting. Hard to go wrong for $200 !


Which Nikkor 300 f/4.5 AIS do you have?
Go to
May 31, 2015 08:29:40   #
terlap wrote:
I have already used extension tubes on a 200-400 f4 Nikon lens and did not lose anything. I was shooting at high f stops as well.
Don't know what you are talking about.
You may be thinking teleconverters...


No one is thinking of teleconverters. We're talking about the need to increase exposure when using extension tubes. The more extension, the more exposure must be increased.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 ... 246 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.