Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Leitz
Page: <<prev 1 ... 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 ... 246 next>>
May 25, 2015 12:00:32   #
Nukepr wrote:
I checked the AF/M switch to make sure it was correctly positioned and also checked the AF/M switch on the camera body. Both were in correct position. This is part of what made it so baffling


If it proves to be an intermittent issue with the motor, about the only solution would be to take it in for repair.
Go to
May 25, 2015 11:53:20   #
photoshack wrote:
I am hoping this is an ok place to put a wanted ad? I am looking for a way to put a ND grad on a 16-35 lens for landscape work..


If no one here has anything, check out Cokin or Lee. Some swear by Lee and swear at Cokin, but I use the latter and have no issues with scratching, distortion or colour cast.
Go to
May 25, 2015 11:48:03   #
jethro779 wrote:
Looks more like an ex mother-in-law


Nah, she's the one I should have married!
Go to
May 25, 2015 11:46:28   #
Nukepr wrote:
Yesterday I was shooting with my Nikon 85mm 1.8G lens on my d7100 body and all was normal. Then, for no apparent reason, autofocus simply stopped working. I took the lens off and checked autofocus with my Nikon 50mm 1.8d (a lens with no focus motor) and on my 35mm 1.8G DX lens (a lens with a focus motor). Both worked fine, so I eliminated the camera as a problem. I then cleaned the lens contact points on the lens with a clean cloth, reinstalled the lens, and it worked fine. At this point, I don't know if it is an intermittent focus motor issue with the motor in the lens, or if it was nothing more than something interfering with the contact points between the camera and the lens, or if it was something else. My concern is that I did not change lenses before this started. Autofocus was fine, then it was not. My question is whether anyone else has experienced a similar problem, and if so, was it and how was it corrected?
Yesterday I was shooting with my Nikon 85mm 1.8G l... (show quote)


Hard to say for sure in your case, but it is always important to keep the contacts clean. Let's hope it continues to function properly now.
Go to
May 25, 2015 11:41:15   #
Jim Bianco wrote:
I didn't see any difference,Thanks Jim


In previous discussions here the consensus seems to be that leaving it on with higher shutter speeds neither helps nor hinders.
Go to
May 25, 2015 11:10:06   #
hlmichel wrote:
I hesitate to post this after my last post, but here goes.

I reworked the bridge picture to create this.


Didn't know my ex-wife was in Minnesota!
Go to
May 25, 2015 11:07:09   #
Jim Bianco wrote:
If I forget to turn off my VR lens when using a faster shutter speed than it's required will it make any difference in my pics,thats using it hand held.? could I leave it on all the time and not worry about it? I know you should turn it off when using it on a tripod.This is for hand held only. Thanks James Bianco


When you tried it each way, what differences did you see?
Go to
May 25, 2015 10:15:41   #
PCity wrote:
Most DSLRs have a stardard ISO range (say) 100-1600, which can often be extended/boosted by going to H1 or equivalent. Maybe increasing the range to 3200 or 6400, etc.

Some have a range of (say) 100 to 12,500, whcih can be boosted even further.

Question - is the effect on the picture generated any different when making use of an ISO within the "base" range versus the boosted range?

It is understood that the higher the ISO goes the more noise is expected due to an increase in the digital frequency. 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?

Thank you in advance for your input.
Most DSLRs have a stardard ISO range (say) 100-160... (show quote)


This is simple to test. Using your example, 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. If so, take a picture at that setting, and compare the two.
Go to
May 23, 2015 13:34:55   #
photon56 wrote:
Very interesting observation. I purchased a refurbished camera. As has already been discussed on this forum to the nth degree, I'm curious what the shutter count is. So, I snapped my first photo, loaded it and found the shutter count was 46. Cool. 45 photos taken before it was delivered.

Interesting, though, I am using a brand new memory card and the file sequence number is _DSC2477.NEF. hmmm. Methinks that the shutter count was reset during refurbishing process.

Trust me, I have no complaints. I'm loving the camera.
Very interesting observation. I purchased a refur... (show quote)


Or perhaps the shutter was replaced?
Go to
May 23, 2015 10:53:42   #
vinceinjax wrote:
Any special precautions I need to take?


Stay upwind!
Go to
May 23, 2015 10:47:37   #
[quote=Lou37]Nikon should wake up and smell the roses. [quote]

What have you been sniffing??
Go to
May 23, 2015 10:27:11   #
boberic wrote:
This assumes that he has keepers.


:XD: :XD:
Go to
May 23, 2015 08:54:35   #
Corolyn wrote:
These shots were taken with my Nikon Fg. I got the prints back and it seems they are all very grainy. Is this a problem with processing, Maybe bad film? I love my old camera but this is not acceptable. I am awaiting for some more rolls to be developed and hope that they come back OK. Will keep you posted. Thanks for your analysis.


The title of this thread makes no sense at all. Do you actually think that grainy prints are the fault of the camera??
Go to
May 23, 2015 07:19:14   #
blacks2 wrote:
My latest flea market find. I just want to share this beautiful 1898 Bulls-Eye Kodak Special which in my opinion is one of the nicest example of historic cameras. The bonus on this is not only the condition, but the low production #54. One of a kind.


Have you done a search to determine when this camera was manufactured?
Go to
May 23, 2015 07:15:41   #
Bob Yankle wrote:
Didn't work on a Canon 7D MK II


Should be simple, Bob. Just put all your keepers in a folder and read the number of items!
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 ... 246 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.