Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Leitz
Page: <<prev 1 ... 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 ... 246 next>>
Apr 26, 2015 07:56:48   #
UXOEOD wrote:
Some poster here sound like they long for the good old days when you could get a shave, a haircut, a tooth pulled, abd brain surgery at the corner barbershop. If you want to compare photography to Da Vinci, you won't find any artists that mix thier own paints, which he had to.

Yes, film is still available, so is tin, and there are still a few who do tin-type photography.

On an extremely routine basis we unskilled amatures do things that Mr A Adams would have given a limb to be able to do. Enjoy technology, and put the old grey mare out to pasture, the age of the steam tractor has changed farming forever!

Welcome to 2015!
Some poster here sound like they long for the good... (show quote)


I get a kick out of these inane comments from those who pretend to know what's best for everyone else! :lol:
Go to
Apr 26, 2015 07:17:40   #
paulrph1 wrote:
I need help identifying a flower. I have tried to search it out but no luck. Any one of you know what it is?


Pretty well fuzzed up, whatever it is.
Go to
Apr 24, 2015 08:53:43   #
Digital is great. Film is great. I shoot more film because I prefer it to digital. Not particularly interested in what anyone else uses!
Go to
Apr 24, 2015 08:48:34   #
brian43053 wrote:
Any hogger out there familiar with Tokina lenses? Opinions? I'm thinking about getting one for my Sony A99. Do they have any full frame lenses?


The Tokina AT-X lenses are among the best of the independent brands, optically and mechanically. Most are FX.
Go to
Apr 24, 2015 08:42:08   #
gvarner wrote:
Been using mostly f16 but could stop down more if that's advisable. All your thoughts on this would be appreciated.


Certainly smaller apertures will produce diffraction, and the greater the enlargement the greater the effect. You might want to photograph a subject with a lot of detail at various apertures and see for yourself just how much deterioration you can live with. Many, if not most, photographs do not NEED to be tack sharp across the board and often a little softening from diffraction may be preferable to having an important area out of focus. Diffraction can be measured, but its effect on an image is very subjective. May your endeavours be successful! :)
Go to
Apr 18, 2015 12:58:29   #
EdJ0307 wrote:
I just made what I thought was an obscure remark. I didn't think so many people would get pissed off about it. I'm surprised anybody commented at all. But I should have known better. This is Ugly Hedgehog and nobody is supposed to have . . . oh, never mind. This is why I keep telling myself, "don't comment about anything on the Ugly Hedgehog website."


Ed, I don't think anyone is angry with you, it just seems a rather trite thing to post about. We all have different thoughts about the terms others use, but most choose not to fret over it. Most folks here try to make helpful comments (I even do so upon occasion, myself!), and there is a wealth of information shared on UHH. Have a great day!
Go to
Apr 18, 2015 11:48:23   #
NormanHarley wrote:
I bought a refurb D7100 and my girlfriend now has a D7100. She also took my 18-55 and my 55-200 kit lenses that came with my D3200. She loves 'her' camera! I just ordered a refurb D610 from B&H and it shipped this morning which will leave me with an excellent camera and no wide to medium focal lengths for it. I do have a Sigma 70-300 that I can use along with my Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-s and my Nikon 500mm f/4P.
My budget is roughly $1000 for some new glass. I prefer fixed focal lengths, f/1.8 is plenty fast enough for me, but I will consider another zoom if it offers sharp, quality images.
I could use some advice on lenses for me to investigate, I prefer Nikon glass but am open to other brands. Thank you!
Norman Lowe
I bought a refurb D7100 and my girlfriend now has ... (show quote)


Since you prefer prime lenses, I'd say you'd be covered pretty well with a 24, 35 and 50.
Go to
Apr 18, 2015 11:38:29   #
EdJ0307 wrote:
One of my peeves (not a pet peeve) is when someone refers to a lens as "glass", like in this title from a recent topic, "Suggestions for Nikon FX glass for . . .". One UHHer I have seen will list his various cameras on the first line of the bio that appears whenever he posts something. On the second line he lists his "glass". To me a window is made of glass. I get a drink of water in a glass. That doohickey on the front of a camera is called a lens, not glass.

OK. I got that off my chest. Now we can get back to more serious matters.

P.S. To the person whose topic that was I referred to, I have no suggestions for "glass" for your Nikon FX.
One of my peeves (not a pet peeve) is when someone... (show quote)


I sometimes refer to my lenses as glass. Anyone who doesn't like it is free to ignore it!
Go to
Apr 14, 2015 17:19:40   #
burkphoto wrote:
Well, I like to see that my subject's eyes are open when I make a portrait! I worked for three huge school portrait companies. The dSLR was considered a highly inferior solution for portrait photography, but a necessary evil to get us off the expensive, addictive drug that we called film.

Lifetouch even builds their own super secret X1 camera to get around it. It is both mirrorless and shutter-less.


I used to complain every time I blinked my eyes, but eventually got used to it! :lol:
Go to
Apr 14, 2015 16:31:35   #
[quote=burkphoto] NO ONE in his or her right mind likes that damned mirror blackout at the point of exposure.
[quote]

Obviously there are differences of opinions here. I've never heard anyone in their right mind complain of it!
Go to
Apr 14, 2015 14:47:53   #
Papa j wrote:
I reviewed my 750 back from Nikon. The issue was my viewfinder only showed the image all exposure ( f stop shutter speed )and ISO and focuss information was blank. I put a 60 mm lens on and the viewfinder is still blank . Nikon said they cleaned the mirror box and made some adjustments to the camera. I called Nikon they apologized and sent me a new label to send the camera back. Should I notify Cameta where the camera was purchased. Thanks in advance

Joe

Have you tried it with any other lenses?
Go to
Apr 14, 2015 13:33:32   #
ronf78155 wrote:
Where is a Canon mirrorless camera for US customers
Available in Japan but not in the US !!
Ive been waiting for one that I can use my L series lenses on.
Come on Canon...get with the program


The interchangeable lens point and shoot camera market is a bit flat here, as well.
Go to
Apr 10, 2015 05:08:20   #
Didereaux wrote:
There is a misunderstanding of 'quality' in these posts (or most of them at least). As mentioned in other posts F2.8 is ONLY a HALF stop from f4.



There is also a misunderstanding of f/stops. F/2.8 is ONE FULL stop faster than f/4.0.
Go to
Apr 5, 2015 07:45:27   #
TSGallantPhotography wrote:
Just noting a change. I used it for a shoot a few days before and it was fine. Put it back on for another shoot the next weekend and noticed the changes. Today's shoot has a background I'd really like to unsubstantiate. I've never taken any classes or had any training so I don't know what has happened. I guess I was hoping for a quick and easy self fix.


A description of just which lens it is might help someone to advise you how to solve the problem. Also, which camera are you using?
Go to
Apr 5, 2015 06:56:48   #
TSGallantPhotography wrote:
Ok, after hours and hours of scouring the net, I'm still not finding anything even remotely close to addressing my problem.

I bought the lens new, years ago. I use the caps and never store it mounted to the cameras. It's been my FAVORITE lens and had never let me down until the last 2 weeks. Now, it won't open to f2.8. F5.0 is the best it will do. It also won't let me change the vertical focal point, only horizontal.

It's never been dropped or abused and still takes otherwise perfect photos. I'm just at a loss (and have a photo shoot to do today). I know I won't get an answer in time for the shoot but I'm still hoping someone might ay least know the "why?" of it.
Ok, after hours and hours of scouring the net, I'm... (show quote)


Obviously the diaphragm is sticking. Is the focal length a secret?
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 ... 246 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.