Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: caknutsen
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next>>
Jan 12, 2013 04:25:52   #
Agreed nice shots, but the signature gotta be toned down. I actually thought when I saw the first photo it too was a reflection until I got to the others.
Go to
Jan 12, 2013 03:41:47   #
Happy Birthday
Go to
Jan 9, 2013 08:34:08   #
BW326 wrote:
chewy wrote:
If you recall,back in the fifties there were gangs every where across the country. mostly in the cities of course. Most of the gangs were fairly benign. It was mostly a bunch of clowns walking around acting tough. They got most of their inspiration from the movie industry. Brando and Dean and a host of others made gangs very popular. It was very common for the weapon of the day (switch blade) to be brought into schools all over the country. As I think back on this era a gun or two was probably present as well. It was also common to carry a dog chain as well to beat off rival gang members. Even with all this going on there was never to my knowledge any mass murders as we see today. Just a thought.
If you recall,back in the fifties there were gangs... (show quote)


And a clash between the gangs was called a 'rumble'. We even had those (gangs and rumbles) in our smaller, midwestern towns although they were quite watered down versions of the street gang rumbles in cities like Chicago or New York. Everybody usually ended up with a bloody nose and something to talk about for the next school year.
quote=chewy If you recall,back in the fifties the... (show quote)


You know I may not be that "OLD" :wink: but is was born in the late 50's. Still we were expected to behave and follow the rules in school, regardless of what we brought. If we got out of line we were sent to the Vice Principle in charge of disciplines office and met one of two paddles, the one with no holes or the one with 13 holes. Teachers could even line us up as a class if we were unruly and give us a smack. There was accountability. I could definitely spin the clock back 50- years and be perfectly happy.

Thanks for sharing.
Go to
Jan 7, 2013 20:36:45   #
sarge69 wrote:
Nice self portrait.

Now welcome and don't talk about race, religion or guns. Names and addresses of pretty women accepted.

Sarge69


Ain't that the truth, unless you want to create the never ending story.

Welcome, there are some awesome people here.
Go to
Jan 6, 2013 20:59:19   #
I guess I need to read the TOS closer, between the heated discussion last night and the above comment I am scratching my head. Especially given some of the topics is have followed and the content (not photos) contained in them.

Thanks for the share
Go to
Jan 6, 2013 20:23:17   #
iPad + fat fingers + wrong glasses = lummox

Guilty as charged

Cheers
Go to
Jan 6, 2013 20:07:30   #
Hey thanks everyone for your input, word from folks here mean so much more than reading reviews in my mind.

I will let ya know what I end up with.
Go to
Jan 6, 2013 20:06:13   #
photosarah wrote:

Well, I compared both the SX50 and FZ200 before going to the Galapagos Islands. Personally, I think there are very few occasions you would need the further range of the Canon camera, but the f2/8 on the Panasonic is with you for every photo you take, in whatever light and at whatever length. I don't remember what the macro range was on the SX50, but it is 1cm on the FZ200 (if you remember to switch to macro on the lens!). I bought the FZ200 and am super pleased with it. My expensive DSLR plus long lens fell into the sea (ruined) but the FZ200 did a wonderful job and, in fact, I think some of my better pics were taken with it. So here's another opinion to muddle you! Go hold both of them, and see which you like the feel of. And may you take good photos and have fun, whichever one you decide on :o)
br Well, I compared both the SX50 and FZ200 befor... (show quote)


Ouch!!! On losing the DSLR into the sea. That's kinda why I am looking for a quality bridge, I have a D90 with lenses ranging from 10-20, marcos/primes, to 28-300 I can't bring myself to purchase a more expensive lens given this is a fun hobby of mine.

A. I don't need to pack these all the time

B. I do some pretty wild terrain sometimes and don't really want to damage or destroy that equipment.

I think I will head to the local photo shop and do some hands on with both. The 2.8 is a good point.
Go to
Jan 6, 2013 16:42:41   #
Tarzan wrote:
My cent - my opinion probably is not 2 cents worth .
I have an SX50, a close friend has an FX200. We often compare our pictures. He is not an outdoors man, and used FZ's max zoom a few times just to see what it coud do.
I am a wildlife and street picture man. The slight diference of image quality goes to Canon, mainly in higher ISO, but is clearly visible only when cropping is applied.
Canon's image stabilizing is very effective. For stationary pictures in maximum zoom (1200mm eq.) I use monopod fewer and fewer times.
FZ is faster in focus and burst.
Can't say a thing about video - never use it.
Best regards.
My cent - my opinion probably is not 2 cents worth... (show quote)


So if your friend said, " do you want to trade cameras?" Would you?
Go to
Jan 6, 2013 16:40:33   #
Just when I had my mind made up to go with the FZ200, a whole series of new replies come in.

Canon SX50 appears to be the dominate direction

Thanks again
Go to
Jan 5, 2013 21:58:20   #
Nikonian72 wrote:
Good for you, Sinatraman.

When I asked Admin if I could start a Sarcasm Forum, but he said "When pigs fly!" Was he serious, or being sarcastic?


Nikonian72 - what is needed to make this happen? I am all over that idea. Or were you being sarcastic?
Go to
Jan 5, 2013 21:35:04   #
Wow people!!!

First, this discussion is posted under

"Main Photography Discussion"

Titled

"New Christian Photography Group"

So we are now clear we are not in the "New Christian Photography Group"

Sinatraman has a great idea that will fit a fair number of people and I wish the best to him and his group. If you don't like it, then don't join. Bashing his idea on the announcement page might not be too cool, but it is an open forum so go for it if you choose.

As for the rest of us, replying, yes in my opinion we are still in an open forum where discussions, debates, opinions, disagreements still can come out. One does not have to reply to anything here unless they want to, the same way you don't have to read what is posted here.

I will say this, I believe we all do have one thing in common, photography. Does that mean we have the same camera? No. Does that mean we all like taking or even looking at pictures of the same things? No. But WE still have that common thread or WE would not be here. I barely have enough time to read what is in the Main Discussion let alone time to join a group, but that is me.

You guys and gals are all awesome in your own way in my opinion.

Good luck Annie_Girl

Okay back to trying to get better, more cough syrup required, maybe a shot of Wild Turkey.
Go to
Jan 5, 2013 17:26:13   #
Marty we are heading to Maine again next spring, my guess is its a tad bit warmer then. But seriously the eastern most part of the US? Now how far of drive out of Portland? Satellite views and other images look awesome though.
Go to
Jan 5, 2013 15:12:12   #
Okay, got the push I needed. Now to find the best deal on the FZ200, I only wish it had GPS, there is most likely an aftermarket one available.

Thanks for your input.
Go to
Jan 5, 2013 14:35:06   #
caknutsen wrote:
Hawknest wrote:
caknutsen wrote:
I love following these, so at this point I have a question, which the answer is either yay or nay to keep with the political theme.

Is our government in need of an overhaul?

Yay or Nay

Let the voting begin

Yay



yay!!!!!


Thanks Hawknest

The tally presently slow growing

Yay's - 2 Nay's - 0 in favor of a government overhaul


Heard from Matti - Yay
Fantom - Yay Yay Yay ( must be backed by some big lobbyist's for that kind of vote)

Yay's - 6 Nay's - 0 in favor of a government overhaul.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.