Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: puku8849
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
May 14, 2017 21:45:21   #
I have the 35mm version of that Nikon lens (35mm PC Nikkor) and it works magnificently. Tilt means Up and down and then you can turn the lens barrel 90 degrees and now you can shift meaning it could move side to side. So what is the big argument about tilt and shift (T-S) and Perspective control (PC) ?? Same type of lens called by different names, just as someone mentioned before, Micro (Nikon) and Macro (Canon) lenses are also the same type of lens.
Go to
Jan 7, 2017 17:44:25   #
Just take a careful look at the next lens you buy from Nikon where it is made.
Go to
Jan 7, 2017 06:41:17   #
jim quist wrote:
Still have the one's I used them in film days, and I'm seriously thinking about buying one of their digitals.


As they say, you should buy your last camera first. I bought my Hasselblad 500 C/M with Zeiss 80mm f2.8 in the 70's for the princely sum of $1200. Nowadays, that amount would not buy you very much. The lens can still be used with an adapter for Nikon bodies. The 'blad is a piece of mechanical work of art, much like you can compare a Rolex watch to an electronic watch. For quality, the 'high' price you pay to-day will seem a bargain in the future.
Go to
Jan 7, 2017 06:20:28   #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
It would probably be a lot better than the Sea Gull Great Wall DF-6.
The Hasseblad V1D Concept does look a bit familiar.


The Sea Gull Great Wall DF-6 is a collector's item if you have a good tidy specimen!
Go to
Jan 7, 2017 06:17:03   #
BebuLamar wrote:
I never bought (or can afford a Hasselblad) and I don't think I will buy a Chinese Hassy. However, for most people why not? People are buying Chinese cameras.


Just check how many Nikon Lenses and camera bodies are now made in China. Sony, Canon and many big names all have lines made in China. They also have Thailand and Malaysia made products, so do you still buy them?
Go to
Nov 25, 2016 09:44:42   #
Agreed, but as so often repeated here, the best camera is the one you have in your hand when an opportunity presents itself in front of your eyes. If you have 1 and 2 mentioned above, 3 becomes less relevant and less important for anyone to be obsessed about. In the end, Whether you want to focus your energy, sleepless nights and resources into chasing the "perfect camera & Lens" or to divert your energy into making a great photo by concentrating on 1 & 2 is really a matter of choice for the individual. Both can be ego boosting or energy sapping if you found out a new model is announced a few weeks after you bought yours, but one choice is much cheaper, can be just as rewarding and makes life less complicated.
Go to
Nov 25, 2016 05:32:48   #
You guys should look at the award winning photographs in National Geographic taken with an iPhone !
Go to
Nov 14, 2016 10:45:49   #
steve w wrote:
What is the general consensus on matching teleconverter brand to lens brand? That is: if you are going to use a teleconverter, say 1.4x or 2x, between the camera and lens, should the converter theoretically be of the same brand as the lens, i.e.: Canon to Canon, Sigma to Sigma, etc., to obtain maximum function and sharpness?
In this case, I have the following: Canon 1.4x ver.III, Sigma 1.4x DG, and a older set of both 1x and 2x Kenko Teleplus Pro300. The Canon tele will only work on certain Canon lenses because of the specific build but both the Kenko and Sigma tele's will work on any lens. All three brands enable AF so no issues there.
Thinking about buying the new Tammy 150-600mm and noticed that apparently, Tamron has their own teleconverter which can be purchased as a side item. Worthwhile? Make a difference in image quality as opposed to using say, the Sigma converter? Quite honestly, I don't use a teleconverter enough to have formed an opinion one way or the other thus the reason for the query.

Thanks for any opinions, particularly those based on actual usage history.
What is the general consensus on matching teleconv... (show quote)



Tonight I used the Tamron 150-600mm attached to a Nikon D300 to take images of the Super Moon applying the 10/10/10 rule (in my case ISO 200, 1/200 sec and f20. The images came out well on full zoom. However, when I tried to attach a Nikon 2X teleconverter between the Tamron and D300, no images could be obtained because the f stops no longer could be adjusted. So it looked like this combination was not compatible.
Go to
Oct 30, 2016 03:44:26   #
Just returned from Budapest > Amsterdam river cruise. This is the Parliament building taken on way out from Budapest . Sony A6300 with kit lens, hand held.


Go to
Aug 28, 2016 12:19:18   #
Kmgw9v wrote:
The DSLR's look like Canons.


Looks like she has the Holy Trinity. Canon 24-70L , 70-200L, and iPhone !!
Go to
Aug 23, 2016 23:26:07   #
mwsilvers wrote:
Love it!! The one on top is the sharper one, right?


Agree, the top one is better, it has more artistic value.
Go to
Aug 23, 2016 23:20:05   #
pinkersc wrote:
I've owned the Nikon D70, D90, D300 and now I have the D7100. If the 7200 is anything like the 7100 go for it. I've given all the other cameras to my grandchildren. They are all working perfectly. I think Nikon makes better cameras for the long haul. I absolutely love my 7100


With due respect, You think wrong, Nikon has had more recalls of their high end models within the past few years than Canon since Nikon started producing most of their cameras and lenses in China and Thailand .
Go to
Aug 23, 2016 23:12:49   #
tdekany wrote:
Completely true. JimBob is the king of rude, how is it that you never police him? What makes me so special?


He is following the example of Trump!
Go to
May 8, 2016 23:22:49   #
[quote=Daryl New]I found "Photoscape",simpler and very easy to use.Once you have spent time what there various things do.Thoroughly recommended.
[url]http://www.photoscape.org[url][/quote]

Fantastic and thank you so much, I just downloaded PhotoScape and tried out the Insert Text and it works like a charm. An excellent free alternative to Picasa.
Go to
May 8, 2016 10:48:28   #
Bunko.T wrote:
I can't understand why folks have so much trauma with photos in Picasa.
To begin with, you don't store pics in Picasa, you only edit them with Picasa.
You store your pics in your "My Pictures" folder.
If your picture viewing programme is Picasa, if not ,make it your default viewing programme, all you do is double click on the pic you want to view or edit, or rt click & choose Picasa, then work your magic.
That done, you save it or save as, & it goes back to where you had it or want to put it. But it ain't stored in Picasa, that is only the programme you open it with. It keeps thumbnails in it, but it's not where you store your pics.
If you want a different programme to be your default pic viewing one, you then have to rt click on your pic & choose Picasa.
I've used it for years & I agree it's simple to use.
I also think it was Google from whom I downloaded it as a freebie, originally, so Google taking it over don't sound right. It's always been.
Whether or not they are ditching it, I've yet to discover that.
What is the world coming to. No Picasa!! Wrist slashing time.
I can't understand why folks have so much trauma w... (show quote)


I, like many other Picasa users, miss the ease with which you can write text on the photos. Is there another easy editor that allow you to write text directly on the photos ?
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.