Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: juan_uy
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 53 next>>
Aug 16, 2021 16:14:00   #
avemal wrote:
Snapbridge ----When it works OK , but getting there is a disaster. Always has some issues. It would be nice -take photos & move on. This NEVER happens. Maybe Firmware will have a easy FIX someday but after 7 years I would think it would done.


If using Android, try turning data off in the phone before connecting. Not very handy/useful, but has worked for me (although with older camera en previous version of the app).
Go to
Aug 16, 2021 15:25:52   #
yorkshire wrote:
Thanks foot the reply that has sorted the issue


Glad to hear that
Go to
Aug 16, 2021 15:09:19   #
Honestly, I think it's a very personal decision, but in your place I would just sell both and buy none. Would use that money for lenses, trying mirror-less, or something else. But if you are asking I guess that you want a DX body, in that case D500 is the best Nikon you can get at the moment.
Go to
Aug 16, 2021 15:05:32   #
yorkshire wrote:
It’s not to the side vertically it should be at the bottom of the lcd display at the top lcd it does show on the view finder but cannot adjust the meter by the thumb controls


OK, so with this new information it looks like you don't see it in the LCD screen when using live view.

On the screen, when using live view, it will show up as a vertical bar on the right border of the screen (in the optical viewfinder you will see it at the bottom).
If not visible, press the "info" button to cycle through the options until you see it.

No clue about the wheels not working.
Go to
Aug 16, 2021 13:13:22   #
I have the same one for D7200. Used it only on a couple of tests (purchased it for astro a couple of weeks ago and haven't been out sadly); and it feels right about what I would expect for the price. It works, feels fragile but not enough to doubt it will last enough time (if taken care of).

Based on my research and reading reviews, felt to be a good compromise between price and quality. Hope someone else with longer experience will chime in.
Go to
Aug 16, 2021 13:06:27   #
Double-checked on a D7200 and it's there.
Based on the screenshot that Paul shared, it should be there in your D7100.

I find it very strange that it won't be there, and more strange if only on manual mode (while showing fine for the other modes).
Can't think of any setting related to this honestly.
Go to
Aug 13, 2021 14:25:08   #
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
Thank you, this is what I am looking for.

And, no need to be jealous, I live in Los Angeles, the light pollution capital of America.


Yeah, I have quite dark skies a couple hours drive, so great advantage on that.
Glad to have helped with at least some tips.

Your tracker is a very good and popular one, you will find tons of YouTube videos on how to set and align it with further details. But it's quite basic, just needs precision.

Good luck with the weather
Go to
Aug 12, 2021 11:39:36   #
I use a different one, and I'm in southern hemisphere (so aligning is somewhat harder here) but:
1. As said level your tripod, a sturdy one obviously.
2. Pre-aim it to the north, as the azimut correction range of the base is quite limited only for minor adjustments
3. Also make dial in your latitude in the vertical (right ascension?) so you have a rough alignment
4. Mount all your gear, even accessories like remote shutter and lens heater if used. And already roughly aim your camera to the desire composition
5. Balance your set up with the counterweight.
6. Align as precisely as you can

Items #4 & #5 tries to minimize physical interaction after fine alignment was done, to avoid ruining it.

Also, make sure to take test shots to check for trailing, and if you are in a long session double-check once in a while.

ENJOY IT! (I'm a bit jelous :-D )
Go to
Aug 5, 2021 18:48:16   #
Same happens with Z mount lenses for Nikon.

I guess that they can't yet produce comparable quality at a significantly reduced price to be appealing for customers. If they could make "the equation" work, they would be producing them.
Go to
Aug 4, 2021 09:14:11   #
Longshadow wrote:


Back at my one job we had a phrase we used a lot...
"If I was on the design review board..."


Same happens on my car, and I think it's unbelievable that someone design that, and others approved it.
Go to
Aug 2, 2021 10:28:06   #
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
an·ti·cli·mac·tic
/ˌan(t)ēˌklīˈmaktik,ˌanˌtīklīˈmaktik/
adjective
causing disappointment at the end of an exciting or impressive series of events.
"it was an anticlimactic finish to the match"
Similar:
bathetic
disappointing
dissatisfying
disillusioning

So, There and many interesting posts wherein seemingly good questions are posed. Some are requests for technical help, troubleshooting problematic issues in an image, asking for advice on many aspects of photography. Then, the good, generous and helpful folks on UHH respond with a wide variety of answers- mostly logical, some are "spot on", some are debatable, a few maybe, putting it mildly, kinda inaccurate, and let's forget about the sarcastic and nasty responses because they are in the minority.

The helpful folks, then swing into action- they post advice, supply links, give examples of editing corrections when requested, supply diagrams, engage in arguments, review equipment, and collectively supply a pretty decent body of work for the OP to research, mull over, put into practice or just say thank you and go away.

I am not keeping statistics but I get the impression that many OPs never come back, a few say thanks and almost none of them report back to update us. It ain't mandatory but it would be nice! It would be hearing t read "I did what y'all suggested and it worked"! or NOT! The ones that tend to get my goat is " "Waht y'all suggested is too much work and I'll just keep doing stuff the wrong way" kinda thing. The worst ones are they deced to apply the worst suggestion of the lot. You know "I'll just take that idea from Mr. Mechanic about cleaning my camera with turpentine and lubricating it with axel grease- I have some in the garage"! Well, it ain't really all that bad but y'all know what I mean!

Some folks will describe a problem, glitch, or defect in an image, in several paragraphs but do not post a (stored) file with EXIF data. Did the not ever hear the expression about one picture is work 1000 words- you'd think- on a photo forum!

The attached image could have been a typical but challenging question: "See, I was shooting my Cousin Matilda's wedding and all the pictures had a strange colour cast- what did do wrong and how can I fix it? The bride is launching a lawsuit"!

Well- there ought to be a law but there ain't gonna be one- anyone has any ideas?

I am not complaining and I am not disgrunteled or discouraged- just thinking about stuff in a perfect world. Just changed my brand of coffee- too much caffeine!
an·ti·cli·mac·tic br /ˌan(t)ēˌklīˈmaktik,ˌanˌtīklī... (show quote)


I agree with you, but I sincerely hope that you and other experienced UHH users will continue sharing their knowledge and expertise with the rest of us.

Even if the OP doesn't even read the answers, some of us do it and are thankful
Maybe we should all express that more, but I personally sometimes don't do it if it's not my thread to avoid having lots of "thanks" replies.

Some time ago, I suggested the Admin, if possible, to enable the OP to close a thread once he/she got the answer. This would avoid, if done correctly, repeated answers or hijacking threads or derailing the discussion once the issue has been "solved".
Go to
Jul 29, 2021 10:32:37   #
Jsykes wrote:
Follow up on the recent HDR discussion.

Wanting to evaluate LR versus PS (both latest LR Classic version) versus Photomatix merge solutions.

LR worked fine, simple process. But having problems with utilizing the PS option. PS process "Edit In>>Merge to HDR Pro in PS" will not work because (of an error message) that the images I used have variable sizes. Contacted Adobe who demonstrated that there was a variation on one of the (three) images in terms of image width. Not clear as to why there should be a problem as I used the standard Canon AEB Expo/Comp.AEB process (+/- 2 stops). Subsequently contacted Canon who are advising that I utilize their (DPP) 4 software, and that they do not troubleshoot third party software.

Photomatix should be straightforward in terms of comparison as they offer a free trial.

Anyone had the similar issue?
Follow up on the recent HDR discussion. br br Wan... (show quote)


If the photos SOOC are of different size, even by 1 pixel line, then Canon should troubleshoot with you as no third party software involved in that.
Go to
Jul 26, 2021 15:47:47   #
DWU2 wrote:
32 works for emailing snaps. I use higher settings if I'm outputting to send to a printing service or other uses.


Sorry I thought that screenshot was from the OP and could be causing the mentioned issue
Go to
Jul 26, 2021 11:37:36   #
I'm no expert, but 32 in Quality slider for JPEG is very, very low. Any special reason why you have it so low?
Try a higher number, at least 75 (I would suggest something higher like 80-85).

Probably others with more experience can correct me if needed o provide better answers. Good luck.
Go to
Jul 19, 2021 16:49:57   #
Longshadow wrote:
Not sure about what they mean about the banana not reproducing itself without human intervention.
I planted one little tree in my yard and wound up with ten+ over a few years. Neighbor gained six.
I never did anything to any of the trees. New trees just kept popping up near the older ones.

Makes me wonder about the other statements.
Amusing though.


This one also seems unlikely to say the least:
"If you get into the bottom of a well or a tall chimney and look up, you can see stars, even in the middle of the day."
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 53 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.