Yes, this is a home recipe used for ages by our moms and grandmoms. But this gentleman was not in my opinion a rank amateur but someone whom did photography for countless years. In talking and photographing with him over a period of a copla hours he showed me he had much more experience in wildlife picture taking than I have or probably ever will have, even though I've been at it for longer than I can remember. He also told me the lens he was cleaning he said he purchased shortly after it was introduced for public sale. I don't know when this was but I do believe it was quite a few years ago. If he has been using this method for many years without a problem one has to wonder if this in fact another way to do your cleaning. I don't think I would ever use this method myself but it seems to have worked for him a long time. Perhaps he started doing this many moons ago when the more modern commercial wipes were not available or too costly for him at the time.

Last fall while out chasing birds in mid- Michigan I met an old timer photographer (tongue in cheek as seeing I won't see 70 agin). As he was using the same lens as I (300 f4 prime) although he had it attached to a FF Canon while I have mine on a T5i cropper we struck up a conversation. While talking he proceeded to clean his lens with what appeared to be either a very old, soft handkerchief or a piece of an old T-shirt. But prior to using the cloth he took out a small bottle of liquid and applied some to the cloth. Being curious I asked him what type of cleaning fluid he used. He then told me it was something he made up himself, being a mixture of distilled water and white vinegar!!! I've never heard of this method before and really wonder if this is advisable as vinegar is in fact an acid, be it very mild. I also should say that this old gentleman did not have a filter on the lens but was cleaning the front elements of the lens proper. Has anybody seen this or use it themselves and what do you fella hoggers think of it?????

Yes, you have an Oranged-Crowned Wabler visiting you feeder. True they are yellowish in appearance if your lucky it will show you his orange crown (very top of head has a orange mark) usually when he is excited or bothered. If you want to make a friend cut an orange in half and put it somewhere he can get to it. When birding in South Texas I usually go through a whole bag of them in a week. Although they will also eat grapefruit they prefer oranges.

All our usual friends from the north have arrived at our home just in time for the Christmas Holiday. Not as many as in years past but after getting skunked on the Redpolls last year even one is better. But this year we have small flocks of Redpolls along with quite a few Siskins and tons of Goldfinchs. They fit in quite well with all my usual feathered friends and are at present doing their best to wipe out my seed supply.
To all youse Hoggers, the missus and I would ask the Lord's blessing on you and your family and have a wonderful Christmas and New Years with your family and friends

Ron and Linda

Welcome to the Hog Phil O. As usual your photos are A-1 in all aspects. You'll really enjoy this forum, lots of good thoughts and people (but I recommend to stay out of the Attic). Hope to see ya at Tawas or Seney in the spring. Best wishes for the Holidays old birder.
Tozjohn in the frozen north

Although I watched this video first on my Windows PC, if you can you must look at it on a Mac to see the real deep beauty of this presentation. Thanks for posting bcheary.

Since you live in TO just take your camera to Sun Camera on Steeles Street. They have excellent technicians who can look after your problem. On their website they are offering sensor and some cosmetic cleaning for $40-$60 depending on the camera model. You can also wait instore for the work to be done during regular business hours. My understanding is that even Canon sends some of its work to this company if they are overly busy.

Tis nice to hear from a fellow SX50 user. This little job should do all you want on your trip to the cool north. (tis cool even in Sept, been there, done that). If your using the max zoom quite a bit make sure you have a tripod or a mono. I use the mono most of the time when using it in the field with the zoom.

Ron J.

Am sitting on my patio playing with my Canon SX50 camera. It is a remarkable camera considering its size and cost. However, as a nature photographer (primarily flying critters i.e. birds, butterflies, dragonflies) I have found that it has it limitations. First the lag time on the shutter is frustrating when chasing after an active subject (the use of the burst method is quite good, however when you take 500 or more pics a day if you use this method you could end up with 5000 pics to scan at the end of the day [500 shot as 10 pics per burst] A week like that and you'd be ready for the loony bin). Secondly, the maximum F stop is F-8, which is quite low and messes up and restricts your DOF, especially when taking pics of butterflies etc. Thirdly, sadly its a pig on batteries. When in the field you need to be always ready to take a quick shot when the occasion arises. Thusly, you camera must be active under full power i.e. the lens in the proper zoom setting, the IS on etc. With this little beast that means it is draining the battery constantly. I do not use the LCD screen for taking pics and still I can go through 2 to 3 batteries in one full day of shooting. I usually carry 4 with me all the time when using it. So, even though I think that this little gem is quite the remarkable camera in its own right I don't think that it will at this stage of my life replace my DSLR. I use a Canon T5i (back-up T2i) coupled with either a 300 prime (+1.4 TC) or a 100-400 tele to do most of my work in the field. It is quick to focus, no lag time on the shutter and even though it doesn't have the reach of the 1200mm equiv of the SX50 it gives me more than I want in quality.
But in retrospect considering what I paid for the SX50 ($379) and the fact that is an easy camera to carry and use I think it is really a remarkable unit. The IQ is quite good throughout the optical zoom range (digital is not all that bad either). For a stationary bird like a egret or a butterfly sitting on a flower it does an excellent job. However, for a small bird such as a warbler darting through the trees it does not fit the bill.
I've attached some photo's I took today while sitting on my patio sipping a single malt to illustrate what I think is the goodness of the IQ of the camera. All the pics were taken at maximum zoom (1200mm equiv) in bright sunshine (at last ;-)) All are jpegs straight out of the camea with NO PP done whatsoever. The gull and flower were cropped to fill most the frame but the butterflies are completely as is, i.e. no cropping.

Ring-billed Gull taken on my neighbors roof top 300 feet away


Yellow Day-Lily taken from across the yard 40 feet away


Viceroy Butterfly taken on neighbors lilac tree 15 feet away


Canadian Tiger Swallowtail butterfly taken on neighbors lilac tree at 15 feet

Appreciate you took the time to look. Thanks for the ok

Thanks for the look-see. All these wild "canaries" are my favorites.

Thanks for viewing. Tis one of my regulars. Have bout 50 of them eating me out of house and home :-))

Thanks for looking. Thank goodness for those birds that sit still.

Had some down time so played a bit with the SX50. Neat little camera but it has it limitations for what I do, i.e. nature photography. Tis a good camera for larger birds whom are not very active. Egrets or birds of this type would be a good subject, but the small warblers flitting through the bushes are next to impossible. You could use the "burst" method but if your taking pics of 100 birds in a day this is not feasible. I find that if the bird is more stationary then it is a quality bit of equipment, giving you for the most part excellent results. But like I said, for the small, active birds it is almost impossible. The lag time on the shutter release is quite sever and the field of view is quite restricted. Also, if you use the LCD and the zoom quite a bit it will eat your battery quite quickly. In order to get a good number of shots you have to use the viewfinder extensively. But, even at the maximum zoom of 200X (maximum optical and digital zoom) the pics are quite good. The following pics were taken at my feeders in my yard at a distance of about 35 feet. The weather was part cloud but bright with the sun peeking through every now and then. I used the "P" option with Auto ISO. I do not use any major PP on these photos so they are basically right from the camera. To me for the right subject this camera is a little gem considering the price.

Rose-Breasted Grosbeak (male)


American Goldfinch (female)


Common Grackle


American Goldfinch (male)

So this is spring, is it? Woke up yesterday morn to find 8 inches of fresh, wet, heavy snow in the driveway. No way in hell I'm gonna shovel again this year. Ran the car back and forth a dozen times to pack it down a bit. Anyhows, they have promised (again) that next week it will be warm and sunny. Whats a sun??
With nothing much to do I spent a few minutes playing with my Canon SX50. Not the best time to take pics with it being heavy overcast and some mist but wanted to see what it could do in very poor light. I dont think it did too bad, a bit noisy but considering the circumstances did pretty fair. Also, contrary to what Canon says there is a bit of a lag from the time you press the shutter button to the time the pic is taken. Not much, but with a bird whom is known to move quite quickly it seems like a lot. These are three pics I took from my back door at some Finches on my feeders in the gloom of late PM. All were taken on a tripod as this old man has trouble being steady even on sunny days.

Purple Finch (male) - Canon SX50 @ 188mm, 1/320, 800 ISO


Purple Finch (female) - Canon SX50 @ 215mm, 1/160, 160 ISO


American Goldfinch (male) - Canon SX50 @ 215mm, 1/160, 125 ISO