The amount of light enables you to raise you fstop from saw f2.8 or so to say f8f8 has a larger depth of field while improve what in focus.
If you are using a 100mm macro lens, You really need 1/250 hand held, f8-f11 for depth of field, and auto ISO assuming light is kind of low. Also spot autofocus or manual focus
if the same price go for th "s". I really gave up on wireless. I don't like to fool with the wireless connection process, finding the router, telling all my devices I have the printer. I know, no really that hard. I stay with USB. personal choice.
i have been have issues for a while, seems they wont hold a charge. i would check the battery performance screen on my camera, some read ok, others not. i then looked at the batteries and found some were OEM, some third party but there was no apparent correlation between life and manufacturer.
Then my charger quit working. I bought a new OEM one and when i put the batteries in the charger they all showed a low charge but charge up completely based on the LED charge indicator, so hopefully the charger was failing to charge the batteries well enough.
In reading about the charger I bought, it the literature provided, it said do not use with non-OEM batteries. Well I guess I don't know why, 7.2 volts is 7.2 volts right? I am now going to test the voltage of the battery at full charge with the new charger and do this occasionally to make sure the battery is charged right. It should show over time that either the charger is bad or the battery is bad. I guess this is what the in camera performance screen does,
i have been have issues for a while, seems they wont hold a charge. i would check the battery performance screen on my camera, some read ok, others not. i then looked at the batteries and found some were OEM, some third party but there was no apparent correlation between life and manufacturer.
Then my charger quit working. I bought a new OEM one and when i put the batteries in the charger they all showed a low charge but charge up completely based on the LED charge indicator, so hopefully the charger was failing to charge the batteries well enough.
In reading about the charger I bought, it the literature provided, it said do not use with non-OEM batteries. Well I guess I don't know why, 7.2 volts is 7.2 volts right? I am now going to test the voltage of the battery at full charge with the new charger and do this occasionally to make sure the battery is charged right. It should show over time that either the charger is bad or the battery is bad. I guess this is what the in camera performance screen does,
I have PS, yes I pay $10/month. I used to have PS element, and routinely bought their upgrades which cost $79, or $99. A friend of mine recommended another program, which cost $99, but it also has upgrades about 1/year, costing $79. that same company now offers their latest package for up to $129, saying its a perpetual license advertising no monthly charge, obviously to fight against Photoshop. It does not say free upgrades. So $129 is about $10/month. other packages have different offers, thus impossible for me at least to know the best value. what I have learned is jumping from one program to another is there is a learning curve which can be frustrating. I am happy with what i have, will pay for it, but stay with one, not jump from one to another.
Yeah, why so touchy, I have the electronic receipt fo my $9/month I purchased the other day.
just changed my plan i had a $59/month package when i was doing web stuff etc, but no longer do that. i only need photo editing. i don't need cloud storage either. use photoshop vs lightroom, so i changed to the $9.99 plan. No problems transitioning, software works fine.
Did the inside passage last year, about 500 pictures, i used 1 battery, but I have 3 more in my bag as this is not my only trip. I have had a couple issues with batteries lately, a few won't fully charge or are bad. Im going back to OEM batteries and OEM charger. More expensive, seem to last longer. both in shots per charge, and how many months they last.
trump promised bipartsianship as well, but never practiced it.
I get my information from a lot of different sources, usually from actual real data. and the evaluate for myself whether to deny or agree. included in this are
-actual CO2 level, the absolute numbers, the trend, the shape of the cure for the increase by year,
-arctic and antarctic ice coverage
-NOAA global average temperature
-Ratio of C12 and 13
-Research why does the molecule act as a blanket, not allowing as much heat to escape as infrared radiation.
- the amount of f****l f**l burned globally in a year, data from IEA.com, i then calculate the amount of CO2 produced and how many ppm increase this is causing,
- sea level increases by location and trends, i have looked at quite a few, NOAA data, ocean pH increase, an indication of CO2 uptake.
- global glacier rate of decline
- high level of volcano activity should cause spikes in the CO2 trends, they none
from this I am more inclined to agree with the notion that higher levels of CO2 does cause g****l w*****g, and that our burning of f****l f**ls is a significant factor.
I f you care to debate, thats fine, come with you data, not a news article.otherwise don't bother
Not true at all, you got that from Fox News. If you want anyone to believe you , state your source of information.
By the way, coal companies and oil companies are the ones who are often times the source on information say man made g****l w*****g is a h**x. it goes both ways.