Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: mrjcall
Page: <<prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 119 next>>
Oct 28, 2018 09:55:18   #
Teacher22 wrote:
Just wondering what lens fellow hogs would use to photograph flowers with a full frame Sony a7riii? Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Got a new toy yesterday!


The Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS is a superior macro lens which I have and use routinely. It performs equally to the Nikkor 105 f/2.8 micro which I used to use with my D800.
Go to
Oct 28, 2018 08:31:39   #
Brucej67 wrote:
After 45 years in the computer field which made me picky I thought I would correct the statement nothing more intended.


Fully understand what you're saying, but you don't find this ironic or even a bit humous? Well, each to his own....... 🤢
Go to
Oct 28, 2018 06:47:53   #
Brucej67 wrote:
(IBM basically invented the computer) Mainframe yes, PC no. The ENIAC was the first commercial computer built by the military.


Picky, picky! Still ironic no matter how you look at it I think.....
Go to
Oct 27, 2018 18:36:03   #
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
Nikon D850 RAW files are 54 MB, it takes too long to convert these to DNG. So I do an import/copy into LR. When editing in PC, ACR handles the conversion to DNG. Operation is much faster.


14 bit uncompressed raw files from the D850 are close to 100 megs. Any particular reason you aren't using all the capability of that excellent sensor?
Go to
Oct 27, 2018 06:29:56   #
Read the first paragraph.......at least. Makes me laugh that IBM basically invented the computer and now are converting to Macs!
https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/10/24/ibm-seeing-great-returns-on-over-277000-macs-and-ios-devices-issued-to-employees?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral
Go to
Oct 25, 2018 15:05:35   #
traderjohn wrote:
Do you have a cell phone??


So tell me, what kind of image of the moon would you expect to get with a typical cellphone? 😳
Go to
Oct 25, 2018 13:06:41   #
Tom DePuy wrote:
of many of us...


"Be Like"? Who the hell created that script?

Having said that, I find myself clearly in this group! 🤗
Go to
Oct 25, 2018 11:37:19   #
Chris Hayes wrote:
I agree this will disappear into the general spending pool and fund more nonsense programs. It should scale back the need for other tax's, but that just will not happen, at least not in California.
As a practical note it will drive me to the local camera stores whenever i am in the area. I will order on line when i am not. It's just a convenience thing we have all grown used to with two day shipping to your door.

Chris


I'll continue to buy all my photo gear from Greentoe as I have for the past 3 years......but now I'll be paying sales tax. Still cheaper than buying anywhere else!
Go to
Oct 25, 2018 11:26:23   #
burkphoto wrote:
NC businesses were losing HUGE amounts of money to online and catalog retailers over the years. Now they have a *little bit* more level playing field. They still don't get the volume discounts available to the biggest retailers, but at least consumers have less incentive to order from distant dealers.

That said, most of the local camera stores in our state closed their doors LONG ago. There are only a handful of them left, and most of them are struggling.

Besides leveling the playing field, this Supreme Court decision will bring a lot of money into the state coffers, since so many people shop the huge online retailers.

Am I not sad to see this loophole closed? Nobody likes paying more for anything, but I can see the good in it. It was inevitable.
NC businesses were losing HUGE amounts of money to... (show quote)


Not nearly as altruistic about the benefits. Our state coffers already have too much of our money which is often frittered away.
Go to
Oct 25, 2018 11:24:06   #
Tom DePuy wrote:
Yes only two left here in Charlotte....Biggs and Cardinal Camera....Biggs rocks, not sure how Cardinal is doing tho


Cardinal does the majority of it's business on-line by the way. I've bought a bunch of my Sony stuff from them at great discounts.
Go to
Oct 25, 2018 10:41:05   #
And so it begins......☹️
https://link.bandh.com/YesConnect/HtmlMessagePreview?gWELrrmyHyagYZx9ImskD1KY--7zmx3orSJHsyylJVg=.enc
Go to
Oct 21, 2018 18:20:55   #
Here's a bit of an update to the processing and cropping....


(Download)
Go to
Oct 17, 2018 09:32:30   #
Architect1776 wrote:
Being a pilot.
It is pilot class 101.
83 feet is from an old case in the 1940's if I remember right where the space was determined.
There are variances etc., ex crop dusting for one, obviously as skyscrapers and towers exceed 83' but you can take a slight amount of time and research those specific requirements.


I have my sUAS pilot certification and I too wonder where all the quoted rules are coming from. Never heard of most of what Architect1776 is talking about. The basic rules are pretty simple:
1. max 400'
2. Line of sight only
3. No fly within 5 miles of FAA facility
4. No fly over private property without permission
5. Yes, 400' above top of building, regardless of building height
6. No fly over people unless they are under shelter
7. No fly over any sort of stadium or public place
8. No fly over gov. facilities

Major changes are coming, but not for the moment.
Go to
Oct 16, 2018 09:16:24   #
For those of you that don't keep up with such things, the following AOPA link has some great info about the new FAA regulations just approved. Many interesting articles on use and restrictions coming soon....


https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2018/october/16/drone-pilot?utm_source=drone&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=181016drone
Go to
Oct 15, 2018 16:04:36   #
TriX wrote:
The lens weight is determined by the image format (full frame, APS-C, M4/3, etc), not whether the camera is a DSLR or mirrorless.


Not necessarily. Sony is making some incredibly lightweight lenses for their FF mirrorless bodies. I came from a full Nikkor set of lenses and comparable ones from Sony, or at least most of them, are considerably lighter than Nikkor. Their 12-24 f/4 which has comparable performance to the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8 and is about 1.5 lbs lighter. Yes, it's an f/4, but that's not the whole story. Sony has found a way through lighter weight materials and innovative optical engineering to make their lenses quite a bit lighter. There are exceptions, but lightweight is one of the primary goals when it comes to their gear.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 119 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.