Anvh

Joined: 4th July 2008

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

Anvh
yep, that's how we call a pacifier here but that's not what I mean but a tutorial.

Comment by Anvh posted on Little flash tut at 07/02/2010 - 01:45

Anvh
Be fast though the 16-45 seems to be out of production, you can also look at the tamron 17-50 f/2.8

Comment by Anvh posted on What a fantastic camera! at 07/02/2010 - 01:39

Anvh
It's about how aperture controls the flash in your photo, it's brought to you in very very lightly manner by Mikey & Andy
link

They also talk about:
- Mikey's dirty lens
- using a soft box as changing room for your model
- that hotel in Columbia are cheap
- food
- random talk
- what leaf to use when doing a #2 in the woods
Enjoy.

Will also name some other tut's by them.
Using a speedlight
1 - about the flash he use, nothing really important link
2 - Shutterspeed link
3 - Aperture link
4 - Flash power link
5 - Final (live shoot) link
ps. yes they forgot ISO, Mikey blame the beer and Andy blame Mikey's genes.
Simply ISO controls your overall exposure so ambient and flash.
If you go from ISO 200 to example 400 you gain 1 stop of flash power (double the guidenumber) and 1 stop of ambient light and vice versa of course.

Light modifiers
1 - link
2 & 3 - link

We also have of course the stobist.com where you can also learn how to use speedlights as studio lights but sometimes it's good to hear a different approach to explaining something, sometimes it can make more sense.

ps. I've no idea why I did this (probably boredom) but hopefully someone will find it useful or at least entertaining

Comment by Anvh posted on Little flash tut at 07/02/2010 - 00:45

Anvh
iceblinker wrote:
Anyway I find dust doesn't land on the focusing screen when I place the blower nozzle near the screen.
I might be doing something wrong then, I saw the dust in the viewfinder getting worse every time I use the blower after a good 6 to 8 months at the beginning all was good.
When I started using the butterfly thing I clean my sensor less often now and no extra dust has gotten on the viewfinder, that's at least my experience and I'm happy for you yours is different Pete.

Comment by Anvh posted on Dirty Sensor - Glasgow help? at 06/02/2010 - 23:32

Anvh
technoidiot wrote:
Stefan

you said
Quote:
ps. why does zippers turn out to be a spellings mistake, do you Brits have a different word for it
Do you mean zips - the things with teeth that you have a slider to mesh them together as you close the opening ?
Thank you Angela I mean those, are they really called zips in British English... hmm it does say I spelled it right now, learning something new everyday

Comment by Anvh posted on UV or not UV at 06/02/2010 - 23:23

Anvh
Hi welcome to the forum, if you're going to use mono block you can use any one you like since it's the trigger that's important and since you only use the middle contact that's the same on Canon, Nikon or Pentax you can use everything really.

One question is how portable do you want them, do you need to bring your own electricity?
I'm no expert but I know the experts would want to know that

If you've some normal flashguns, you can of course consider the strobist way. Most modern flashguns with high guide numbers are just as powerful as a 200 watt monoblock and you're very portable then.

Comment by Anvh posted on portable studio lighting at 06/02/2010 - 23:18

Anvh
womble wrote:
I am also puzzled that people who complain they degrade image quality will happily put a polariser or ND grad in front of their lens. When I can I use Pentax SMC filters and I doubt you could tell the difference.
Because a polariser or ND grad adds an effect where an UV filter does so good as nothing on digital for your image so all it does is be there for protection.
Since it's the first glass the light will go through it does need some coatings to prevent flaring and glares since that's the main problem for filters and then you end up with quite a pricey filter that only is there for protection and then of course you need to weight down the pros against the cons.
Most of the time you then come to the conclusion it's better not to use an filter, of course there are exceptions.
If you take your camera always with you for a walk on the beach each weekend then with the salty air and the blow up sand it does make sense to use an filter to protect your lens but for an walk in the woods or on the streets I think you're better off without and use an hood to keep branches and zippers away from the front element.

ps. why does zippers turn out to be a spellings mistake, do you Brits have a different word for it?

Comment by Anvh posted on UV or not UV at 06/02/2010 - 22:43

Anvh
Oggy wrote:
Crumbs mate - one of us is not well...We agree on something
Well I said it first so

I used a blower in the beginning, the first time it works okay since there isn't so much dust but after a while it really gets everywhere

Oggy wrote:
I use a clean piece of soft silicone tube wedged into the vacuum hose.
Good idea, didn't though about that one, not a mobile solution though but for at home

Comment by Anvh posted on Dirty Sensor - Glasgow help? at 06/02/2010 - 22:33

Anvh

Problem with a blower though is that you move the dust away from the sensor but that it remains in the housing.
Also with blowing it always goes where you don't want it... the viewfinder

The Arctic Butterfly works well and Pentax has some sort of sticky pads that you press on the sensor and if you really need some cleaning or have a fluid on your sensor then you need swaps with cleaning fluid like this link

Also it's not the sensor that's dirty but the protection screen on top, hopefully that way it does not so delicate
Still be careful with hard objects and "aggressive" fluids since the protection screen does have a special coating.

Comment by Anvh posted on Dirty Sensor - Glasgow help? at 06/02/2010 - 21:55

Anvh
Mike-P wrote:
Darkmunk wrote:
Quote:
will not effect any of your photography or does anyone have prove that it does?
Doesn't the extra wiring on the sensor and other overheads compromise the still image? or was I dreaming I read that somewhere?
I thought a video capable sensor was the reason that the K-7s noise capability was being hampered. I also read the same thing with the Nikon D300 and D300s
Don't know about that one though, don't see why it should effect each other...

Comment by Anvh posted on What a fantastic camera! at 06/02/2010 - 16:58

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo