All Forum Comments
Comment by ChrisR posted on I've been a naughty boy!!... at 09/12/2011 - 10:52
major wrote:
Hi Gwyn,
Thanks for your wise comment. As someone with experience AND very similar kit, it makes sense for me not to rush and buy on impulse.
BTW Chris, which Sigma do you own as a matter of interest?
Cheers,
Jacey.
The Sigma, EX 10-20mm: f1.4 - f5.6: DC.Hi Gwyn,
Thanks for your wise comment. As someone with experience AND very similar kit, it makes sense for me not to rush and buy on impulse.
BTW Chris, which Sigma do you own as a matter of interest?
Cheers,
Jacey.
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on New Member at 09/12/2011 - 09:46
Hi Jacey.
Another vote for the Sigma 10-20.
Take care.
Another vote for the Sigma 10-20.
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on New Member at 08/12/2011 - 14:33
I have a K mount to the M42 thread adaptor, when you fit this to the camera, a small spring clips down to lock it into position. To remove it requires a small pointed tool to lift this spring clip before being able to remove the adaptor. (The small tool can be the end of a ball point pen).
Maybe the Tamron adaptor has a similar spring clip. :
Take care.
Maybe the Tamron adaptor has a similar spring clip. :
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on Help - Adaptall-2 Stuck on Kr at 07/12/2011 - 15:04
Thank you all, at least I now know, it not just me that finds it pointless.
I can now sleep at night.
Take care.
I can now sleep at night.
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on Another pointless thread at 06/12/2011 - 19:51
Gwyn wrote:
I have been practically forced into joining Facebook by my family. I resisted until Saturday, but the pressure just got to me.
I don't understand it, nor do I particularly want to tbh.
I am not interested in the fact that a nephew has had a cup of coffee after making mince pies, or that a niece's child had a fabulous report - they wouldn't post that it was a bad one would they?
I don't intend to tell the world anything - I don't do much that is of interest anyway. So do I stick at it or should I unFacebook myself?
Hi Gwyn.I have been practically forced into joining Facebook by my family. I resisted until Saturday, but the pressure just got to me.
I don't understand it, nor do I particularly want to tbh.
I am not interested in the fact that a nephew has had a cup of coffee after making mince pies, or that a niece's child had a fabulous report - they wouldn't post that it was a bad one would they?
I don't intend to tell the world anything - I don't do much that is of interest anyway. So do I stick at it or should I unFacebook myself?
Glad to see I am not the only one, that doesn’t understand or get the purpose of Facebook. I joined over twelve months ago, after being encouraged by members of the (Multiple Sclerosis Society), but I have never used it.
The MS Society have their web site with a forum, as does this site, the local radio stations, the BBC, etc,etc, you name it, all have their own web sites, so why the need for Facebook.
Nothing ever happens on my site, other than an Email message every two weeks from Facebook, asking why I have not used my site. :
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on Another pointless thread at 06/12/2011 - 16:56
Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical).
This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000 of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get on to the next house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will accept for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about 0.78 miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not counting bathroom stops or breaks.
This means Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second--3,000 times the speed of sound.
For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element.
Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousand tons, not counting Santa himself.
On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer could pull ten times the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of them-Santa would need 360,000 of them.
This increases the payload, not counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the monarch).
600,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance-this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer would absorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second each.
In short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake.
The entire reindeer team would be vaporised within 4.26 thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to acceleration forces of 17,500 g's.
A 250 pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and reducing him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Merry Christmas!
.
This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000 of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get on to the next house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will accept for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about 0.78 miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not counting bathroom stops or breaks.
This means Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second--3,000 times the speed of sound.
For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element.
Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousand tons, not counting Santa himself.
On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer could pull ten times the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of them-Santa would need 360,000 of them.
This increases the payload, not counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the monarch).
600,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance-this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer would absorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second each.
In short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake.
The entire reindeer team would be vaporised within 4.26 thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to acceleration forces of 17,500 g's.
A 250 pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and reducing him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Merry Christmas!
.
Comment by ChrisR posted on Another pointless thread at 06/12/2011 - 11:22
Don’t just put it down, put it away.
Take care.
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on Your Quote for the Day at 06/12/2011 - 09:10
K5Bob wrote:
Took the camera back to Jessops who did a complete swap for a new unit after I demonstrated the failure.
So new body, charger and battery have given me NO problems so far
My dilemma is ...do I upgrade the firmware? It seems silly not to as an official update really shouldnt matter.
If it aint fixed and all that......but I do like to shoot in low light situations and an improvement to the autofocus would be good
Don’t go there, you have already had a close shave, with upgrading.Took the camera back to Jessops who did a complete swap for a new unit after I demonstrated the failure.
So new body, charger and battery have given me NO problems so far
My dilemma is ...do I upgrade the firmware? It seems silly not to as an official update really shouldnt matter.
If it aint fixed and all that......but I do like to shoot in low light situations and an improvement to the autofocus would be good
Think you should have asked Jessops, to upgrade the firmware, for you, at the time of exchange. Then if the camera died, it would be their problem.
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on K5 dead on 1.11 Fware update at 05/12/2011 - 15:23
Yes, creature of habit.
Never bother/stay up to see the new year in.
Take care.
Never bother/stay up to see the new year in.
Take care.
Comment by ChrisR posted on Is it too early to ask? at 05/12/2011 - 11:40
Take care.