All Forum Comments
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on wireless remote for k10 at 15/12/2008 - 20:21
Just found this on ebay. Bit pricier than others, but looks like it has some decent functions.
There was one around that also had an interval timer too, I was quite tempted at the time, but never got round to it. Can't find it now.
Dan
There was one around that also had an interval timer too, I was quite tempted at the time, but never got round to it. Can't find it now.
rhayles wrote:
Daniel, if you are ever on the adjacent south coast, give me a buzz. Travelling to the Island is a very costly affair. I doubt it would be viable.
Will do! Might take another holiday on the island at some point, haven't been there for about 15 years. Daniel, if you are ever on the adjacent south coast, give me a buzz. Travelling to the Island is a very costly affair. I doubt it would be viable.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on wireless remote for k10 at 15/12/2008 - 19:59
In your situation Kris, I'd have filters on the lenses too (or not let them near your monkies :lol. But for general use I avoid them.
A filter is more likely to break than a lens front element. So if it is knocked, it's more likely to break and almost certainly damage the lens element. If there's no filter on, there's a better chance the lens may be fine.
By the way, I didn't actually expect you to try the experiment...
Dan
A filter is more likely to break than a lens front element. So if it is knocked, it's more likely to break and almost certainly damage the lens element. If there's no filter on, there's a better chance the lens may be fine.
By the way, I didn't actually expect you to try the experiment...
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on lens care at 15/12/2008 - 19:49
MattMatic wrote:
All DSLRs have built in IR-cut filters... some are more aggressive than others
If you want an IR camera, there's a US company that can "hack" your camera and remove the IR-cut filter completely. Pete Bargh did an article on ephotozine.com - he had his *ist-D modified for IR-only photography. Great results (if expensive)!
Matt
There's a company in Norfolk that does this too (might even have been there that Peter sent his camera). Costs about £200, and they offer different levels of IR effect, depending on what sort of filter they use to replace the stock one.All DSLRs have built in IR-cut filters... some are more aggressive than others
If you want an IR camera, there's a US company that can "hack" your camera and remove the IR-cut filter completely. Pete Bargh did an article on ephotozine.com - he had his *ist-D modified for IR-only photography. Great results (if expensive)!
Matt
Here's the article: http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Convert-your-Digital-SLR-to-Infrared
and the company is Advanced Camera Services.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Infra red filter? at 15/12/2008 - 19:33
womble wrote:
I dare say the front element would have still looked pretty horrible had it smashed into whatever instead of the filter. Surely any bump bad enough to break the filter would leave a pretty nasty gash in the front element?
Okay, try this experiment. Pick a lens (any lens), then without a filter on the front, knock it firmly again your knee cap (assuming you're wearing trousers :lol. Any damage?I dare say the front element would have still looked pretty horrible had it smashed into whatever instead of the filter. Surely any bump bad enough to break the filter would leave a pretty nasty gash in the front element?
Now I dare you to do the same with a filter on...
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on lens care at 15/12/2008 - 19:27
Mannesty wrote:
Check your c:Windowssystem32driversetchosts file for odd entries. The default file (which rarely needs changing) looks like:-
# Copyright (c) 1993-1999 Microsoft Corp.
#
# This is a sample HOSTS file used by Microsoft TCP/IP for Windows.
#
# This file contains the mappings of IP addresses to host names. Each
# entry should be kept on an individual line. The IP address should
# be placed in the first column followed by the corresponding host name.
# The IP address and the host name should be separated by at least one
# space.
#
# Additionally, comments (such as these) may be inserted on individual
# lines or following the machine name denoted by a '#' symbol.
#
# For example:
#
# 102.54.94.97 rhino.acme.com # source server
# 38.25.63.10 x.acme.com # x client host
127.0.0.1 localhost
Just had a look at mine and got a fright! Didn't realise that Search and Destroy uses this to make sure that you don't inadvertantly follow a link to a dodgy page.Check your c:Windowssystem32driversetchosts file for odd entries. The default file (which rarely needs changing) looks like:-
# Copyright (c) 1993-1999 Microsoft Corp.
#
# This is a sample HOSTS file used by Microsoft TCP/IP for Windows.
#
# This file contains the mappings of IP addresses to host names. Each
# entry should be kept on an individual line. The IP address should
# be placed in the first column followed by the corresponding host name.
# The IP address and the host name should be separated by at least one
# space.
#
# Additionally, comments (such as these) may be inserted on individual
# lines or following the machine name denoted by a '#' symbol.
#
# For example:
#
# 102.54.94.97 rhino.acme.com # source server
# 38.25.63.10 x.acme.com # x client host
127.0.0.1 localhost
One of the more tame entries was:
127.0.0.1 adwarealert.com
If you enter 'www.adwarealert.com' into a browser, nothing happens. So if dodgy site's URLs are added to the host file (with a DNS of 127.0.0.1) you're never going to end up on them by mistake.
As I say though, gave me a fright!
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on PC Security at 15/12/2008 - 14:51
Mac wrote:
Is Sod's Law the same as Murphy's Law?
Yes, only worse. Is Sod's Law the same as Murphy's Law?
My heating bill came today, so no new lenses for me!
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Bit the bullet at 15/12/2008 - 14:14
Plenty of discussion about merits of various anti-virus stuff on this thread.
I use Free AVG (Anti-virus), Zone Alarm (firewall) and as far as I know, haven't had any problems.
Be careful what 'Anti-Spyware' programmes you use, as some of them are little more than spyware themselves, and will tell you to download all manner of things to 'clean up' your system. 'Ad-Aware' and 'Search and Destroy' are two well respected ones. I run them now and again to make sure nothing's slipped through.
Dan
I use Free AVG (Anti-virus), Zone Alarm (firewall) and as far as I know, haven't had any problems.
Be careful what 'Anti-Spyware' programmes you use, as some of them are little more than spyware themselves, and will tell you to download all manner of things to 'clean up' your system. 'Ad-Aware' and 'Search and Destroy' are two well respected ones. I run them now and again to make sure nothing's slipped through.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on PC Security at 15/12/2008 - 14:12
sanderscapes wrote:
The reason for the 24-51mm on a cropped sensor is because dg lenses are compatible with 35mm film cameras and therefore the focal length changes on a digital sensor.
Reminds me a bit of this thread. The reason for the 24-51mm on a cropped sensor is because dg lenses are compatible with 35mm film cameras and therefore the focal length changes on a digital sensor.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on lens care at 15/12/2008 - 13:50
Personally I don't use filters for protection, some here feel the same way, others don't. If you're going to use them, then it makes sense to buy the best you can afford. If you have the lenshood fitted all the time, it will protect the front element of your lens from knocks and scrapes much better than a thin glass filter.
And, why the Cimco convertor, why not a Sigma EX?
Dan
sanderscapes wrote:
...as you may notice from my gear i am a bit anal that way i like everything to be the same
Looking at your lens list, I'm wondering why you put "Sigma EX DG 17-35mm (24-51mm on a cropped sensor)", but not "Sigma EX DC 10-20mm (15-30mm on a cropped sensor)", or "Sigma EX DG 50mm 1:1 macro (75mm on a cropped sensor)" etc. ?...as you may notice from my gear i am a bit anal that way i like everything to be the same
And, why the Cimco convertor, why not a Sigma EX?
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on lens care at 15/12/2008 - 13:32
Dan