*istD, SMC-A 50mm 1.7 @ f/4, 1/125s, ISO200.

Dan

Have a look here: http://www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html

Basically the lower the voltage, the safer you are. Having said that, the flash I use is listed at around 200V, and so far hasn't fried my K10D or *istD before it. However, if you wanted to risk it, that would be your decision. The Pentax flashguns listed are all nice an low.

Having said that, there's a link to a related item at the top of that page, which says Pentax have said their cameras are safe to 600V. But that's something someone has posted on the internet, so should be taken with a pinch of salt perhaps (it might have been done by a disgruntled EOS user ).

Hope that helps,
Dan

When you say 'macro flash', do you mean a ring flash, or just a flash that will give you good results when shooting macro with your 100mm (105mm?) Sigma?

I use a cheap secondhand manual flash (Centon FG28, I think), with this diffuser and get results like this...






...which I am pleased with. About £30 all in.

Dan

Sorry, should have been:

...with which I am pleased.

Dan

Right, sorry that some of these are a little short and perhaps don't offer the constructive criticism I would normally try to give, but I'm late!!!

Here's the judgement for this week's competition:

Mongoose: I like this shot, nicely exposed, perhaps could do with the top of the arch included too. Hope you worked quickly so your dad didn't have to stay there too long.

Scoker881: I'd prefer to see a larger image here for a start. However, you've caught the sparks from the sparkler well, but the composition could be better, looking down on the pudding, chopping the edge off the plate, cutting the glass in two...

AlfaFoxtrot: Nice idea, but I think the composition lets it down - wth the hand behind the glass, and the pudding poking out. Moving to the left may have put the glass nearer the bottle, and given us a clear view of the cutting of the pudding.

Johnriley: Although it's lit with flash, this seems a very noisy image, and this detracts from the shot for me. Looking down on 'B' also doesn't look right - bend your knees and get down to her level!

Lenscape: Nicely composed to show it's onviously christmas, but with a clear subject that's fairly clutter free. A little camera shake?

Gwyn: Possibly would have liked a little more space below the cross, but well done, with good, warm colouring. The cross on it's own wouldn't signify Christmas to me, but once on the tree it has the right feel. Third Place.

Justgetoutandride: Would have prefered the point of focus to have been on the diamond shaped chocolate rather than an empty space, but a nice idea, well exposed.

Amoringello: Possibly the most unusual entry . You've obviously spent some time on it, but I think it's a shame that the right hand edge cuts across the cow. The more I look at it, the more bizarre the whole picture is. Commended.

ChrisA: Chris is hoping Santa brings him the other fingerless glove next year . Contrast looks a little lacking, but it's a pleasing image.

Malo1961: A warm looking shot, with nicely rendered background and gentle lighting. Well done - First Place.

StrawberryBeret: Hmmm, after the previous shot this one looks a bit slapdash, but it's christmas, and you've got more fun things to do! Hence why my comments are getting shorter - I'm already late going out. The harsh lighting and the less than pristine tabletop detract I'm afraid.

Mitcho: Well captured to keep some colour in the sky and detail on the house, but I'd prefer to see the whole building.

Prieni: I find the wonky-rimmed glasses a little disconcerting, but the overall layout is very well done. Again, I would have preferred it if the glass on the left wasn't cut in two, and without the Santa, it's not the most Christmassy shot here... Highly Commended.

Hefty1: A typical scene in many a home I'm sure. Think you could have gone in a little tighter and cropped out the bookshelf on the left.

Lilly: Another very nice shot from Lilly, well exposed with nice colours and a definite Christmassy feel. But you're making me jealous so you're not going to win! Second Place.

Ernie: Ahh, how sweet! Pity the dog's not looking at the camera, or, like John, you didn't get down lower.

Dirk1000: Lovely shot of clouds, but even with the comet, it doesn't make me think of christmas I'm afraid Dirk.

Deecy: My wife really likes this one, but I'm afraid it doesn't quite do it for me. Not sure why, might be because of the large dark spaces. Sorry.

Nimitz: We've had lots of chopped in half things this week! The fur on this chap looks really nice, and with a different background (lose those posts and get some grass) it could have been a lot better.

Joe S: Lots going on colourwise, which I find detracts a little (although christmas is generally a time of lots of colour). Just find that left hand side too distracting.

Unlocker: Think this looked too flat, I'm guessing you used flash on camera. Bounced or off-camera may have given it a better look.

Utopia Poppy: Well, it's definitely Christmas, when else do you get Roses? One of those funny ones where things don't seem to sit quite right, and I think it may be because the sweet leans to the right. Perhaps it's just too prominent in the frame? Not sure, and I'm getting later!

Hyram: I think I see what you're trying to do, but I would have preferred to see something in focus.

Sussexsurfer: I'm afraid I can't see the pic today. I could last night and I think I quite liked it, but it's not there for me now. Sorry about that.


So it's well done Malo1961, and a very happy New Year to you all.

If anyone wants me to exopand on any of these, I'll gladly do it tomorrow!

All the best,
Dan

Competition now closed and judgement will be passed tomorrow afternoon at some point.

Thanks for your entries,
Dan

Expecting a record number of entries for this one - no excuses from anyone!

Let's see some pictures of Christmas, whatever style, subject or aspect of it you choose. Enjoy yourselves!

Dan

Okay, from now on 'Shutter Speed' is a banned term, no longer to be used.

Hence forth, Exposure Length is the phrase.

Don't let Chris catch you using that old term.

Dan

And when I say much less, I mean quantatively, as in 1/30s is less than 1/4s. So faster. Or higher.

How can something that's higher be less?

Dan

Okay, that was bad punctuation.

...with the filter removed I'm guessing shutter speeds would be much less. Handholdable?

How's that?

Dan