Congratulations Clarky and Brian too!

Just posted my entry, and thought I'd explain something about it. The duo playing are Pillowfish, and the bazouki player is Tom Drinkwater, aka Thomastherhymer. They were playing at this small folk club, and I'd expressed an interest in them before, so Tom invited me along.

Looks a bit subdued, and I liked the shot because of this, but it was a great night, and the music was excellent. And I'm not even a folky!

Will post a few more later, had a go with Tom's SMC-M 120mm f/2.8, and got some nice, close crops with that.

Dan

Er, we're talking about the pop-up flash here I think...

I don't know how well the flash metering works with the older lenses, but is it just a case of a typical flashlit image, where skin looks pallid and backgrounds are dark? Not sure if the DS has flash compensation (where you can reduse or increase the power of the flash), but the first thing to try if you haven't already, is balancing the flash with natural light.

Get a correct or slightly under-exposed exposure for natural light (using manual exposure mode), then use the flash, and this will avoid the dark background.

Other than that, you'd probably need a hot-shoe mounted flash that you could bounce off a nearby surface (ceiling or wall).

Dan

I wonder if they'd take cameras from the UK too? Might be quicker than the current system...

Dan

Oh, and my iP4200 cost about £65.

Dan

I use a Canon iP4200, which has been superseded (probably a couple of times now) by the iP4500 I think. I bought it for its speed, decent quality prints, and also because it can print to CD/DVD (as long as they're printable ones).

You can get a test print done from any of their Pixma printers too, which at least gives you a good idea of how the quality compares to your current printer: http://www.yourprint.canon-europe.com/

I imagine the quality would be fine for what you want, but I don't use it for doing prints very often, prefering 'real' photographic prints when it matters.

Dan

It's a beautiful lens, probably my favourite. I took a quick test portrait on saturday when I was doing one of my workshops, to show the difference between this sort of lens and a slower zoom (in this case a Canon 24-105 f/4 L series, more on that in a bit ).

Here's the shot I took:



K10D, FA50mm 1.4 at f/1.4. ISO 200, 1/45s

The reason I'd taken this wide open, was because at f/2.4 this lens looked far sharper than the Canon one on a 40D. This was comparing them on the screens on the cameras, but I mean far sharper. The Canon was nearly comparable at f/5.6. So I said "at f/1.4 this one will be softer", but to be honest it wasn't... This is the above shot shown at 100%.




I just love this lens. Note that at this wide an aperture, the eye is sharp but the glasses are a little soft, and the tip of the nose is definitely blurred. Also note, the soft blurred background, which was bracken, brambles, trees...

Dan

I'd had a look and missed it too.

Dan

It is!

Dan

Yes, unfortunately I didn't think of this one, but I was about to enter the one below until I saw Niblue's entry, and I thought it was a bit too similar.



(taken with the 10-20 at 10mm again, just a couple of minutes before that other one. 1/10s, f/8 ISO400 with the *istD).

Curvature at the edges of the frame is more pronounced at 10mm, and I'm not sure if tilting the camera emphasises this too - here's an example:




But overall detail and excellent lack of CA's with this lens is superb.

Dan

Here's a shot of my brother taken with the Sigma at 10mm. No, his head isn't actually that shape.




Here's a shot from down your way Lilly, which shows the lens distortion (curved horizon) at 10mm. This isn't too bad in my opinion, but it's a little odd in that it's only at the ends that there's a curve. This disappears by about 12mm (ignore the red and blue box ).




Dan