Yes and no. The forum software will now resize the images automatically. I use 1000 pixels, but only because it's convenient across many websites.

I wouldn't upload huge files as it takes too long.

Unfortunately Dave I don't have the 300mm, otherwise I'd be happy to try it out.

Yes, I agree, but worth a look anyway.

Jay is a great photographer and I'm sure any course he runs will be excellent. We can take on board what any teacher says, but that doesn't stop us from thinking for ourselves. Failing to use a lens hood, or even a lens cap, just because that's what Jay Maisel does isn't really thinking.

Having said that, I agree that a lens similar to what he uses, in our case the 55-300mm, is a very effective street photography tool. The Pentax lens hood is not particularly intimidating, nor is the lens hood. Pentax cameras and lenses are relatively compact, making them ideal reportage cameras.

The newsletter dates are being looked at with a view to avoiding this problem, hope it helps.

Contrary to popular belief, I have no axe to grind about other marques, but don't talk about them on PU.

As for the hoods, it is entirely possible to use a bag in such a way that hoods are not attached in reverse. We use Billingham Hadley bags and the hoods are all separate, easily accessible and used every time. It's a bind, I know, but they do make a difference.

There are some circumstances where a hood isn't used, and one is when using the onboard flash with some wider lenses. If you use the hood, it will cast a shadow from the flash.

Street photography ideally is unobtrusive and you can still use the compact hoods on small, unobtrusive lenses. The Pentax range has lots of them. The ultimate unobtrusive hood is the design used on the 40mm Limited and the Q 01 prime lenses. Super idea and a hood both in reverse and the right way round at the same time. Problem solved!

e-mail disguised to prevent attracting spam.

Existing members can PM you and you will be able to reply. Hope that helps!

Subjectively, it didn't seem to make a lot of difference, so I ran a test using an online stopwatch. Obviously it depends on how far the lens has to focus as to how long it will take, but with identical parameters we can establish the difference between speed with and without the converter.

Each shot was started at an aim point on the display, after which the lens was defocused the same amount every time ready for the next aim point. The aim point is irrelevant, but it was 5 second intervals. The delay was observed by seeing what the display on the shots taken was. This includes any operator variation, but that too will even out after a lot of shots.

Without the converter, the delay between the shutter release being pressed, the lens focusing and the shot being taken varied from 0.2s to 0.4s and averaged out at 0.3s

With the converter, the delay varied between 0.2s and 0.4s and averaged out at 0.3s

In summary, the converter made no difference whatsoever, Hope that helps, I'll post more into on the lens as I use it more.

The competitions are found in the menu bar Gallery>Competitions

The discussion threads on the competitions, including rules and guidelines, are found in this forum under Competitions.

Hope that helps, but I'll mention the discrepancy in the newsletters.

I know, it's because of the release date of the newsletter. I'll point it out to the appropriate department.

However, I don't think we need a newsletter to remind us that the weekly competition ends at the end of the week, or that the monthly competition ends at the end of the month do we? If we've left it that late, it's going to be too late.