Last time I looked it seemed rather expensive so didn't buy it and continue to use an ad-hoc combination of light sources. But your needs and preferences may be different to mine.

Steve

I do like these, both individually and as a pair. Lighting, texture, detail, colour (in the second), all superb. There's something ammonite-ish about that single seed - but perhaps that's what living near the Jurrasic Coast does to your brain!.

Interesting that you chose IR for the first. Is it much different to a straight mono version?

Steve

Anyone going to watch the Big Match from Down Under tomorrow?

It brings back memories of when my son was at uni about 15 years ago. The morning after the end of summer term party he woke with a sore head and an uncomfortable feeling that he'd agreed to coach the ladies' football team for the next year. He spent the summer holiday hoping that either his memory was wrong or the ladies would forget. It wasn't and they didn't. A year later he was even more convinced that females shouldn't even try to play football. I haven't dare ask for his opinion about the current situation...

Steve

Thanks folks, glad you like it, Just goes to show what can happen when you've got a cooperative subject - these bugs usually try to hide as soon as they see me with a camera...

Steve

Care to explain 'conventional use'? For me, a butterfly shot is conventional use .

Steve

Almost every year there are changes to my household insurance policy. Usually it is to clarify the meaning of certain words or terms, sometimes it is something more substantial. My guess is that most of the changes have been made because the insurance company has had a disputed claim that hinged on the precise meaning of words and want to remove any ambiguity. And in the other direction, I once asked for clarification on whether an SLR with lens attached would be considered one item or two when interpreting a clause in the policy. The reason for a more substantial change is usually obvious, for example people working from home due to Covid restrictions caused changes over what business-related items are and are not covered.

As for the specific details in the OP's post, the new terms and excess don't seem unreasonable to me. The only thing that does is requiring photographs when a simple yes/no checklist is all that is needed. I suppose that taking photos of everything with a phone is now so commonplace that it's considered normal to ask for them.

Steve

Not very stealthy, then, if you could see and hear it...

Steve

This little one popped out of the undergrowth to see what was disturbing its rest. It didn't offer to help me attack the weeds (mostly bindweed) that shouldn't have been in the flower border. However, it did hang around long enough for me to go indoors, grab a camera with suitable lens and return to take its portrait. Not the classic portrait (head-and-shoulders taken from front or side with rim lighting to highlight the sitter's fabulous hair :wink, but the best I could do given the abundant foliage surrounding it (mostly weeds...). At least the eyes are in focus - and you can see some hair .

K3 + Irix 150mm + 1.4TC, hand held, not cropped.

Thoughts, comments etc. welcome as always.




Steve

That's a rather good butterfly photo. And a butterfly that knows how and where to pose, too. Like it a lot!

To be honest, with this sort of photo I can't tell from just looking which version of the K3 was used.

Steve

That's a lot cheaper than I'd have guessed. For the results you're getting, I'd say it was money well spent. I bet a Death Star would set you back a lot more £££s though - even the Lego kit costs upwards of £700. Mind you, making that thing would give you something to do in the minibus while waiting for the clouds to clear...

Steve