All Forum Comments
Comment by Mannesty posted on Studio flash dilemma at 15/11/2008 - 19:29
terje-l wrote:
Amanda, my interpretation of your original question is that you, like myself, will benefit from the constructive comments and critique given in the Your Photos section. And I don't believe that your equipment is the limiting factor.
I recently upgraded from K100D to K200D, mainly to get the weather sealing and the increased number of functions available. I enjoy my kit, and I have a long way to go before I have exploited all possibilities it offers.
As to John Riley's advice on formatting, I wholeheartedly agree. Most people will find a solid block of text very hard to read, and will most probably skip the whole entry. I was rather surprised by Martin's reaction to a friendly advice.
Yes, I was, sorry. Mannesty wrote:
Your K200D is an excellent camera and I doubt that you need to change to a K20D just yet. The only real advantage you'd get by so doing is the higher pixel count and weather sealing.
But Peter, the K200D also has weather sealing. Perhaps you were referring to Amanda's K100DS?Your K200D is an excellent camera and I doubt that you need to change to a K20D just yet. The only real advantage you'd get by so doing is the higher pixel count and weather sealing.
Amanda, my interpretation of your original question is that you, like myself, will benefit from the constructive comments and critique given in the Your Photos section. And I don't believe that your equipment is the limiting factor.
I recently upgraded from K100D to K200D, mainly to get the weather sealing and the increased number of functions available. I enjoy my kit, and I have a long way to go before I have exploited all possibilities it offers.
As to John Riley's advice on formatting, I wholeheartedly agree. Most people will find a solid block of text very hard to read, and will most probably skip the whole entry. I was rather surprised by Martin's reaction to a friendly advice.
Comment by Mannesty posted on Lens or new camera advice appreciated.. at 15/11/2008 - 19:20
rhayles wrote:
Thanks, Peter. The reason that I need to turn to you guys for advice is that there are no dealers on the I.o.W. that hold stock of any Pentax..Full stop. It would mean a day trip to Southampton or Portsmouth costing twenty pounds and an all day venture. When you have a walking problem, it's not on, so, thanks again for your willingness to give me advice. Have you used the 55-300? How did you find it? I am simply torn between the varying reviews and responses. regards Ron.
I have no personal experience of the 55-300mm lens, but I'll be getting one when I've sold my Sigma 70-300mm.Thanks, Peter. The reason that I need to turn to you guys for advice is that there are no dealers on the I.o.W. that hold stock of any Pentax..Full stop. It would mean a day trip to Southampton or Portsmouth costing twenty pounds and an all day venture. When you have a walking problem, it's not on, so, thanks again for your willingness to give me advice. Have you used the 55-300? How did you find it? I am simply torn between the varying reviews and responses. regards Ron.
Comment by Mannesty posted on advice on longer lens, please at 15/11/2008 - 19:09
The star trails seem OK to me, but i hadn't noticed the spot in the middle. The only star in the Northern hemisphere that doesn't appear to move in relation to the others is the Pole Star. Could it be that?
Maybe it's a geostationary satellite/space station.
Maybe it's a geostationary satellite/space station.
Comment by Mannesty posted on The Solway at 15/11/2008 - 14:37
Comment by Mannesty posted on Can SRS Microsystems be trusted? at 15/11/2008 - 14:30
rhayles wrote:
It's too late once purchased, finding out that these comments are valid.
If you are able to find a lens in stock on IOW, perhaps you could take some sample shots to help make up your mind.It's too late once purchased, finding out that these comments are valid.
Ordinarily I would agree that a zoom ratio of 5.5:1 is stretching it a bit. For that reason, I've never considered the Sigma 50-500mm with a zoom ratio of 10:1. I think too many compromises are made at these extremes.
That said, modern lenses designed for the APS-C sized sensors make fewer compromises and maybe 5.5:1 is less so than if it were a FF lens. 70-300mm lenses are common in the FF world, maybe 55-300mm isn't an issue.
See if you can find one to try out.
Comment by Mannesty posted on advice on longer lens, please at 15/11/2008 - 14:29
rhayles wrote:
Reviews on the 55-300 Pentax leave a question mark on their functionality.
Not around here.Reviews on the 55-300 Pentax leave a question mark on their functionality.
Comment by Mannesty posted on advice on longer lens, please at 15/11/2008 - 13:18
gartmore wrote:
According to the instructions for my little flash heads a GN of 36 equates to 150 watt/seconds and a GN of 48 equates to 180 watt/seconds.
So a rough calculation reveals that a flash having a GN of 54 is going to be equivelant to around 200 w/s, similar to entry level studio heads ( 180/48 ) x 54 = 202.5.According to the instructions for my little flash heads a GN of 36 equates to 150 watt/seconds and a GN of 48 equates to 180 watt/seconds.
My 2 X AF540FGZ's will give me around 400 w/s of lighting , the AF500FTZ around another 180w/s, and I'll use the 2 AF360FGZ's for 300 w/s more light if I need it. I think that'll do for my immediate needs.
Thanks for all the replies so far.
Comment by Mannesty posted on Studio flash dilemma at 15/11/2008 - 13:07
Get started on reading the manual now. Download it from here.
Comment by Mannesty posted on K20D, ordered one at 15/11/2008 - 12:57
Ken, I think i've seen those 180 watt heads on ebay. Do they have variable output?
Comment by Mannesty posted on Studio flash dilemma at 15/11/2008 - 12:24
there are few downsides to the Dlites except the lack of a fan.
For simplicity and portability I like using a ring light for macro but it produces rather unnatural lighting. I prefer a twin flash system to get a bit of shadow, but not overstated as with direct flash.