Thanks Alan i'll try that tonight, as its one of those cloudy days when the light changes a fair bit.

I can't see the diaphragm when the lens is set to 2.8 so it can't physically get any wider. Yet I can select 1.2 in Av mode, and if I lock the shutter speed, the 1.2 setting results in a brighter image than when I select f2.8 manually on the aperture ring.

Its not causing me any issues with exposure as such.

I have a sigma super-wide supposedly with a maximum aperture of f2.8. However, in Av mode I have found I can get the aperture to f1.2! The shutter speed gets faster, and dof is noticeably decreased, as you would expect if this was a real f1.2 lens.

For example, I just took a shot of Pershore abbey at f2.8 and the shutter speed was 1/1000. At f1.2, 1/4000. There is more fringing at f1.2 but hey- I am very pleased with this 'bonus feature'!

Anyone know how this might have happened?

I'm using a Cobra d700 flash. It works fine as a manual flash - shooting stuff around the house I set the camera to f8 and iso 100 and bounce the flash off the ceiling. Digital means you can easily correct your exposure. I thought about a yong nuo flash, but thought that if an old manual flash had survived for ten years or more and was still working, It's probably well built and reliable- and it cost a fiver.

Admittedly my flash needs are pretty basic! The voltage is under 10v, I believe.

I am sure that anyone trying to make their own frames will soon realise that the money professional picture framers charge is well earned.

My sister is having to close her little picture framing shop and gallery, but she is going to keep the equipment as she has a list of steady clients who value her 'eye' for what type of frame and mount will work best for their work.

If you do have a little gallery and framing shop near to you, why not support it? You might even be able to sell some of your prints through it- my sister was always open to displaying work by local artists and photographers.

Like it Pauly. Love shots which combine reflections into the image.

All the talk of taking cameras down mines etc reminded me of this great trip I went on in 2007... me and an American buddy explored some lava tubes at Lava Beds National Monument near Tulelake in Northern California.

We spent about 5 hours underground, and there were some worrying moments as very narrow sections of cave (with sharp spiky walls) needed to be negotiated, and towards the end, doubts began to creep in regarding whether we were headed back to the cave entrance, or deeper into the subterranean labyrinth! It was refreshing to be allowed to explore on your own, rather than with a guide. The helmet I'm wearing in my profile picture was bought from the visitor centre for the expedition.

Very foolhardy, but lots of fun.

Note the cinder cone in the landscape photo from near the cave mouth, and the Native American petraglyphs.

A truly fascinating place, and very few visitors. Pictures are taken with my old DL2 and kit lens - rather crudely processed for this post I'm afraid!

If it was me, I would just keep the camera in a toploading slr bag, and whip it out when needed, putting it back again straight after, and avoid standing under dripping water with the camera pointing upwards!
[Edited for brevity]

Just wish I had the cash to spare

It looks a great lens, and 35mm is a sweet focal length both for film or digital IMO. Wanting a DA 35mm puts me off a bit though.I'd be chuffed with either lens tbh! You must admit the 35 macro is also a beaut