All Forum Comments
Comment by PeteL posted on Question for johnriley (and all) at 31/03/2010 - 17:42
It might be worthwhile just checking inside the film chamber for any dust particles or any feint tram lines on the pressure plate on the inside of the camera back or on either side of the shutter aperture.
But my guess is that the processing is to blame. Try someone else and see if you have lines in the same place.
Regards - Pete
But my guess is that the processing is to blame. Try someone else and see if you have lines in the same place.
Regards - Pete
Comment by PeteL posted on Scratches on negatives at 31/03/2010 - 17:26
Anvh wrote:
where are the days that silver camera's were standard?
Absolutely! In my day you had to pay extra for black!bwichmawr wrote:
I was referring to the...Oh never mind!!
A.
I was referring to the...Oh never mind!!
A.
where are the days that silver camera's were standard?
Regards - Pete
Comment by PeteL posted on LTD ED K-7 Silver at 31/03/2010 - 12:57
Hi i have just found this by the Manfrotto School of Excellence.link Two Tutorials being broadcast on line on the 8th April between 7pm and 8pm UK time. Register for free.
Regards - Pete.
Regards - Pete.
Comment by PeteL posted on On Line Tutorials at 31/03/2010 - 12:51
Better still you could buy all Forum members a pint!
Regards - Pete
Regards - Pete
Comment by PeteL posted on I've just found out what my bonus is. I need spending ideas! at 30/03/2010 - 14:02
Hi Barrie, I hope my observations were useful! I have not been to that part of the world for a while, I used to go to South Shields and Whitby fairly frequently and always fancied Robin Hoods bay. I was married to a girl from near Durham... That too a long time ago!
Regards - Pete.
Regards - Pete.
Comment by PeteL posted on A Trip to the Coast at 30/03/2010 - 11:20
Hi,
I enjoyed looking at your pics, Are they around the North East? The first thing that struck me is that they all appear to be taken at roughly eye level and one or two appear to be a tiny bit over exposed.(It`s possible the meter was fooled by the dark subject matter.) There are some interesting shapes there and personally i would have got down and dirty and taken some at ground level, Even some at odd angles to make more of the subjects. The close ups of the heads have a bit too much space at the top of the image which take my eye away from the figures. The vertical shot of the light tower i think might be a bit stronger if cropped to square format as there is a lot of empty blue before getting to the cloud at the top of the frame. I know the cloud holds the eye into the frame it`s just too far above the subject. and perhaps the image would also have benefited if you had placed the grass a little more to the left to fill the bottom corner..
I think overall my favourite shots are the group of 4 figures and the windmill showing the blades. Nice work.
Best Regards - Pete
I enjoyed looking at your pics, Are they around the North East? The first thing that struck me is that they all appear to be taken at roughly eye level and one or two appear to be a tiny bit over exposed.(It`s possible the meter was fooled by the dark subject matter.) There are some interesting shapes there and personally i would have got down and dirty and taken some at ground level, Even some at odd angles to make more of the subjects. The close ups of the heads have a bit too much space at the top of the image which take my eye away from the figures. The vertical shot of the light tower i think might be a bit stronger if cropped to square format as there is a lot of empty blue before getting to the cloud at the top of the frame. I know the cloud holds the eye into the frame it`s just too far above the subject. and perhaps the image would also have benefited if you had placed the grass a little more to the left to fill the bottom corner..
I think overall my favourite shots are the group of 4 figures and the windmill showing the blades. Nice work.
Best Regards - Pete
Comment by PeteL posted on A Trip to the Coast at 30/03/2010 - 09:40
technoidiot wrote:
That Remote control F is so tiny I'm scared of loosing it , sadly I can't see how to get a lanyard onto it to stop me putting it down and not finding it again .
I have pieces of Dayglo attached to my F which helps.That Remote control F is so tiny I'm scared of loosing it , sadly I can't see how to get a lanyard onto it to stop me putting it down and not finding it again .
Regards - Pete.
Comment by PeteL posted on Cable switches or remotes at 29/03/2010 - 17:18
MrCynical wrote:
In my 550 i have a K7 with grip and DA*16-55 attached,DA* 50-135,100mm macro, 20mm f4,200mmf4,300mm f4,18-50 mk2 kit lens,2x converter, Vivitar telescope eyepiece (For converting any lens into a telescope),Pentax 540 flash, Vivitar 283 flash,Spare cards, In the pockets i have Pentax cleaning kit, Glass filters, Cokin Filters and associated bits, Ring Power ring backup power source, Zigview mk2, Reflectors, Rode Stereo Mic, Wind up torch, Spare AA batteries, Cleaning cloth,Baseball cap, Flaxh off camera cable, Mini extra flash,Lens cloth and cleaning fluid, Aircrew inner cape leather gloves, Cable release, I R release, Maps, Additionally i also sometimes carry a Vivitar Flash bracket and a Kaiser rifle grip.or a 1m Candlepower torch.Gwyn wrote:
I have a Tamrac Expedition 5 (5575) which is my bag of choice for travelling. It is just carry-on legal, though it is heavy. Luckily it's never been weighed yet.
I also have an old model Lowepro Nova, which though smaller holds more than the pretty Bella. But I like my (oatmeal) Pretty Bella for trips when I don't want to scream camera bag, or am feeling very girly. And it is incredibly comfortable for a shoulder bag.
Both the Tamrac and the Lowepro have been in downpours and everything stayed dry inside, no need for an extra rain cover.
I'm now wavering on Billingham - their bags are of astonishing quality, but I'm not convinced that the Hadleys are big enough to carry all the stuff I need them to and the larger ones are beyond what I would be willing to pay for a camera bag. I'll take a look at those two you mentioned, since waterproofness is my primary requirement (aside from carrying ability of course!)I have a Tamrac Expedition 5 (5575) which is my bag of choice for travelling. It is just carry-on legal, though it is heavy. Luckily it's never been weighed yet.
I also have an old model Lowepro Nova, which though smaller holds more than the pretty Bella. But I like my (oatmeal) Pretty Bella for trips when I don't want to scream camera bag, or am feeling very girly. And it is incredibly comfortable for a shoulder bag.
Both the Tamrac and the Lowepro have been in downpours and everything stayed dry inside, no need for an extra rain cover.
If i added another layer of dividers i could probably get more in but i value my health!
Unfortunately the harness is not suitable for the 550 so i am unable to carry it like a backpack.
Regards - Pete
Comment by PeteL posted on Bag recommendations/comments? at 29/03/2010 - 11:58
MrCynical wrote:
*Are they actually waterproof (through a treatment of the material or somesuch), or do they just protect gear from most rain by the canvas simply absorbing water for longer than most people will be out in rain?
*Do they come with camera/lens-holding dividers or is it basically a single 'cavern' for which dividers must be purchased separately?
With the Billingham, The Canvas is simply the outer layer, It is sandwhiched with a neoprene layer while a third different material is used as an internal layer. I have never had any problem in any kind of weather. The real beauty is that when you know the layout well enough you can just reach into the bag and pick out your gear whilst on the move yet still leave the top flap protecting against rain.johnriley wrote:
We use Billingham Hadley Pro bags - very accessible, waterproof and compact. We find them big enough in the field and they hold quite a bit of kit.
Those look nice - expensive, but if they're as useful as they look possibly worth it (and probably not that much more expensive than my Timbukhack once the cost of inserts is taken into account). I've a couple of questions about the Billinghams though:We use Billingham Hadley Pro bags - very accessible, waterproof and compact. We find them big enough in the field and they hold quite a bit of kit.
*Are they actually waterproof (through a treatment of the material or somesuch), or do they just protect gear from most rain by the canvas simply absorbing water for longer than most people will be out in rain?
*Do they come with camera/lens-holding dividers or is it basically a single 'cavern' for which dividers must be purchased separately?
There are a useful number of dividers included but others can be added if required.
Regards - Pete
Comment by PeteL posted on Bag recommendations/comments? at 28/03/2010 - 17:58
Regards - Pete