A DFA 50mm f2.8 macro in the SRS 10% off sale, the second in my small lightweight primes. However just after I clicked the order for it I had a phone call to tell me the Leica D-Lux 7 I had a reserve on was at long last in stock: just the one so did I want it? Of course I had to say yes so they both arrived yesterday, what with new tyres it has been an expensive month so far. My hands having been used to a FF DSLR struggled with the little camera which is intended as one you keep handy at all times, however not long before I hit a snag: RAW files are in Leica’s unique format and the software you download is the Adobe Lightroom/Photoshop subscription! If I want that I also want the choice to cancel, not be tied in, so I am on the hunt for alternative software which is a pain. Considering it is marketed as a beginner’s camera that is a major flaw in my view. The point of mentioning it here is how much better Pentax’s .dng default RAW output is which has no such restrictions. The main reason I didn’t opt for the GR III is its fixed focal length although it has a bigger sensor.

As for the 50mm macro it looks promising, nice and sharp, and more useful for close up than true macro given the way it extends to focus - likely to hit anything you are trying to capture! The ring flash works well on it, better as someone else said on a standard screw in adaptor to avoid vignetting which you get with the hood replacement although I worry what effect the weight would have on the lens barrel. The vignetting disappears at smaller apertures which you are more likely to use anyway.

Wow, you are really showing the natives up now! I love these, especially the last one. Keep them coming.

Glad to hear you got sorted, what a fabulous location and cottage!

I just looked on the Kood website and they list three circular polarisers, just one from China at 40mm (no picture), the other two from Japan 43mm & 86mm. All very cheap and not specially slim.

Slim PLs can be a beggar to unscrew, I keep filter grips in my bag now after having to keep a PL on all day when it refused to budge. I wish someone would introduce a press and twist action but an alternative is the magnetic type although I don’t think those go up to 95mm.

Thanks David and well done. Mine was just an advisory day, with a single advisor at HQ, and supposed to be (as I thought) the final thumbs up to go for an assessment after doing the tweaks to my panel suggested by an FRPS earlier. My quandary now is which one do I take notice of for my selection of photos, do I still trust the first or let the latest one overrule her? The advisory days always have a caveat that the views expressed may not be those of the judging panel, so I have drawn on the technical points from both and am attempting to make a final selection to include those they both liked.

Now i have calmed down, retrieved my report from the bin and stuck it back together I recognise that technical matters in regard to the making of prints were valid and useful. I am sure I have come across the advisor before somewhere and I think he works for Photospeed but I could be wrong; however there were diametrically opposing views on image choice and layout between the different advisors I find difficult to reconcile; the first, Hazel Mason FRPS, was more empathetic and looking at her website I can see why that would be. Still, if I have to jump through the right hoops then so be it, maybe revisit the process again sometime but meanwhile get on with just enjoying taking photos for my own enjoyment.

Perfect time of year, everything still fresh but not yet the holiday season. I hope you enjoy!

Good luck Derek, you certainly have a good eye and reflexes for pin sharp photos which I guess trumps the choice of kit.

Thanks both, I will bank the seven photos that both advisors liked and maybe revisit some time in the future. Thinking back over the day it was clear that yesterday’s advisor struggled with anything “artistic” and when someone’s submission for such a category had been previewed by a specialist in that field he readily admitted he had no idea what the comments meant. So images of mine previously judged as well-observed and interesting were rejected as boring, and that is what got my goat. Here is one example:


As for print paper, the advisor admitted that how my panel looked under their lights gave him a negative impression from the outset which didn’t help but I find different subjects work better on different papers; Matt art paper is great for portrait and some landscape but the ones I have tried are simply not sharp and bright enough for action and macro insects. However for a submission they must all be on the same, so the photo lustre paper was a compromise recommended to me by a lady from Permajet who happens to be an ARBS. I will need to rethink that, experiment with different papers and check how they look with oblique lighting.

I suppose the whole advisory process has been useful in helping me to critically review my photos technically, but the contradictory views on the subject matter are difficult to reconcile.