Not so much an issue, more of a mystery.

I have a number of rechargeable high capacity (2700 and 2900 mAh) NiMH AA batteries. For various reasons these don't get used very often nowadays, and when I went to them they seemed non functional. The battery charger that was supplied with some of them seemed to indicate that they wouldn't charge, and a multimeter was showing an output of 0.

Out of curiosity as much as anything I put the first lot of four, 'Powerex' 2700, in a generic NiMH charger and let them cooking for a couple of hours. They looked to be still charging, but I took them out to check the voltage and it was still zero. Put them back in and after some flickering the charger indicated they were done. I took them out and tried the meter again, this time they all showed 1.46 volts.

Next batch was a set of Vapex 2900 mAh. Again, zero volts on the meter. I put them in the charger and watched as the LCD display went from zero to ready in about 10-15 minutes. I checked them with the meter and once again, 1.46 volts.

With the Vapex I wondered if there was some gross memory effect, so I put them in my ist DS and proceeded to hammer it through about 350 exposures, with flash, which it endured quite happily. When I first put them in, the battery indicator showed full, but very quickly showed empty, but the camera kept going. I switched it off then back on and the camera's battery indicator showed full for the remained of the experiment.

So, fingers crossed that they are all sorted. Hopefully this might be of help to anyone with a similar problem (if, indeed, mine is cured!) But it would be nice to hear the opinions of a battery expert on this experience.

K1000 is, IMO, the best option for such a venture.

When I first started with photography I had several Pentax SLRs in 35mm. After a longish break I decided to get back in with one of these new fangled digital SLRs. I settled on a K200D because I liked the Pentax brand, but mainly because it seemed to be the best bang for the bucks and with excellent backwards compatibility. Since then I have acquired an ist DS for fun, a K20D which I wont get a good enough return on to sell it, and now a K5. A fine assortment of lens, and other bits and pieces because I'm a gadget junkie.

There would appear to be no evidence whatsoever that the photographer had done anything to compromise the crime scene. Had he actually done so then I suspect he would have been arrested anyway, or at least had his camera seized.

Secondly, for such an issue there would be no point in complaining to the IPCC as all they would do is forward it to what is laughingly called the 'Professional Standards Unit' of the force concerned. The IPCC is routinely biased, incompetent, and almost always end up supporting the police unless it is simply impossible to do so (and sometimes even then). The Youtube publication will not hazard a police discipline complaint, and may even improve the chances of the officer concerned actually being dealt with properly.

Well, for sheer bullying the sergeant in this topic is a clear winner, but if you are looking for police stupidity of a truly awe inspiring degree, you need look no further.

link

Not at all. The photographer merely stood his ground. Many of these incident have the photographer acting like a real numpty, but this one was fairly steady. The only thing the photographer was guilty of was failing to grovel enough to the wonderful sergeant.

Who says the photographer was gong to put anything on Faceache? For the avoidance of doubt, there was at no time any obstruction by the photographer of a police officer acting in the execution of his duty. Neither was there any occasion mentioned where there was someone dying on the scene. That moment had passed.

It is clear, on listening to the whole of the conversation that this officer, a sergeant FFS! was abusing his authority to an amazing extent. It was one of the very few occasions that, if I had been the photographer, when the threat of arrest was made, I'd have told him to carry on. The trial would have been a hoot, if CPS were stupid enough to run it.

"What was the physical obstruction the photographer was causing you?"

"Did you think the camera was going to steal your soul?"

"Were the light rays entering the camera's lens blocking the road somehow?"

All the sergeant had to do was to ignore the photographer, at most to warn him if he got too close to the action that he was physically in someone's way. But no, he just couldn't miss the opportunity to fondle his ego, which was all he was doing. A shameful, bullying, stupid uniformed, uninformed, embarrassment to any society with a desire for freedom.

Still, never attribute to malice anything that is attributable to stupidity.

If you get a DFG and amalgamate it with a QCF, the J65 will combine with the 78K and produce a wonderful CX16J.

FWIW, I've just acquired a small, and cheap, 5"x4" light box via eBay. The idea was to use it to put negatives / slides on and use an SLR to photograph them. So far I've just tried a few handheld close up shots of some old negatives. The results look very promising for the set up if a tripod or other stabilising system is used. Some post processing work will still be required. The results so far look at least as good, probably better, than the Veho film scanner I have, and FastStone will handle the results easier and better than the Veho software.

If you have a quality SLR that can manage a decent macro shot, then it's well worth considering. If I had any worthwhile pictures I'd post some, but what I'm looking at are negatives, and some slides, from way back when, which are of interest only to me.

Well, the answer's obvious. They're not birds.