Activity : All Comments

Phil_D

...Read More
Profile
  • Thanks Nick

    I currently use this lens on a D3 and am more than happy with it, but was curious, particularly having read the Nikon document that was linked to in the 'other thread'.

    Phil.
  • Prompted by the earlier rather humorous discussion of the 'technical inadequacies' of the D800, I am wondering if any of our more enlightened contributors have any experience of using a 16-35 f4 on a D800 . . . is it man-enough for the job? If not, what are the viable alternatives, given I like to use a set of Lee filters?

    Thanks

    Phil.

  • Quote:...is there a monthly subscription??


    No, you just download/stream through iTunes.

    From memory rentals are something like 4 for a cheapie up to 7 or 8 for a new release 'Blockbuster'.

    Works pretty good, but you are limited to whatever is available on iTunes.

    Phil.
  • Worst Canadian joke ever - poutine . . .Sad
  • I have an LX5, which I bought as a 'carry everywhere', so that I didn't have to lug around my SLR all the time.

    It does have limitations, which have taken a little getting used to. Mainly for me, it has been the depth of field - even at f2, unless you are focusing on on object very close, the depth of field is not as shallow as you will be used to with your SLR. As the senser is very small, the 'effective' wide angle focal length of 24mm, is in fact about 3mm, and the depth of field accordingly massive.

    Image quality is pretty impressive, but not in low light, where shadow detail seems to go very blotchy.

    I would agree with Sherlob in terms of intuitiveness, but I genuinely put this down to the fact that it is 'not what I'm used to', and I think the more you use it the more intuitive it gets.

    Overall, I'm pretty pleased with the camera, and it had proved definitely 'fit for purpose' for me.

    Phil.
  • If the FC is not a business, then it should cease from engaging in business practices. The FC holds enormous influence over timber prices in the uk, due to fact that across the whole of the country (i.e. Including Wales and Scotland) it represents in excess of 50% of the market, selling around 4.5 million tonnes of timber per annum. I'm not sure which if any other government quangos engage in commercial activities to such a scale (or for that matter so inefficiently when compared to the evil, faceless private sector). As an example, i don't believe the department of agriculture engages in large scale farming, or owns the largest fleet of tractors in uk agriculture (FC owns the largest fleet of timber harvesting mavhinary in the uk), and i don't believe the said department has any great influence (or interest for that matter) in the price of wheat for example.

    38 degrees are nieve and ill informed, and clearly have little understanding of the issue.

  • Quote:'faceless' landholders
    a great many of whom have demonstrated far greater skill and aptitude than the army of FC staff at managing woodland, enhancing biodiversity and encouraging public access.

    The lack of understanding, and the volume of mis-leading information circulating about this subject is what is breathtaking.
  • I work as a harvesting forester across both public and private holdings, and this whole story makes my blood boil. Put very simply, there is no corrolation whatsoever between the quality of forest managemnt and the ownership status of a wood. I coul show people bueatifully managed woods from both public and private sector, and i could show you appalling woodlands from both public and private sector. This is a non-issue - a complte red herring.

    As for the cost of the FC to the tax payer, this is the lowest estimate i have seen, with the highest at around 1m per day once pension liabilities are included.

    Public access is enshrined in law, and again ownership status has no impact. FC routinely close footpaths etc when forestry operations are underway.

    Large parts of cannock chase are not owner by FC.

    UK forestry is highly regulated (by the FC) and this will continue to be the case.

    As for the original question above, i think mr cairns should stick to what he knows, although having met him, i understand that this may prove difficult for him.
  • Just thought those members who have enjoyed photographing the old wooden pier remains at the end of Glen Etive might like to know that said pier has now been replaced by a much more functional, but sadly much less attractive, stone and concrete structure.

    This has been done in the name of taking lorries off the road, as a large forestry operation is about to begin, and the logs are to be loaded onto boats via this new pier.

    What with the recent demise of the burger-van stag, and now the disappearing jetty, EPZers will soon have little reason to come north anymore . . . .

    Phil.
  • Absolutely amazing, inspiring stuff

    Phil

  • Quote:There's one in Glencoe that lets you photograph him from almost point blank range - I used an ultra wide angle lens!


    He certainly removes the need for any skill in deer photography . . . Smile although I understand he is now dead - heart attack brought on by a sustained diet of burgers and Mars bars . . . there's probably a lesson in there for all of us!

  • Quote:anything taken originally as a jpeg is an instant failure


    Not strictly true, as I have had images accepted that were shot as JPEG on a 6MP Nikon D50 (with a non-pro lens too!). However, I think they do look more closely at your initial submission, so these first four images have to be your absolute best.

    Phil.
  • Just to clarify a point, the uncompressed file size should be a minimum of 48MB - the JPEG (i.e. compressed file) resulting from this will be about 8 - 10MB.

    Phil.
  • Sorry Aron, looks like it has gone :-(

    Phil.
  • Hi Nigel

    I have sold a number of shots through Alamy taken with a D80, so I think the answer to your first question is 'yes'.

    The battery grip helps out if you are using longer lenses or do a lot of 'portrait' format shots (it has a shutter release on bottom right hand side).

    I have since upgraded to a D300 and have a D80 battery grip for sale (less batteries) - PM me if you are interested.

    Regards

    Phil.
  • Apology accepted - I will now bother next time . . .
  • I'll take that as a 'no' then . . . won't bother next time - hope you get ripped off ! ! !
  • But no thanks for those that pointed it out to you on the actual thread . . .?
  • Mike

    The link you have posted above takes me into your account with this supplier, where I can see such details as 'My Account' etc

    Might be an idea to remove it before someone more malicious than me comes along . . .

    Phil.

  • Quote:That's what I mean by


    Perhaps you could have been a little less cryptic in your original post . . . Wink

    From my own point of view, the main reason for using Alamy is that they do all the 'leg work' - if I had the time and inclination to make direct contact with publishers etc, then thats what I would be doing, not waiting for an 'in' from Alamy . . . .

    I just want to see my pic in print, nothing sinister!

    Phil.
  • It doesn't really matter if it is understandable or not, the fact is they will not tell you . . . Smile
  • Thanks Michael

    Phil

  • Quote:Sadly Alamy used to give it out but some people decided to market direct tot he customer cutting Alamy out of the loop and annoying the clients with unsolicited marketing.

    So Alamy stopped and do not divulge client information anymore.



    No I haven't, but I suspect I wouldn't get very far . . .
  • Hi all

    Haven't been on EPZ for a while - just too many other things to do . . . .

    Anyway, I'm chuffed to bits as I've just made my first sale via Alamy - not quite time to tell the boss where to stick it and follow my dreams, but its a start!

    I would really like to see the finished item in print, and i ma just wondering if there is any known way of finding where the image is actually going to appear. My Alamy summary lists the buyer as a UK magazine with a circulation of up to 100 000 . . . . well that narrows it down a bit!

    Anyone got any ideas?

    Thanks

    Phil.
  • Boomtown Rats, Sunderland Empire, I think either 1978 or 1979. Don't really remember much about it other than the support band were some reggae outfit who didn't go down too well with the punks of Sunderland!
  • Try machinemart. They have a couple of pages of portable generators in their catalogue. You'll need an idea of the sort of output you require (in terms of wattage) and can then easily select the best model for you - it even tells you fuel consumption, noise levels etc.

    Hope this helps

    Phil.

  • Quote:Keith H and Andy D on the offchance of being able to score a free Norfscape weekend

    Pete on the offchance of scoring an EC



    No offence to the gents in question, but I can't help thinking this would be a wasted opportunity . . . .

  • Quote:Am I the only person who thought that John Fogerty was brilliant ??
    . . . until he did Status Quo :-(

    Highlight for me was Iggy Pop, also thought the Killers were good, just a pity they were both on at the same time

    Phil.
  • They'll need to be big, wide (i.e. expensive) ND grads . . . or just use the lens down to 12mm

  • Quote:They're out - and biting. I can tell you that with certainty


    . . . trust the English to put us straight . . .
    Wink