Westie

100% behind you on that one NJ. For our absent friend.

Great stuff Snatcher. I'm sure the boss is loving it, from his photo studio in the sky. It's a great way to thank him for everything he's done for this forum, so keep it coming.

Words fail me. I never met Danny in person, but he was one of the kindest, friendliest and most helpful people that I have ever come across on this forum. The news of his passing has come as a massive shock and I am sure I am right in saying that on behalf of all those that knew Danny/Mr Wiggly on this forum, we pass on our heartfelt sympathy and wishes to his family at this tragic time. Rest easily, Danny. You will be sorely missed. Andrew.

Words fail me. I never met Danny in person, but he was one of the kindest, friendliest and most helpful people that I have ever come across on this forum. The news of his passing has come as a massive shock and I am sure I am right in saying that on behalf of all those that knew Danny/Mr Wiggly on this forum, we pass on our heartfelt sympathy and wishes to his family at this tragic time. Rest easily, Danny. You will be sorely missed. Andrew.

Entry No: 2 ------------ Mercury ---------- Flash Used: No Focal Length: 105.0mm (35mm equivalent: 157... Exposure Time: 20.000 s Aperture: f/36.0 ISO Equiv.: 100 Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: Manual Exposure Mode: Manual Exposure Mode: Auto bracketing

Entry No: 1 ----------- Mary ------- Flash Used: Yes (Strobe light detected) Focal Length: 105.0mm (35mm equivalent: 157... Exposure Time: 0.017 s (1/60) Aperture: f/4.5 ISO Equiv.: 200 Light Source: Flash Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: program (auto)

Looks like the Joker. LOL. Everyone in my limited household is a face puller. Sharon hates having her photo taken - full stop. So I get a nice kind of grimace. Pip is developing the skill of gurning into an artform. Even the cat manages to look like he'd rather savage me than have a nice kitty photo taken. Time to adopt.

NJ - well done - a very worthy winner!!

I don't think anyone has said old glass is bad glass. If that were the case, why would people put a lens on a camera where it then has to be manually focussed, because it doesn't configure with the new camera's autofocus system? Simply because of the quality of picture it produces. Good glass doesn't become bad through age. Technology will undoubtedly advance and with it lens design and what a lens is capable of achieving. Look at the 14-24 f2.8 for the Nikon. I've never tried one, but all the reviews indicate that that lens single handedly bettered stellar prime lenses in the same range - something that the experts said was not possible for a zoom lens. Fact of the matter is that most of us mere mortals cannot afford pro grade glass, but a point that comes out of your comment, Den, is that with a bit of detective work, you probably could collect yourself some quality, older lenses at a fraction of the price of newer versions, providing you are also prepared to take the occasional compromise with that too (e.g. manual focussing). It depends on purpose/application - you wouldn't want to be maually focussing a tele for a sports game! For stationary work - landscape etc, less of a problem. ATB. Andrew.

Tis true, tis true. A neat way of saying the grass is greener! I'd love the idea, but then again, being hunched over a computer until late in the night mucking around with photos. Hmm. Late at night. Hunched over a computer. I'm two thirds of the way there already.

Anyone want to gift me £5000 for my lens choices? I bought a lottery ticket, but realised that I've just lost a £1 in my camera fund... LOL Perleeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaasssssssssssssssse? If I could start afresh in my career, I'd love to do something that I love - photography. Or is this just a case of the grass being greener?!

Aren't we all in this for the same thing - enjoying taking photos? That is the goal as far as I am concerned. It's a picture, that's all. If others like it, great, If not, no biggy. We all have reasons for showing our pictures here and ultimately, it's a nice little insight into others worlds/life etc. I enjoy every picture in here for what it is - a snapshot of some one else's life and what makes them tick. Let's not make this competition thing too serious now. At the end of the day, we can all learn from other people's shots - a different perspective on taking photos. But let's not lose the overall perspective - themed or not - this is for fun. Sermon over.

I'd have to agree with that. I've got one pro grade lens and it blows my other lenses away in terms of colour rendition, contrast etc, although I'd probably be hard pushed to see the difference in small prints that I run off for friends/family. Bigger pictures, then yes, I can see a quite marked difference. Shame my pocket doesn't allow me to indulge myself, otherwise I'd happily have a 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 and 200-400 f4 in the Nikon range. Mind you, I wouldn't have a wife after a spending spree of that nature. I doubt I'd have the support of my bank manager either. But you can still dream. LOL.

I've tinkered with HDR in CS3 and it seems to do a reasonable job. I haven't had a chance to really get to grips with it yet (haven't really had much of a chance to get the camera out for a concerted effort for a while), so that will be the next project when we get some decent weather. I want to do some more long exposure shots and it's a question of getting the timing right, especially now it's dark when I go to work and dark when I get back. Probably about a 30 minute window at the weekends. Keep up the great work.

Nice PPing, HB. Are those plugins freebies? I've not got round to experimenting with anything other than standard CS3 stuff yet. Nice effect.

Entry No: 3 ----------- Core! -------- Exposure Time = 8" F Number = F20 Exposure Program = Manual ISO Speed Ratings = 100 Date Time Original = 2008-10-26 13:13:34 Shutter Speed Value = -3 TV Aperture Value = 8.64 AV Exposure Bias Value = +0.33EV Max Aperture Value = F3.86 Metering Mode = Pattern Light Source = unknown Flash = Off Focal Length = 105mm

Happy Birthday, HB. Like a good wine, it'll feel better after you've had a bottle (or two). LOL. Congratulations, mate.

Elton - is the fact that you've managed to get it down from 3 minutes to 1 minute simply a side effect of you loving Peter so much? Think about Margaret Thatcher - that should get you back up to 3 minutes again.

Entry No: 2 ----------- Pip's Piano -------------- Exposure Time = 1/60" F Number = F10 Exposure Program = Manual ISO Speed Ratings = 500 Date Time Original = 2008-10-04 12:51:49 Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV Max Aperture Value = F4.44 Metering Mode = CenterWeightedAverage Light Source = unknown Flash = Strobe return light detected Focal Length = 70mm

Hi SW On the long end, the Nikon 70-300mm gets very good reviews, although reports of the 200-300mm range being a little softer than the 70-200mm range, especially on the largest aperature settings. Also a tendancy to hunt in lower light situations (but that can be overcome by manually focussing if it simply cannot lock on in dingy conditions). I played around with that lens in a camera shop - well built, compact and the VR works very, very well. As you suggested, you can use a monopod if you want and the advantage of that over a tripod is that you can still use VR on the monopod, as there will still be movement that the VR can cancel out. The issues with VR are, I understand, if it is left on whilst using a tripod - the camera is rock solid still and the movement of the VR internal gyroscopes (I think??) can introduce unnecessary movement in that case! As you say, the 18-70mm is a very good lens - good build quality and optics and weather/dust sealed. Not half bad for the price. The 50mm f1.8 gets very good reviews for low light capabilities and you can get that lens for under £100. Not bad at all. If you're happy with 3rd party lenses, the following always seem to have good reviews: Wide Angle: Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 Tokina 12-24mm f4 Macro: Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro Sadly, no experience with any of these lenses, but if you look at the DPReview website you may see some links/threads with discussions about these lenses. Most owners seem happy bunnies. Here's the link. DPReview ATB Andy.

SW - sorry to hear about the health issues. I hope all resolves in good time. I loved your daisy shot, by the way. Sharp, great depth of field and framed nicely. Sorry for the delay in responding. Work is... well work, in a credit crunch. FWIW, I have 3 lenses at the moment: Nikon 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR Sigma 30mm f1.4 I understand that the 18-200mm, despite its limitations on the f front, is a very, very capable lens for all purpose walk around work. If I was going to limit myself to one lens on the Nikon system, the 18-200mm would probably be my all purpose walk around lens of choice. The range is quite incredible, and VR is an added bonus. I can't really comment on the body issue. I use a D200 and wouldn't want to say anything about a product I haven't tried. I know that there are issues with D40, if the lens doesn't have SWM/AFS or similar. The price, though, seems very good. If they honour that price with a 12 month warranty (even if a 3rd party MAC style warranty), then snap their hand off, provided your existing lenses are compatible on the SWM/AFS issue. The 18-70 will be fine, as will the 18-200, as they are both AFS. Think there might be an issue with the Sigma though, so worth checking? As for lenses, I have the 18-70mm, and I bought that over another kit lens, because it has great reviews, given its price. It is a slowish lens, but it still performs pretty bl00dy well. I can't criticise my copy. Softish wide open, but notch it down a stop or two and it does me proud. I've seen plenty of reviews really slapping the back of the 70-300mm VR too. Best in the 70-200mm range, but again, are we so critical of our personal shots, in day to day photography, that we would reject softer shots at 300mm wide open? Probably not, because we aren't printing large enough to see the flaws in the performance of the lens. 70-300mm VR would work on a D40, as I undertand things. Hope this helps. A.

Mate - cheers for that. I just get this name going round and round in my head... Trouble is, it's Gollum!! LOL. Those eyes have a very similar effect. Good PPing.

Hi SW. I'm not certain what you are considering in terms of 'creative' with VR on, but in my humble experience, I don't think VR affects the quality of the image one jot - quite the opposite. I have hundreds of shots taken with my 105mm VR, which have noticeably improved the keeper rate when using handheld. The pictures are sharp, sharp, sharp. It's the best lens in my (limited) arsenal. VR allows me to use a 105 handheld with a shutter speed of 1/30s-1/60s and still get a sharp as a tack shot. The conventional rule of thumb would be that I would need a shutter speed of nearer 1/200s. The only time I have seen any degradation of the image (and that is looking at it 100%, which is never going to affect image quality on an A4 size print) is if I have left VR on when using a tripod. I suppose pros may say that it does have an impact, but when you consider that they are thinking about pictures being blown up to the size of my house, I'm not convinced it should trouble you or I. Even if you were still concerned, you could turn VR off. Some would argue that the money is better spent on a f2.8 lens. With that comes better glass, better contrast and resolution and faster shutter speeds, which overcome the same issues that VR does i.e. camera shake. But strap the camera to a tripod, stop those lenses down to their best range f5-8 and you might be hard pressed to see any tangible difference in a normal sized 10x8 print. If you crop a lot, you may. Having said that, VR is more often put into the consumer range of lenses in Nikon's line up and some prosumer lenses. Ultimately, you get what you pay for. Having read this through, I'm not sure it makes much sense. If you want me to e-mail you some full size pictures taken with VR, more than happy to do so. Andrew.

HB - I left my thoughts on your PP'd versions on the Sept 08 Winners thread. Just hope my little girl is alright now. My wallets been ripped to shreds by you, mate. There's some things that BUPA/private health care does not cover. In all seriousness, I'd love to know how you morphed your eyes like that. I'm thinking of scanning in my wedding photos and giving Sharon a suprise by replacing the odd one or two round the house.

Peter - a cracking shot - the mood of it was superb. HB - you owe me big time. The original shot was impressive. My daughter, Pippa is now in private therapy having seen the follow ups which you PP'd. The PP'd versions didn't affect me quite to badly - did you just tweak the contrast slightly? LOL. Seriously mate, if your eyeballs ever do go like that, get to the quack quick. All other runners up - congratulations on getting into the final 6.