Alnath

I have one mate and i love it, it is much more accurate then trying to use a beachcaster which just doesnt give with the weights involved, its like trying to cast with a broom handle. The Outkast has a test curve of 5lb so with an 8oz spod on it like a full Fox TB1 it all ballances out nice, just remember to use a finger stall or you might cut your finger end off LOL. I got a cheap Daiwa reel free with mine and i just shoved some 20lb Daiwa Sensor on it, 80 yards is pretty easy with a decent chuck.

The only way to do it right is to use a real calibration tool, no point doing it by eye or by changing colour profiles etc. because it just doesn't cut the mustard, given the amount of money you have to invest in DSLR bodys and glass the 60 or 70 quid for something like a Pantone Huey to get constant results is pretty insignificant. http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-panton...brator/p1012117 FWIW your 17 inch Dell (the big clunker) will be much more able to represent what the senror picked up, TFT monitors are pretty crap at it to be honest.

Thanks Clifftop, it was my first time at Sunderland and it was brill, much better than Waddington.

Buy which one you like the look and feel of, it is no good anyone telling you what they do and do not like because it is all personal preference. You will get good quality shots no matter which DSLR you buy, its the glass you shove on the front of it that matters. I could sit here all day telling you why i use Canon and why i think you should use Canon but thats because i like Canon, whould i be happy if i had bought Nikon? I am guessing yes, i would be very happy.

It is really hard to get prop (or rotor i guess it should be) blur on any kind of helicopter, this was at 1/80th of a second (hand held at an effective 640mm), even 250ths will surfice for prop shots but the slower the better These are all from Sunderland, none were pushed a stop because of the light refelcting off the sea, they didnt need it (and you can get it back shooting raw anyway to be honest)

Cheers, they were even more colourful tonight

Took this photo of Noctilucent Clouds around 12.30am'ish this morning, amazing sight to see the glowing blue ghost like clouds in the dark night sky.

Tar fella

Holy moly eye splitting sharpness going on there it is way over processed, the original image on flickr was spot on and i could also see a difference in to to the photobucket image in post 12 (calibrated 23inch 1080p Samsung monitor here) FWIW i use Fotopic because it is English and i would rather support them than anyone else.

These were taken with a reversed old (and broken) M42 mount 50mm lens which i bought from a car boot sale for 2 quid. Eye of a needle Ball in a ballpoint pen Grains of Sugar

it is shadow not CA, the moon was photographed the night before full and is at 99%

Clifftop all you need to remember is the moon is a lot brighter than you think and your camera will get mighty confused with the little burning white blob and the mass of jetblack, shoot manual and use a shutter speed faster then you might think, i cant remember what this full moon was shot at but the waining moon was at 1/320th of a second (both are shot hand held on with a 100-400mm L)

They are available from the links i posted but i seem to have either become invisible or not accepted as part of the anglersnet photography forum clique, ill give Mr Wiggly his dues, he welcomed everyone god bless him.

I have an Epson R300 which is clining on for grim death, i have reset the ink counter twice and it now sprays waste ink out of the back in to an empty shampoo bottle. Last set of inks i bought for it cost £11.99 for 5 full sets (30 cartridges) so you can see why i am keen to keep it running LOL. SVP http://svp.co.uk/category/ink_and_toner_cartridges and choice stationary http://www.choicestationery.com/ have always been good for ink.

Any compact camera with a zoom lens is capable of using the reversed 50mm trick. This is a green lacewing, its head real size is about 2mm long, this was using a Canon G6 with a 50mm lens i bought at a car bootsale for £1.50 held against the zoomed lens on the G6 but backwards, i.e. front element to front element.

This is the contents of my "photos" hard drive How many do i wish were in raw that were shot in JPEG? None cos for everyday shooting raw is just making work for yourself. Like i said earlier if it is absolutely critical to get it right then raw all the way baby but any other time sod it, it ain't worth the effort.

I shoot raw (it isn't an acronym for anything, its just raw data) when it is critical to get it right such as weddings and portraits. The flexibility it offers with the colour balance and exposure can be a right life saviour. For air shows, sport and everyday shots ill shoot JPEG simply because of the speed and storage advantages JPEG offers as well as the huge amount of time it saves not having to convert everything. JPEG may be a lossy format but not even an Eagle could resolve the missing data on a first generation low compression image.

You don't have to be shooting at the nest, that was my point . TBF kingfishers need to feed each and everyday so there is no need to specifically go for them in the breeding season.

Entry #2 Canon 40D Canon EF 100-400mm L ISO1600 1/80ths f5.6 Taken 18/12/08

Entry #1 Canon 40D Canon EF 100-400mm L ISO400 1/320ths f5.6 Taken 17/12/08

You should also remember that disturbing a breeding pair near or around the nest in the breeding season carries a £5000 fine and/or 6 months in the clink.

don't buy a used DSLR, you don't know how long the shutter has left in it, it could be 5 years it could be the first shot you take and they are not cheap to get replaced. A warranty is everything with a DSLR, if you are buying one you want to get at least a year out of it given the cost. I wouldn't go for an Olympus, they are a four thirds camera, what is the point? you might as well use a high end compact and the 2x crop factor is a joke. Have you looked at the Canon 1000D? http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EOS-1000D-Bo...y/dp/B0014IK7W8 i have a 20D and a 40D and i am willing to bet the 1000D looks no different at all IQ wise.

Very sad news indeed My deepest sympathy's to Danny's family. John.

I cant tell the difference of images taken on my old 350D, still in use but a bit croaky 20D and 40D using the same lens but if i look at images taken on a 350 quid Tamron lens (which lets be honest still ain't cheap is it) and then at images taken using my L lenses the difference is shockingly different. The L lenses are a million miles ahead.

When i picked the finalists the other month i based my choices on how much i liked it and then how good it was technically. For me that months winner was one that didn't come anywhere so it just shows you how personal it is. I was surprised not to see one of my Halloween shots in the final this month given i posted them on Halloween but easy come easy go