Westminster Abby, London, England.

not taken from any SLR camera, just my panasonic point an shoot. no editing done.

2/13/2008 8:43:52 AM

Quote :

"skack... don't take apart your lens. it would have to be a hell of a lot of dust to affect your picture quality. unless you see something fairly large in there you should be ok. and i wouldnt recommend taking a lens apart. they arent' too easy to put back together.... trust me... "

I wasn't planning on doing it myself. I was thinking more along the lines of sending it off to get cleaned. I guess I should take a photo of a white background and just see what kind of specs I can find in it.

2/13/2008 8:56:12 AM

^^ red x

[Edited on February 13, 2008 at 9:02 AM. Reason : 6]

2/13/2008 8:56:41 AM

damnit. can't do it with picasa.

nm

2/13/2008 10:47:08 AM

2/13/2008 4:54:05 PM

Quote :

"I wasn't planning on doing it myself. I was thinking more along the lines of sending it off to get cleaned. I guess I should take a photo of a white background and just see what kind of specs I can find in it."

it would really have to be big specs to see it on your pictures. if you see specs on a white background, it would probably be whats on your sensor anyway. for the most part... internal dust is just an annoyance to see when looking at the lens. big problem is fungus. you should be ok.

2/13/2008 6:30:05 PM

.

[Edited on February 13, 2008 at 7:11 PM. Reason : sigh]

2/13/2008 6:50:27 PM

Paranormal dog or "Hey, where are you going? I'm taking your picture!"

I got a tripod and a remote for my Rebel XT today and were testing them out. So far I've found out that a long exposure for stars doesn't work as they turn into streaks. Now I want to take a picture of a jet flying overhead. I also took some more photos of our neighborhood that I might post later.

[Edited on February 15, 2008 at 7:35 PM. Reason : Content]

2/15/2008 7:34:02 PM

I tried the jet thing, and it looks like connect-the-dots because of the flashing lights. Maybe yours will come out better than mine did.

2/15/2008 10:26:45 PM

I was planning on taking a jet shot during the daytime and see what it would look like, but then I thought that would just be odd. Has anyone tried digiscoping with a spotting- or telescope with an SLR mount? While some of the scopes out there don't have very good glass, others such as Leica, Minox, and Bushnell Elite do have good glass in them. The only problem I can see is that focusing may be a problem, as well as the fact that there's no aperture to adjust. It just looked like an interesting way to get good shots of wildlife that aren't available with most telephoto lenses.

2/17/2008 3:40:46 PM

2/17/2008 7:56:24 PM

2/19/2008 7:15:42 AM

anyone know anything about http://www.istockphoto.com? a friend was telling me about it...and i was thinking if i whore out some photographs, it would be nice to make some dollarbucks off that.

anyone try this? pros? cons? go exclusive or whore out to as many similar sites as possible?

2/19/2008 12:52:27 PM

photos have to be 4 megs and you get like .25 per download
you better put an ass load of pictures before you make any money

2/19/2008 12:55:41 PM

What settings are you negros using to take a picture of this eclipse?

Best results with my kit lens were with 55 mm focal length, f5.6, 3 second exposure.

2/20/2008 10:54:53 PM

Quote :

"So far I've found out that a long exposure for stars doesn't work as they turn into streaks."

...those are called startrails. Take a few and you'll find out they actually make fantastic pictures.

2/20/2008 11:17:00 PM

2/20/2008 11:24:38 PM

Whatever happened to ZiP? Haven't seen him post in awhile.

2/20/2008 11:30:25 PM

AIDS

2/21/2008 12:55:52 AM

i had some great shots lined up (or so i thought) for the eclipse...some good ones with clouds passing and such...when i finally looked at them, i noticed they're awful...the ambient light from raleigh really messed with it, i think (which i knew was a possibility, as the last full moon i drove to my parents' farm to take shots)

2/21/2008 9:12:15 AM

Quote :

"What settings are you negros using to take a picture of this eclipse"

i posted a link to a guide in the eclipse thread
did you just over look it?

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 9:28 AM. Reason : sdf]

2/21/2008 9:28:19 AM

2/21/2008 4:07:49 PM

Quote :

"i posted a link to a guide in the eclipse thread did you just over look it? "

Quote :

"Forbidden You don't have permission to access /LEphoto/LEphoto.html on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request."

2/21/2008 7:43:47 PM

well ill be damned

2/22/2008 10:31:46 AM

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080222.html

2/22/2008 2:53:53 PM

^Fraud! The photo was 'shopped!

2/22/2008 8:09:52 PM

I couldn't find the last pics I took of an eclipse, but how 'bout this:




[Edited on February 22, 2008 at 10:04 PM. Reason : 1200mm x 1.6 FTW]

2/22/2008 10:03:37 PM

2/25/2008 12:41:42 PM

Quote :

""

There are perhaps ten people on TWW who will appreciate this. Maybe five.

2/25/2008 12:43:42 PM

looks very valve-ish

nice find

2/25/2008 12:49:59 PM

yeah, just bought me self a 300mm f/2.8 IS. Can't wait till I test it out.

2/25/2008 7:19:58 PM

I saw this truck at work yesterday...I've never seen a Volkswagen truck.

2/29/2008 9:40:57 AM

3/6/2008 7:21:52 PM

My first pano attempt

3/6/2008 10:52:53 PM

Damn, I just did some ISO 12233 testing of the 300. Check this out.

That's the 300 with the 1.4x and 2.0x at f/8 with no post production. I can easily sharpen it a little bit but wow, I'm impressed.

3/7/2008 4:39:41 AM

IMMA RUN IT MA!

GET DA CAMERU!

3/7/2008 4:44:15 AM

I'm not sure how I feel about this one.

3/8/2008 10:53:59 PM

^ The exposure was so long that it almost makes the belltower look like it was made from plastic. I like a little bit of shadow here and there

3/9/2008 7:29:18 PM

^^Yeah, quite overexposed.

Set....em.....up!

3/9/2008 9:49:24 PM

knock em down

Page 53

3/9/2008 9:58:15 PM

[Edited on March 9, 2008 at 10:32 PM. Reason : .]

3/9/2008 10:24:41 PM

so what is the difference between DSLR pics and HD pics?

3/9/2008 10:30:24 PM

Well, HD as in video format has a MUCH lower resolution. Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras use a single lens that uses a mirror to let you see what you're going to take a picture of optically, an HD video recorder just has an electronic eyepiece that you can watch through, although in either case, what you see is what you get.

3/9/2008 10:52:04 PM

I love threads that load quickly, plz to embed smaller rez pics, k?

^^^those're some nice pics to have come from a point-n-shoot.

3/10/2008 8:24:40 AM

^ Which WolfCamera do you work at? I'm ready for a DSLR but I need good advice. I had made up my mind until I saw the Sony a200.

3/10/2008 8:52:39 AM

^^ sorry...i posted those from a friend's computer, with a 24" display and high resolution...they looked smaller

any way a mod can give me edit privileges so i can change the links to the medium size?

3/10/2008 9:31:03 AM

just change your source files on flikr

3/10/2008 5:11:26 PM

^ i keep getting errors through piknic...unless i'm missing another way to change it without affecting the location? i guess i could just delete them and re-upload them...worst comes to worst, the ones above are broken and then the new ones are posted as smaller images (again, sorry about that...you kids and your tiny monitors )

3/10/2008 10:04:23 PM

my first pano yay

3/11/2008 12:51:14 PM

^ What lens did you use? I'm guessing you had a polarizer on it?

3/11/2008 1:04:27 PM