Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10 »
 on: Today at 05:00:25 PM 
Started by Harlem22 - Last post by RSL
Good grab, Harlem. That lady must be Mrs. Mercedes.

 on: Today at 04:57:10 PM 
Started by Harlem22 - Last post by Damon Lynch
Sure they change, but we are discussing here why, how, and by whom. Not a conspiracy (as it implies something clandestine), but a result of a deliberate, concerted, public effort by numerous groups that can be loosely combined into "left-wing" (PC nuts, feminists, progressives, liberals, loony left, etc.)

This is ridiculous. Where did you get this idea from - Glenn Beck?

Thanks to advances in science, we now have a much better idea about the biological basis of sex in mammals, including human beings, than we did a century ago. To take one example at random: we now know that some female athletes have physical attributes we normally associate with being male that give them a performance advantage on the track. That's to do with sex. That's biological. We also have a better idea of cultural diversity and what it entails than a century ago too. When a male does penile subincision, he's doing because his culture tells him it's a good thing to do. His sex is male but the way he understands how to be a proper man (his gender role) is different from you and me.

In short, in working through things like this, last century researchers found it helpful to distinguish sex from gender. Nowadays we take it for granted that sex and gender are as different as biology and culture, simply because it makes so much sense.

Finally, most of the people who did this primary research were neither women nor feminists, because as we all know, women in almost all countries had their access to practicing science curtailed until not that many generations ago.

 on: Today at 04:50:40 PM 
Started by dwswager - Last post by terence_patrick
How about two step ladders? Or an apple box?

 on: Today at 04:46:38 PM 
Started by padam - Last post by padam

 on: Today at 04:43:23 PM 
Started by padam - Last post by padam
I sold the A7 a few weeks ago, so now the lens is up for sale as well. I used it on both FF and APS-C and it is very sharp with smooth oof rendering.
It is in mint condition with no noticeable signs of wear, the focus ring is very smooth to turn. Comes with the original packaging.

Asking 500 Euros plus shipping cost. PayPal accepted.

PM me if interested (happy to send pictures if needed) and thanks for looking.

 on: Today at 04:42:23 PM 
Started by dwswager - Last post by NancyP
In the real world, one is going to test at just a few FLs along the zoom range. Nice to know that it is adequate.

 on: Today at 04:41:14 PM 
Started by Paul2660 - Last post by kdphotography
Hi Paul,

I estimate no more than 2-3 seconds for double-tap to 100% zoom on my IQ180.  Maybe a second or two to move the image around and redraw.  It's pretty quick.

I'm using the newer Sandisk Extreme Pro 32GB card, 160MB/s, UDMA7.  I also format my CF card prior to each use.


 on: Today at 04:39:17 PM 
Started by Ken Tanaka - Last post by jeffreybehr
Once you have set the world right on that one, it's onto the bonus round: where do the dashes go in "OMD EM5"?

...ahem...they're hyphens, not dashes.

...since we're all trying to be correct.

 on: Today at 04:39:09 PM 
Started by Ken R - Last post by gazwas
Fits in perfectly amongst its fellow co-stars and locations IMO and I couldn't think of a more appropriate camera.

 on: Today at 04:14:41 PM 
Started by jeroth - Last post by terence_patrick
Firstly, the color rendition is going to be different between LR and C1. Once you are used to C1, you will feel LR rendering to be pale.

I agree with this statement.

Back to OP's problem, I think the OP should try to make adjustments that best fits what their vision without looking at the "out of the box" defaults. The image they chose is about 2/3rd stop under and was probably shot in early/late light, with the camera's AutoWB making things warmer.

Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10 »