hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Re: Photographic gear

  • Subject: Re: [iris-photos] Re: Photographic gear
  • From: "Harold" harold@directcon.net
  • Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:53:16 -0700

Us SLRers should feel free to comment also. I have an automatic Minolta with
a 35 to 70 lens that has a separate macro feature. I had to replace the
camera last year and find the newer more automated camera is not quite as
flexible as I want or was used to. What I like to do for depth of field was
set the camera on aperature priority, adjust the aperature until I had a
speed of 1/30th or 1/60th. None of my quivering or flower blowing in the
wind caused focus problems at that speed and that gave me the best depth of
field available with the existing lighting. For color accuracy and and other
quality reasons, tried to take photographs in low light (no shadows)
conditions. This is frequently impossible so sought person to hold diffuser
over subject whenever feasible.

I have firm plans to purchase a macro lens next year. There is a nice macro
lens available for $200. I got one for my youngest daughter who is taking
photography classes in college. She has loved hers.

Harold Peters
Beautiful View Iris Garden
2048 Hickok Road
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
harold@directcon.net  www.beautiful-view-iris.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Brown" <ddbro@llano.net>
To: <iris-photos@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:27 PM
Subject: RE: [iris-photos] Re: Photographic gear


> Letitia,
> What is the optical and digital zoom on your camera?  My Sony Mavica FD91
> has a 14x optical and now that we are looking for a second digital I find
> most of them aren't even close.  I don't know that I want to settle for a
2
> or 3 x zoom.
> How about the rest of you using digitals, what have you got?
>
>
> Dana Brown
> Malevil Iris Gardens
> Pres. South Plains Iris Society
> Region 17, Judges Training Chair
> AIS, MIS, ASI, RIS, TBIS
> Lubbock, TX  79403
> Zone 7 USDA, Zone 10 Sunset
> mailto:dana@malevil-iris.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lmmunro [mailto:lmmunro@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 9:25 PM
> To: iris-photos@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [iris-photos] Re: Photographic gear
>
> Are those filters just for SLR cameras or can they be used for
> digital cameras?
> I have found that I am not completely satisfied with most closeups I
> take with my Kodak DC4800. Seems sometimes I just cannot get close
> enough. If you get too close, the picture is blurry. You have to keep
> a few feet distance.
> I have experimented with the camera, and find that if I put the 'F
> number' whatever that is, on F8 I get the best up close shots. I'm
> not sure why, something about 'depth of field', and that F8 is
> supposed to be the best for getting sharpness in foreground and
> background.
> Laetitia
>
> --- In iris-photos@y..., "Pearl Doyle" <pdoyle@o...> wrote:
> > Hi Bob, I think I can help you a little with your camera/picture
> taking. It's probably not your camera's fault and probably not even
> camera movement. If you are trying to take pictures of flowers up
> close, you will need to study the effect of depth of field. Without
> getting too technical, let me say that most cameras are not equipped
> with lenses for taking close-ups, but it's simple to remedy. I bought
> an inexpensive set of "filters" that screw on the front of my camera
> lens. They look like a lens, but you need to ask for magnifying
> filters. It's been a while since I've used a regular camera but I
> think I liked the +2 filter for closeups. Mine came in a set of three
> and the cost was about $22. I got some really great pictures. I use a
> digital camera now, but I still liked the pictures I got from the old
> totally manual SLR camera. Pearl
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: Robert Dickow
> >   To: iris-photos@y...
> >   Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 5:47 PM
> >   Subject: [iris-photos] Photographic gear
> >
> >
> >   Hi folks... I have a suggestion. What say we all give a short
> comment about
> >   equipment used, shutter speed, flash, film type, lens f -stop and
> other
> >   pertinent data when we post photos that we have taken ourselves?
> >
> >   I think some of the pics are great, and I'm trying to figure out
> why I get
> >   ever-so-slightly fuzzy pics with my fancy Minolta Maxxim SLR
> analog film
> >   camera. (I suspect camera or subject movement).
> >
> >   Bob Dickow
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Sell a Home with Ease!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/SrPZMC/kTmEAA/MVfIAA/2gGylB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 






 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index