- Messages
- 164
For as you say, a first effort, I think it's a great shot, a millisecond of Time, captured. well done.My first experiment with photographing water drops.
View attachment 24408
No fancy equipment just a dropper from dropper bottle, water and off camera flash. I do know I have a long way to go, but for a first effort I'm not displeased.
My first experiment with photographing water drops.
View attachment 24408
No fancy equipment just a dropper from dropper bottle, water and off camera flash. I do know I have a long way to go, but for a first effort I'm not displeased.
View attachment 24415 Taz at 8 weeks old! Border terrier.
Ha, you are right there, full of mischief, even now.He is a cute little bugger. Looks like mischief, defined.
Who left the tap on?
Nice pic. You mentioned in a previous thread you were taking a Nikon FA? And indeed HP5? I haven't owned that camera but I seem to remember it was the the first Nikon manual-focus body to do matrix metering? There was a period - about ten years ago - that film cameras were embarrassingly cheap on EBay. Before that - professionally - I had been a proper photo-journalist and when traveling - Olympus bodies were the best thing to use. OM1, OM2 and OM3. When I got my current job I moved to Nikon. More recently I bought up my dream lineup of Nikon bodies - with matching motor drives or auto winders - F2 - HP Photomic high eye-point finder, F3 - HP - press version - virtually waterproof. Hot-shoe on the prism. Not a Nikon specific mount above the rewind crank - a major design flaw in the original camera. FM2 - the titanium shutter version. Bought from a police forensic lab but virtually unused. It had been attached to a microscope for most of its working life. I retained a pile of F4's and an F5 - before we went digital at work - but I don't reach for them often - if at all. In fairness the F4's were great cameras - I can't remember them ever letting me down. Ok - the AF was rudimentary but the problem moving to digital was flash - if you're a news photographer - which I am - you need to use fill-in flash routinely. Off the film metering was faultless in my experience - digital cameras were completely horrible until the Nikon D3. The D1 bodies - which we paid not far off £5000 for - couldn't tell colours apart. Hopeless. Stick to film mate. Keep the craft going. I've been paid to take pictures for more than 25 years - the trade - in my experience - has become de-skilled. I work with cameras that think they know more about photography than I do. This might well be the case but I'd hate to accept it. I most often reach for rangefinder cameras - either a Leica - I have an M6 classic, an M4 P and I have a selection of Voigtlander bodies. Matching lenses - which are unbelievably sharp - do you understand what bokeh is? - and have a quality of their own. in the case of Leica £500 for a second-hand 50mm. I take more personal pictures with these - possibly excepting the FM2. Sorry for the photo rant. I thought you might understand. IWent on a road trip to Northern Cyprus (Turkish area). Obviously couldn't help but to drop at a traditional barber shop.
![]()
Nice pic. You mentioned in a previous thread you were taking a Nikon FA? And indeed HP5? I haven't owned that camera but I seem to remember it was the the first Nikon manual-focus body to do matrix metering? There was a period - about ten years ago - that film cameras were embarrassingly cheap on EBay. Before that - professionally - I had been a proper photo-journalist and when traveling - Olympus bodies were the best thing to use. OM1, OM2 and OM3. When I got my current job I moved to Nikon. More recently I bought up my dream lineup of Nikon bodies - with matching motor drives or auto winders - F2 - HP Photomic high eye-point finder, F3 - HP - press version - virtually waterproof. Hot-shoe on the prism. Not a Nikon specific mount above the rewind crank - a major design flaw in the original camera. FM2 - the titanium shutter version. Bought from a police forensic lab but virtually unused. It had been attached to a microscope for most of its working life. I retained a pile of F4's and an F5 - before we went digital at work - but I don't reach for them often - if at all. In fairness the F4's were great cameras - I can't remember them ever letting me down. Ok - the AF was rudimentary but the problem moving to digital was flash - if you're a news photographer - which I am - you need to use fill-in flash routinely. Off the film metering was faultless in my experience - digital cameras were completely horrible until the Nikon D3. The D1 bodies - which we paid not far off £5000 for - couldn't tell colours apart. Hopeless. Stick to film mate. Keep the craft going. I've been paid to take pictures for more than 25 years - the trade - in my experience - has become de-skilled. I work with cameras that think they know more about photography than I do. This might well be the case but I'd hate to accept it. I most often reach for rangefinder cameras - either a Leica - I have an M6 classic, an M4 P and I have a selection of Voigtlander bodies. Matching lenses - which are unbelievably sharp - do you understand what bokeh is? - and have a quality of their own. in the case of Leica £500 for a second-hand 50mm. I take more personal pictures with these - possibly excepting the FM2. Sorry for the photo rant. I thought you might understand. I
Nice pic. You mentioned in a previous thread you were taking a Nikon FA? And indeed HP5? I haven't owned that camera but I seem to remember it was the the first Nikon manual-focus body to do matrix metering? There was a period - about ten years ago - that film cameras were embarrassingly cheap on EBay. Before that - professionally - I had been a proper photo-journalist and when traveling - Olympus bodies were the best thing to use. OM1, OM2 and OM3. When I got my current job I moved to Nikon. More recently I bought up my dream lineup of Nikon bodies - with matching motor drives or auto winders - F2 - HP Photomic high eye-point finder, F3 - HP - press version - virtually waterproof. Hot-shoe on the prism. Not a Nikon specific mount above the rewind crank - a major design flaw in the original camera. FM2 - the titanium shutter version. Bought from a police forensic lab but virtually unused. It had been attached to a microscope for most of its working life. I retained a pile of F4's and an F5 - before we went digital at work - but I don't reach for them often - if at all. In fairness the F4's were great cameras - I can't remember them ever letting me down. Ok - the AF was rudimentary but the problem moving to digital was flash - if you're a news photographer - which I am - you need to use fill-in flash routinely. Off the film metering was faultless in my experience - digital cameras were completely horrible until the Nikon D3. The D1 bodies - which we paid not far off £5000 for - couldn't tell colours apart. Hopeless. Stick to film mate. Keep the craft going. I've been paid to take pictures for more than 25 years - the trade - in my experience - has become de-skilled. I work with cameras that think they know more about photography than I do. This might well be the case but I'd hate to accept it. I most often reach for rangefinder cameras - either a Leica - I have an M6 classic, an M4 P and I have a selection of Voigtlander bodies. Matching lenses - which are unbelievably sharp - do you understand what bokeh is? - and have a quality of their own. in the case of Leica £500 for a second-hand 50mm. I take more personal pictures with these - possibly excepting the FM2. Sorry for the photo rant. I thought you might understand. I