Thanks a lot, Phil - I appreciate your candor.  I actually have been looking at the Tamron you suggested, too.

Kind regards,


Susan

I'm considering a purchase of the 16-50mm Pentax SDA lens for wide-angle work and wondered if any of you out there have used it and what you think.  I'm currently using the came-with-the-camera 18-55mm DA and while it's not a bad lens, sometimes it ain't all that great, either.

Any input would be great - thanks!   

Regards,


hrhportia

No sales yet, but something got cocked up during my second upload.  For some reason several images show up 2 or 3 times.  I've got loads more to upload, but until I figure out how the multiple images bit happened, and how I can fix it, I'm holding off.

I guess I'm one of the idiots who figure if you don't upload, you won't sell.  Sorta like lottery tickets - if you don't buy one, you will never win.  heh!

P

I got a keyword rejection last week for this:  I placed a diamond necklace over the heel of a black high-heeled dress shoe.  The wingnuts at iS rejected it, saying that the words "diamond" (as in precious stone) and "necklace" (as in jewelry accessory) were not appropriate to the image.

Okay, how do I describe a diamond necklace without using the words "diamond" and "necklace"?  At first, I couldn't believe the rejection; on second thought, I seriously considered nuking IS's corporate headquarters.  ARRRGGHHH!!!!  Does a potential "inspector" have to have a double-digit IQ to qualify for the job?  If that's the case, we're all in serious trouble here.   

Portia

Quote from: hali on October 24, 2008, 22:11
I can remember what an oldtimer stock contributor once told me 5 months ago when I asked her the same question. She told me, it's not what you the photographer thinks is amazing so it sells. It's what is generic that the buyer can use and use again. recycle stuff. your peers may not think it's so great a photograph.
it's not an Ansel Adams or W E Smith, but it's something a buyer can use over and over again. I still find it hard to put on two different "head" when shooting for gallery , and then shooting for stock. but to be successful in stock, that's vital.

I hated her answer, but I realised she was, and still is right.

Amen, hali.  Peanut butter sandwiches sell better than a glorious artsy-fartsy shot of a sunset on the beach.  Sad, but true, true, true.

hali,

The way I look at subs is this:  you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't.  On the one hand, subs at $.30 are pretty degrading; on the other, if it keeps the $$$ rolling in, it's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.   

Susan

Quote from: Imagine on November 09, 2008, 09:46
I have been photographing stamps for about a year now and some do sell well. I have been collecting stamps for about 45 yrs so I have a nice collection. Now as far as copyright goes, just because a stamp is canceled does not mean it's not protected by copyright laws and every country is different. United States stamps are public domain up to January 1 1978. Thats when United Postal Service ran by the government went public and became United States Postal Service. All stamps after the January date are copyrighted and owned by the USPS. On the safe side majority of stamps with 13c denomination or lower are public domain. But to be sure it is good to check a stamp catalogue. The photos linked above the ones that I have checked of US stamps are copyrighted Images.
Here is a link to use as a guide
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stamps/Public_domain

Thanks for the info.  I, too, have been collecting stamps for about 45+ years, and have quite a collection of First Day of Issue covers.  As most of my "good" collection is MNH (mint, never hinged), I don't worry about postmarks, but as my next photographic project is going to be stamps, I'm really grateful that you posted that link.

As most of my collection is space/astronomy related, I've already anticipated a keywording nightmare.  I'll be sure to take the appropriate medication (a stiff shot of bourbon or single malt) before I start that bit.  groan!!

Regards and thanks,

Susan

I've been once, in 2006.  It's also a great place to talk to industry pundits to see which direction the various markets are taking.  There are great seminars and talks, mostly about industry related stuff, but several of them are geared to the end-user.  I spent 2 days alone going through the exhibits and grabbing as much free stuff as possible.  If you live near Las Vegas, I'd recommend at least a day-trip and run through the exhibit hall(s).  uh - bring a suitcase-style carrier with wheels to lug all the stuff around.  Believe me, there's gobs of it.

As I originally stated, the only reason I upload to MP is because it's a good place for online storage.  I haven't sold anything there, but I can upload pretty much anything I want, and I use the site as online storage.

Mind you, don't blab this around - MP might get wise to that tactic........

Quote from: stokfoto on August 27, 2008, 11:09
I never liked the idea of getting video camera features on a  photographic camera because they don't usually able to produce decent videos but Nikon's D90 seems a bit different.it looks quite impressive but I wonder how it will effect the shutter cycle and what storage capacity it has
I imagine if you shoot 1,280 x 720  videos you'd end up with huge files.
may be video feature is not as handy yet.

oh well as I said I am not a big  fun of  combo products.

Neither am I, to be honest.  But that may be more of a reflection of my "old fartness" than of reality.  Time will tell - I have actually been wrong before.

I KNOW!  Shocking, isn't it?  Me, being wrong!!!  Right!

Anybody going to PMA in March, 2009?  I'd kill to go but it's in Las Vegas AGAIN, and I'm in FL.  They used to alternate between Orlando (just a hop, skip, and a jump up the road) and Las Vegas.  This makes the 3rd year in a row they're having it in Vegas - groan!!!

Thanks, all!

There are anti-static tools now available commercially that one can purchase and do a successful sensor cleaning on their own.  If you take the camera in to, say, the retailer I work for, you are charged $65 US but they clean the whole works - sensor, camera, etc.  Well, I can do all that myself, and I've cleaned several sensors at work with the appropriate tools.  An anti-static "pen" is an essential, but I also use a hurricane blower before the pen.  Works for me - at least so far, knock on wood!  (Portia knocks on her own head.)

I've used Hoya filters for...er...years.  (actually more like decades, but let's not dwell on that!)  I've always found they've done the job for me.  I'm not at all crazy about the Cokin system, because the filters are made of "optical" gel, and will warp over time, introducing all kinds of artifacts.  The system itself is nice because you can use one adapter and just slide in and out the filter you want, but the results aren't worth the convenience.

Just my opinion....

The *ist series in the Pentax was rated among the highest signal-to-noise cameras in the market.  With the K series, Pentax went with a different CCD and I've found those to be somewhat noisier, especially at high ISO, but the reviewers found the image quality to be superior to the *ist series.  The pundits claimed that with the *ist series, Pentax had gone for low noise over image quality, but I have a *ist DS, and the quality is not lacking.  What scared me, at first, was the K20D employing a CMOS sensor made by Samsung, rather than a CCD sensors they were getting from Sony.  I took one out for a "test drive" and was amazed at the color rendition, the overall quality, and the features.  God, I love working for a retail joint - I can test drive all kinds of stuff.  Needless to say, a K20D is definitely going to be my next camera.  Of course, the fact that I have about 2 dozen great SMC Takumar lenses makes this a lead pipe cinch.   

Quote from: sharply_done on October 22, 2008, 06:23
This thread is becoming 'over the top' comical.

[/quote/]

Hey, we all need a laugh now and then.  We might as well joke about the absurdity of some of these rejections - otherwise we'd all wind up in a fool farm somewhere, or throwing our cameras onto concrete slabs.  My husband actually did that the other day (it was an accident) but lucky for him all he broke was his CPL.  ROFL! 

Quote from: cascoly on October 22, 2008, 21:27
i got an email from someone in the Federal Republic of America asking my assistance in redistributing $700 Billion....

um....... I think that one came from the U.S. Congress.  SNORT!!!!!!!!!

Just as a sidelight to this thread, I'll attempt to translate "megapixels" into film quality.

Your average film, say, 400 ISO, represents 12-14 megapixels on a digital camera.  This does not factor in noise.  Average slide film - 20-24 megapixels, again with no noise factor.  One of my favorite emulsions is Fuji Reala (ISO 100) and I have yet to find a DSLR that can duplicate the quality.  otoh, I shot film for.... uh.... a lotta years........translation:  I'm an old fart.

Portia

I wish I were this imaginative - thx for posting, leaf.  It was a real eye-opener.  Every now and then I need a good kick in the a$$ to come up with innovative methods.  This may have just done the trick.

Portia

Okay, I'm in.  I get this stuff at least 4 times a week.  If I'd known we were having a contest, I wouldn't have "junked" all of them. Not to worry - I'll fish a good one out of my junk file!   

Quote from: Pixart on October 08, 2008, 21:56
What's her religion?  If it's Nikon, tell her.  If it's Canon, keep your trap shut.

ROFL!  And if it's Pentax, marry her!!!!!

No bias here!

Portia

I think I just broke two ribs from laughing at this one - thanks for posting this, V.  You made my day!!!   

Quote from: RGebbiePhoto on October 19, 2008, 01:18
I've had over-the-top rejections, too.

You know, I probably wouldn't mind as much IF the resubmits didn't count as a new upload.

Well, time to upload my 15 so I can get another 2 online

I was actually 14 for 15 on my last IS submission - I almost fell out of my chair in shock!!  Now let's see what they do with my current batch; just to keep the law of averages average, they'll probably reject the whole lot..

uh - this looks suspiciously like a telescope.  I can just see myself lugging something like this around with my day pack - 

I haven't, personally, noticed any difference in optical quality between the SD and A-series Canons, but I will say this:  in general, the A-series has more zoom - 4x as a opposed to 3x in the SD series.  They are a little bulkier because they use AA batteries, too.  There are pros and cons to this, but I'll not go into them here 0 

Quote from: le_cyclope on October 20, 2008, 22:30
You can see desc. here:  http://www.expodisc.com/product-overview.php?cat_id=1&keywords=ExpoDisc

Never heard of it before this thread, but just like Portia, I'm curious...

With Camera Raw, you can adjust the white balance as you wish...  So what's the use of this gadget?

Claude

I'm with you on this one, Claude.  To me, it's one of those many accessories that are trying to make digital photography more difficult than it is.  When we were all using film, we all used different emulsions and different filters, exposures, etc,. to get the result we wanted.  I conducted tests with a Nikon D80 and a Pentax K10D both with and without the Expodisc.  I shot several different images in various environments, and found that the onboard camera white-balance settings are just fine without "reading" a manual custom exposure. You can already do a custom manual exposure anyway if you wish.   But that's just my opinion.  Anybody else out there have another view?