Recent content by Archibald

LED lights may give light that looks strongly orange to the camera. So beware if subjects are close to LED sources. If you are overpowering the LEDs with the flash, then no problem. Use EFCS or mechanical. The R6 might not work with flash in electronic mode.

Those things are very hard to use. They need to be calibrated for the anticipated shooting distance on every outing. You don't get confirmation that focus has been achieved, or where the focus is. Some get great results with them though, so maybe worth a try.

My own experience is that my RF 100-500 L (cropped) outresolved the 800/11. The zoom also focuses much closer. There isn't a great weight difference between those lenses. Advantage: the zoom (except for price). I sold my 800/11.

Of course it is the lens that causes diffraction, not the sensor. There would certainly be diminishing returns with a high resolution sensor, but never a poorer resolution. In practice, we rarely see the effects of diffraction unless we are cropping hard. The effects are present, but not very...

I don't understand why you wouldn't shoot at ISO 100-200 if you are in the studio where you can control the lighting.

I'm more with @mikeyw. I replaced a 6 year old computer and noticed no improvement in performance. There probably was an improvement, it just wasn't significant enough to notice.

I would not use deionized water for a long time on negatives. Pure water is likely to be absorbed more by the gelatin, which will make it weaker and susceptible to damage. Use plain clean tap water. A quick final rinse with deionized water should be fine.

I was in Costa Rica in March. I would plan on several locations spending a few days at each one. That's because the ecosystems and species vary by region. I had howler monkeys in the Osa peninsula, scarlet macaws in the mid-Pacific, and a quetzal in Monteverde. Some ecolodges are in or near wild...

LR is basically a raw converter. Usually you start with a raw file and then edit it. Those raw files are made in the camera and are never changed by LR, or by anyone else AFAIK. LR can also edit JPGs and other photo formats, and as far as I know never alters those either - except it might add...

First-generation JPGs always look great, 2nd too usually. But JPGs are lossy, so you lose a bit each time the file is re-saved. If you have no storage space or don't/can't edit raws, do JPGs. Else raw is better.

Always shoot raw, because JPG creates artifacts. I would just shoot full res images. A lower res might also be fine depending on the original, but there is no simple answer to this IMO. I shoot so I can make out the grain. A higher res will give a truer copy but there are diminishing returns...

DOF does not get shallower with distance. Adding a 1.4x does not (necessarily) increase the length. Use the online DOF calculators.

I have the R5 and R7, very different cameras, and love them both. The R7 is for distant birds and very close bugs. The R7 has some annoying drawbacks like AF failures when the subject is not ideal and of course the rolling shutter issue when shooting electronic shutter (so I never use that...

As others have said, just use memory cards. Copy from one card to the other using the camera. It goes fast. Make extra copies and give one to a travelling partner for extra security. Or send them home by mail. You can make as many copies as you want. Cards are cheap.

I have the R7 and find it to be versatile and light-weight. With the RF 18-150mm kit lens it is a great walkaround combo. Just the thing for family stuff, but expandible with the right lenses to more serious work.