Recent content by sk66

I have an older SunwayFoto GH-Pro for field use (D4 copy). It was reasonably priced (then), light, compact, strong, and the gearing can be disconnected for quick positioning acting more like a ballhead. It's great for landscape/architecture. But it is only geared in two axis, so I keep my 405...

I wouldn't say "should have" as the result you got is pretty good. But it would have made things easier and perhaps gotten a better result. For example, you can feather a softbox to minimize/eliminate light pollution of the perspex surface, along with more falloff due to placing it closer...

Some nice results there. The issue with the greying perspex is mostly just angles... if the light were positioned terribly wrong the perspex would have been white (a reflection of the umbrella). And part of the issue is that you are not really using falloff because your light source is a bounce...

The main thing I noted on skimming the study is that it was discussing accelerating from 40 km/h and not a static stop. It seems to be just saying that gearing down in order to accelerate in a better gear ratio with more torque and less drag is more beneficial. Which makes sense if you've ever...

That's going to be next...

I'd be curious to see what difference the diffusion panel made. It would certainly counter the 10˚ honeycomb and add more wrap, but it is so close to the source and the subject that I'm not sure how effective/significant it actually is. The mirror is somewhat problematic IMO in that it has...

It's light density, not necessarily the amount of light. A 16mm lens will have a smaller aperture so it transmits less light from any given source (i.e. a street light bulb). But that bulb is also much smaller at the image plane. And therefore that less light is concentrated into a smaller...

It's T-stop. And no, even a single element f/5.6 lens won't transmit more light than a 12 element f/2.8 lens. An uncoated lens element may lose 2% so after 12 elements you would be down by ~ 28%; about 1/2 of a stop. Whereas f/5.6 is down by 75% (2 stops).

I will say that the 180-600 can tend to have nervous/nisen bokeh, so busy/messy backgrounds can look pretty bad sometimes. I've not owned the 200-500 so I can't provide a comparison, but I know it also suffers from nervous/nisen type bokeh.

Might be as good as you can get... and there is always some variability. You might want to try the DotTune method. View: https://youtu.be/7zE50jCUPhM?si=Ho_dw6BXI_y0o-FN

A 50mm at f/16 on a DX body *infinity is at 25ft (~8m); at f/1.8 it is 230ft (~70m). I'm surprised the camera actually considers that to be in focus and yet it doesn't have an issue with other lenses. (*the hyperfocal distance)

I believe the D7000 has AF fine tune available that will allow you to adjust the focus offset.

Those circular lugs and the holes they go into is what creates the anti-twist feature; they prevent the leg and bushing from rotating... there will be a ridge in the larger tube that fits into the gap in the bushing.

Any environment that is comfortable for you is fine for the gear. You don't really need anything more than conditioned living space.

If the legs are anti-twist they need to be aligned; there's a ridge and mating groove that prevents the tubes from twisting. And most are anti-twist these days.