<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Really Wet And Scruffy Birds on the Veranda</title>
	<atom:link href="http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541</link>
	<description>Not a photo blog. A personal blog with photos.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 16:37:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ruslan</title>
		<link>http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541#comment-7949</link>
		<dc:creator>Ruslan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541#comment-7949</guid>
		<description>Jeffrey, nice blog, nice shoots. A question though: since you have switched to 17-55 f/2.8 lens, many of your pictures are at f/2.8 and 1/160 or some such whereby: (1) depth of field seems to be a bit shallow and (2) ISO seems to be surprisingly high (&gt; 400), like 800, 640 etc., for the aperture as large. Are you shooting in shutter priority mode? If so, have you achieved what you needed with the switch to Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 from 18-200 3.5-5.6? The latter would easily give you f/4.5 @ 1/80 (and ISO around 400, perhaps) and considering its VR, would your shoots be sharper?

&lt;div class=&#039;jfriedl&#039;&gt;&lt;p&gt;I generally shoot in aperture-priority mode because depth-of-field is always on my mind. Often, I need to bump up the ISO to allow me a fast enough shutter speed. In my case, &quot;fast enough&quot; refers not to subject motion, but to my own lack of skill in holding the camera steady (because I&#039;m concentrating on depth of field instead of my shutter speed :-) )&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I&#039;d certainly love VR, and would replace my 17-55/2.8 with a VR version the day Nikon came out with one, but I appreciate the depth of field and speed of a 2.8 too much to switch back to the 18-200 for general use. I now have a good tripod and monopod, so I hope getting used to them will help with my overall image quality, but by far the best thing for my pictures will be more skill, which I have yet to acquire. As I get better, hopefully, I&#039;ll be able to lower the ISO yet increase the quality. We&#039;ll see. &#8212;Jeffrey&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeffrey, nice blog, nice shoots. A question though: since you have switched to 17-55 f/2.8 lens, many of your pictures are at f/2.8 and 1/160 or some such whereby: (1) depth of field seems to be a bit shallow and (2) ISO seems to be surprisingly high (&gt; 400), like 800, 640 etc., for the aperture as large. Are you shooting in shutter priority mode? If so, have you achieved what you needed with the switch to Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 from 18-200 3.5-5.6? The latter would easily give you f/4.5 @ 1/80 (and ISO around 400, perhaps) and considering its VR, would your shoots be sharper?</p>
<div class='jfriedl'>
<p>I generally shoot in aperture-priority mode because depth-of-field is always on my mind. Often, I need to bump up the ISO to allow me a fast enough shutter speed. In my case, &#8220;fast enough&#8221; refers not to subject motion, but to my own lack of skill in holding the camera steady (because I&#8217;m concentrating on depth of field instead of my shutter speed <img src='http://regex.info/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  )</p>
<p>I&#8217;d certainly love VR, and would replace my 17-55/2.8 with a VR version the day Nikon came out with one, but I appreciate the depth of field and speed of a 2.8 too much to switch back to the 18-200 for general use. I now have a good tripod and monopod, so I hope getting used to them will help with my overall image quality, but by far the best thing for my pictures will be more skill, which I have yet to acquire. As I get better, hopefully, I&#8217;ll be able to lower the ISO yet increase the quality. We&#8217;ll see. &mdash;Jeffrey</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcina</title>
		<link>http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541#comment-7895</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Aug 2007 01:34:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541#comment-7895</guid>
		<description>Now you are morally obligated to take a picture of that poor fellow all preened and dry and handsome to post on your blog.   He’s got his pride, you know!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now you are morally obligated to take a picture of that poor fellow all preened and dry and handsome to post on your blog.   He’s got his pride, you know!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541#comment-7822</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:13:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://regex.info/blog/2007-08-11/541#comment-7822</guid>
		<description>&#039;Every picture tells a story&#039; - these certainly do!

Shall be interested to hear, in due course, how you get on with the monopod, but these results must encourage you.

Peter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;Every picture tells a story&#8217; &#8211; these certainly do!</p>
<p>Shall be interested to hear, in due course, how you get on with the monopod, but these results must encourage you.</p>
<p>Peter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

