josephallenkeys

You can print all your images out and let them go from a high window on a windy day. It's just as, if not more effective than throwing your images into the digital noise of any social media.

(Please use eco friendly paper.)

That's just how patents work. And not just for lenses. Any invention can be patented in this way and any rival will need to have a variation in the design, otherwise, they're infringing on that patent.

One major aspect is autofocus and the motor systems needed to shift the large f-stop pieces of glass within the same housing whilst also offering silent motors, weather sealing, electronic control/communication and overall durability.

Historically and technically, primes are very simple designs, but, earlier designs could cut corners due to the formats they were designed for. I.e. b&w, 35mm, etc. These formats were nowhere near as detailed as digital images and so new elements are needed to refine the quality.

They also have a lot of patents taken up. The Leica and Zeiss patents for Summilux and Plannar, etc are very old. So rival designs often needed to take the long route to the same result.

But it all together and you have that behemoth of a Nikkor!

Considering you asked them and didn't mention payment, they're not expecting a professional photographer.

They said yes. Roll with it.

I'm currently in a position but leaving on 15th December.

I was allowed to market myself for anything that wasn't a conflict of interest. So the agency did corporate work - headshots, interiors, Events, some lifestyle and campaigns.

I was once under the impression that I could market to small and one-person businesses, but I was slapped over the knuckles as that was apparently still a conflict of interest, even though those businesses could never afford the big brand rates of this agency.

I'm in the UK and by my contract, no additional commercial work can be undertaken while under contract. But they had graces on that. Weddings were fine as well as a bunch of other avenues such as if I sold my prints. That literally isn't their business.

So I stuck to weddings and I could market that as much as I liked. I still did the odd other shoot and even got referred by the boss for one! But those were word-of-mouth things I could keep on the down low. And I always used my own kit. That's pretty important, tbh. They'd have no copyright claim or anything but you taking the risk of damaging it off work time.

However, marketing the weddings led me to hand my notice in. So it still worked out!

Please ban me

I second this. Please ban them.

As an experienced working photographer, when I'm being paid, I work hard at manually balancing those settings every second of the shoot. But being experienced, it's also second nature. That's part of my cost/value.

On my personal time, however, I flip to auto. I'm not working on my day off.

You want a high-speed sync flash so you can use shutter speeds faster than 1/160. If you get a black bar when you set faster than 1/160, the "high speed" that your flash claims to have is not compatible with your camera. That setting is brand dependent, just like ETTL.

The photographer retaining the copyright does not prevent you from revoking your rights to not having the images publicly shared. This is a right in law to you as the commissioner of this photography for private purposes.

If she reduces this, after the fact, you can take her to court. You have the power here. Thankfully.

Unfortunately fairly normal. But if you stick to your guns and grant an exclusive licence, explaining exactly what that means, you might be able to keep things sweet.

Extremely drastically. They're basically the same thing. There is no colour without light. But when you change a light source, you change overall tone, not just certain colours. That's white balance.

Nothing is wrong until you (or the person paying you) don't like the result.

End of story.