<?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: Head Angle Ramifications and a Huge Revelatory Eye Brightness Question &#8230;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/</link>
	<description>The blog of bird photographer Arthur Morris</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:51:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/comment-page-1/#comment-1756883</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=55337#comment-1756883</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/comment-page-1/#comment-1756866&quot;&gt;kevin Hice&lt;/a&gt;.

The light was from the front not the rear ... That said I am not sure that you might not be right.  What do you mean by the light was shining through it?  Why might that be true in 5013 but not in 5001???

 I described in the text how I boosted the color. 

with love, artie]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/comment-page-1/#comment-1756866">kevin Hice</a>.</p>
<p>The light was from the front not the rear &#8230; That said I am not sure that you might not be right.  What do you mean by the light was shining through it?  Why might that be true in 5013 but not in 5001???</p>
<p> I described in the text how I boosted the color. </p>
<p>with love, artie</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/comment-page-1/#comment-1756874</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:26:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=55337#comment-1756874</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/comment-page-1/#comment-1756872&quot;&gt;Rob Monsipapa&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi Rob,

With all due respect, you reasoning does not make sense. Simple supply and demand would indicate that Nikon prices would be high if demand were high. But demand is very low and Nikon folks simply do not want to price the lenses to sell.  For example, I have had a new-in-the-box Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR Lens listed for $7,999 since November 2015. With zero interest.  Strangely enough B&amp;H offered $4,000 for that lens in 8+ condition and subsequently offered the same $4,000 for the brand new copy. So I must ask, where is the demand? There is simply not a lot of demand for lenses that weigh 12+ pounds ...

with love, artie]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2018/04/23/head-angle-ramifications-and-a-huge-revelatory-eye-brightness-question/comment-page-1/#comment-1756872">Rob Monsipapa</a>.</p>
<p>Hi Rob,</p>
<p>With all due respect, you reasoning does not make sense. Simple supply and demand would indicate that Nikon prices would be high if demand were high. But demand is very low and Nikon folks simply do not want to price the lenses to sell.  For example, I have had a new-in-the-box Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR Lens listed for $7,999 since November 2015. With zero interest.  Strangely enough B&#038;H offered $4,000 for that lens in 8+ condition and subsequently offered the same $4,000 for the brand new copy. So I must ask, where is the demand? There is simply not a lot of demand for lenses that weigh 12+ pounds &#8230;</p>
<p>with love, artie</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
