I suspect he doesn't actually care about the end result of the oil much. Putting his foot on the necks of people, trying to show the planet what he can get away with is likely way more important to him.

(And I'd agree that makes a far more convincing point than a few 'barrels' of oil ever could).

He might have a concept of a vision in two weeks.

Mooi kiekje.

Ik mis het best wel om niet meer even door het park en landgoed te kunnen lopen.

You're a smart cookie, another great post.

Also, you can very well have just batteries without solar panels, so only ever having them charge from the grid.

But whether any of this would help depends on your location, roof orientation, your electricity tariffs, and your consumption needs.

You'd need an installer to help with that.

4/4

To make good use of panels without battery storage you'd have to match your power consumption to the power that is generated.

Instead and ideally you'd store any generated power in batteries first and foremost. Plus using cheap nightly rates to top up the batteries from the grid when needed.

3/4

How much power depends a lot on latitude. Here at 56.3N with about 5.5kW max of panels: Aug 23.1kWh/day, Nov 2.6kWh/day, Dec 0.99kWh/day. Still adds up to ~5.2MW per year.

Right now the sun barely broaches the tree lined horizon while this roof is not ideally oriented for solar either.

2/4

As someone else already said, you don't charge panels.

You can charge batteries if you have those; directly use the power; or sell back what is not used to the grid (at peanuts rates).

But yes, solar panels do still generate power even when the sun isn't directly shining on them.

1/4

I was on the Dutch Photo Zone forums many years ago, and we met up a few times for a photowalk or a day in a photographers' studio or such, which has always been a good experience.

When discussing gear though, yeah us amateur photogs are absolutely a bunch of "intense nerds" anytime and anywhere. 😆

You might've missed that newer digital cameras like the mirrorless ones usually have inbuilt image stabilisation? That, plus in-lens image stabilisation on some gets you quite a bit of handheld shooting for free. (Not really tested it myself though).

Yeah, I don't go out enough with the camera here; struggling to find motivation myself nor things to shoot and there's nothing like a club to join nearby that I can find to help find such motivation.

Oh, and p.s.: mobile devices aren't old school tech ;)

Well, I think 28 is too narrow on crop sensors. About okay on full frame. I've not used Tamron, but I've had a Sigma 28-200, which if I recall correctly also suffered from lots of focus hunting, and I can stand that less than having to focus manually. (Manual only with a focus prism or live view).

Yeah maybe. More likely a Canon 100-500 or 200-800 (just can't decide) from MPB, as I'm extremely spoiled for having fast AF. 😁 Would want it for both e.g. birds and deep sky astrophotography.

Thanks :)

This was the 1st EF 75-300 lens, cheap, optically sharp but just far too slow (both aperture & the AF).

I have a 7D and R6m2. Lenses: 24-105 4L IS USM II, 70-200 2.8L IS USM; primes (nifty fifties, 85 1.8, 100 2.8L Macro, Samyang 14mm 2.8).

Missing a (reasonably fast) long zoom lens.

Not exactly what he said: an initial invasion would with little doubt be successful by the US. But they and their equipment is unlikely to last due to the climate involved. Unlike the Nordic countries' armies, who are very well acclimatised to this and who help train other armies in such warfare.

It's probably bots doing those posts, you should keep that in mind.

In the Netherlands our new house (built mid/late 70's) like all houses in our street had a large double glazed sliding door to the garden. So maybe somewhat common?

Managed to find a picture. I managed to run into the closed door once, though fortunately I bounced, didn't go through. Hurt though!