[microlight]

S'funny, don't have any wandering across mine ...

Although I did have little visitors wandering across my MX focussing screen back in the day! 😂

[Clarkey]

Yup, that is a fair statement of the problems

+100. I have family members living on either side of the Judgeford; they have used motorbikes for years to avoid some of the travel (and parking) crunch. Sucks using a bike in Wellington weather, though.

I think there's one very significant reason why Clifford Bay didn't go ahead. Right in the middle of Lake Grassmere was the epicentre of a 6.6 magnitude earthquake that followed a 6.5 in the same area a month before. Buildings were damaged in Wellington, so I suspect any port at Clifford Bay would likely have been uninsurable. No mention of the quakes were made when it was announced that Clifford Bay plans had been shelved, but I'm not sure whether it was mere coincidence that the announcement was made not long after the quakes.

A Carvair? I remember when there were a few of them in NZ.
I hear the Air Force is going to be disposing of some flying machines capable of transporting vehicles in the near future, only trouble is they're not very reliable any more.

---------- Post added 07-24-20 at 02:58 PM ----------



The Wellington rail network is actually a major attraction of Wellington for me, apart from making the cost of getting across Cook Strait more bearable as it's actually possible to get around reasonably well without needing a car.

I remember when they used to have a weekend pass that allowed you to ride the train anywhere on the electric network, and I took advantage of it to go up to Paraparaumu (quite a scenic trip), and then back into town and up the Hutt Valley to stay with relatives.

I like riding on trains, but don't particularly like buses, as in my opinion, the ride tends to be rougher.

I was fortunate enough to do the Taieri Gorge railway 4 years ago, as it's gone now.

I remember when I was a kid taking the inland Kaikōura road south, and the railway line still went through to Waiau, although there were no longer any trains.

Also loved the train. Back in the early 90's when I was in Upper Hutt doing my first qualification, all I needed was my bike and the train. Was awesome. When visiting family a few years ago it was like walking back in time, though - nothing had changed! Separately, I used to laugh at the thought of moving to/driving in Auckland, but now I am in Toronto, which is at least three times worse.

There was a lot of undeclared damage in Wellington from that quake. Causing some significant infrastructure damage that did not make the news (Certain consulting firms have only recently moved back into their buildings!). Considering the bad decisions made around the location of Te Papa, I'm glad they canned that move.

If Wellington does actually cop a Force 9, then that is very likely - it will be fully munted at that point.

+1. Although based on the past, there should then be more land to build highways on.

[zkarj]

+100. I have family members living on either side of the Judgeford; they have used motorbikes for years to avoid some of the travel (and parking) crunch. Sucks using a bike in Wellington weather, though.

There are some areas that are woefully under-served by public transport and the whole of SH58 meets that criteria, including Whitby (even though it does have some buses, they were crap when I lived there). But the "traffic problems" on the SH1 corridor are mostly created by stupid roading design coupled with years of underfunding the public transport. On the SH2 side, I'm sure it could be cured entirely with public transport investment — is there anywhere apart from Wainui' that's more than 10 minutes drive from the railway??

I used to LOVE commuting from Pukerua Bay on the train, where I lived a 5 minute walk from the station. 40 minutes each way was really good reading time — I got through the entire LOTR trilogy on that. When I bought my first home in Tawa I was a bit miffed that I only had a <15 minute ride and my reading dropped dramatically.

Also loved the train. Back in the early 90's when I was in Upper Hutt doing my first qualification, all I needed was my bike and the train. Was awesome. When visiting family a few years ago it was like walking back in time, though - nothing had changed! Separately, I used to laugh at the thought of moving to/driving in Auckland, but now I am in Toronto, which is at least three times worse.

Oh, something very fundamental has changed in that equation, and it's the fault of some very short sighted decision makers. The new trains DO NOT CARRY BIKES IN PEAK. How stupid is that?? Tons of bike lanes are being built around the city but you cannot get your bike into the city if you're a commuter. Same thinking that tore up Manners mall to run buses through, which basically killed off a vibrant space and didn't really solve any bus issues.

[Kiwizinho]

There are some areas that are woefully under-served by public transport and the whole of SH58 meets that criteria, including Whitby (even though it does have some buses, they were crap when I lived there).

Don't talk to me about Whitby. My wife has one of her best friends there, and we visit whenever we're in the North Island. Her friend's husband recently resigned from the council as he got frustrated with it repeatedly going against advice and allowing development where it shouldn't have occurred.
Whitby seems like it's designed to ensure the least efficient possible transport infrastructure, with hilly, twisting, not particularly wide streets, with limited exits. It's a pretty suburbia, but totally impractical.

Oh, something very fundamental has changed in that equation, and it's the fault of some very short sighted decision makers. The new trains DO NOT CARRY BIKES IN PEAK. How stupid is that?? Tons of bike lanes are being built around the city but you cannot get your bike into the city if you're a commuter. Same thinking that tore up Manners mall to run buses through, which basically killed off a vibrant space and didn't really solve any bus issues.

I didn't know about that, but it's something that annoys me about rail in general. I'm a casual cyclist, so not likely to do big cycle tours, but if I were to do significant local tourism leaving the car at home, my preference would be train plus bike. Trains handle long distance well, but bikes are fine for local mobility, even for people like me who might not be keen to ride more than 20-30km in a day. I'll ride considerably further occasionally, but cycling isn't a hobby, it's a means of getting from A to B - or as a photography support vehicle - Bikes are more convenient that a car if you want to be able to stop and start just about anywhere for photo opportunities.

[MarkJerling]

Oh, something very fundamental has changed in that equation, and it's the fault of some very short sighted decision makers. The new trains DO NOT CARRY BIKES IN PEAK. How stupid is that?? Tons of bike lanes are being built around the city but you cannot get your bike into the city if you're a commuter. Same thinking that tore up Manners mall to run buses through, which basically killed off a vibrant space and didn't really solve any bus issues.

I sometimes think that the "decision makers" are thicker than we give them credit for. Take the new rules for work exempt from the requirement to obtain a Building Consent: New building consent exemptions | Building Performance

Specifically: Carports up to 40 square metres; Ground floor awnings up to 30 square metres; Ground floor verandas and porches up to 30 square metres.

So, if it's a awning or a porch that you park your car under, it can be 40sq.m, but if you don't park a car under it, then it can only be 30sq.m. You'd have to be seriously braindead to come up with something like that.

[Kiwizinho]

I sometimes think that the "decision makers" are thicker than we give them credit for. Take the new rules for work exempt from the requirement to obtain a Building Consent: New building consent exemptions | Building Performance

Specifically: Carports up to 40 square metres; Ground floor awnings up to 30 square metres; Ground floor verandas and porches up to 30 square metres.

So, if it's a awning or a porch that you park your car under, it can be 40sq.m, but if you don't park a car under it, then it can only be 30sq.m. You'd have to be seriously braindead to come up with something like that.

Just for fun, I took a look at the Building Act, which refers to the Land Transport Act. Apparently a carport, doesn't have to actually store a car, just something that fits the definition of a motor vehicle.

Which apparently is:
(a) means a vehicle drawn or propelled by mechanical power; and
(b) includes a trailer;
although then there's a specific section of the act that allows something that would otherwise be a motor vehicle not to be one if it's declared not to be one in the NZ Gazette. (Apparently for that reason e-bikes are thus NOT motor vehicles, but an e-scooter or petrol powered scooter (but not mobility scooters) is!)

So - although I'm no expert on the law, from what I can work out, all you've got to do is park your scooter or e-scooter under your verandah or porch to be allowed to add an extra 10 square metres to it, without requiring a building consent.
Just looking at the building consent costs on the local council website, and 50cc scooters on Trademe, it almost looks cheaper to buy a cheap scooter than get a building consent if you want a large verandah!

[MarkJerling]

So - although I'm no expert on the law, from what I can work out, all you've got to do is park your scooter or e-scooter under your verandah or porch to be allowed to add an extra 10 square metres to it, without requiring a building consent.
Just looking at the building consent costs on the local council website, and 50cc scooters on Trademe, it almost looks cheaper to buy a cheap scooter than get a building consent if you want a large verandah!

I like your thinking!

[zkarj]

You wanna be careful confusing porches and car ports.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[zkarj]

I've started work again on an app idea for my iPhone. One thing I will need is a slider to represent focal length. Rather than make it linear, I figured it would be more useful to skip through higher focal lengths in larger jumps. It seems reasonably obvious to me if I stop at 600mm, then the ability to set 599mm doesn't have any great purpose. But then I started thinking about where I would make the transitions on jump sizes.

Here's my current thinking:
6-30 by 1s
30-200 by 5s
200-350 by 10s
350-600 by 50s

Notwithstanding zooms that can sit at any value in their range, does anyone have (or know of) a lens that could not be matched exactly by the above scheme? Or for that matter, a zoom whose terminal numbers cannot be matched.

[Class A]

Notwithstanding zooms that can sit at any value in their range, does anyone have (or know of) a lens that could not be matched exactly by the above scheme?

Unfortunately, I don't know, except that you wouldn't hit the Pentax 560/5.6. Also, have you checked the forum's lens database?

Coincidentally, I was going to share the fact that Photo & Video have a Pentax 1000mm f11 mirror lens. Perhaps someone is interested? It definitely represents a case where the focal length exceeds 600mm.

[zkarj]

Unfortunately, I don't know, except that you wouldn't hit the Pentax 560/5.6. Also, have you checked the forum's lens database?

Coincidentally, I was going to share the fact that Photo & Video have a Pentax 1000mm f11 mirror lens. Perhaps someone is interested? It definitely represents a case where the focal length exceeds 600mm.

Good call, I didn't realise that existed. The only D lens I miss is the 560 you mentioned. In the F lenses there are a few more with the 31, 43, and 77. In the A series I miss the 1200(!!). And in the M series a couple of 1000s and a 2000(!!!!!). So I had already matched a whopping 226 out of 234 lenses list, and that counts hitting both ends of all the zooms. By bumping my 30 threshold up to 45 I can catch two of the three low end ones. And surely 550 could stand in for 560 and maybe 75 for 77, bringing me to 230/234. I wonder about the utility of my app over 600mm — I will have to run some numbers.

[Kiwizinho]

Thought it might be time to post a photo

First effort with my latest acquisition, a DA* 50-135 2.8. I actually bought the lens with the intent of using it primarily as a portrait lens, but it turns out it can work for landscape as well.

Moonrise

[Transit]

Excellent image, grats on lens

[Class A]

I wonder about the utility of my app over 600mm — I will have to run some numbers.

What is the app about?

If precise focal length numbers are important then you could allow for a few outliers between bigger steps.

[zkarj]

What is the app about?

If precise focal length numbers are important then you could allow for a few outliers between bigger steps.

At its core, it's calculating depth of field. I've done some experiments and the numbers do still move a fair amount with focal lengths beyond 600mm, depending on your focus distance, of course. Interesting to note that 600mm at f/8 has a hyperfocal distance of 2.3km!

The good news is I have managed to extract the slider behaviour out to a generic function that takes a list of values thus: [(5,0),(45,1),(200,5),(350,10),(600,50)]

That means steps of 0 up to 5 (i.e. unobtainable, minimum is 6mm), then steps of 1 up to 45, steps of 5 up to 200, etc. So it will be easy enough to tweak if it turns out I don't get them right.