We were hit by lightning over Rotterdam, short before landing on a flight from MAD to AMS in february 1999. Big storm with snow,rain and hail. Lightning hit between engine and wingtip f the A320, but everything went normal. BW Roger

This reminds of a photo I saw in the Museum of Army Flying some years ago. In a vitrine was the tail section, with the swastika on it, of I believe a downed JU-88. Hanging just above this relic was a (period) big picture of the same tail, shown as a trophy by RAF personal/pilots who downed the JU-88. The real tail, and the one on the photo were 100% the same one. However, what surprised me very much that the tail in the WW2 photo was almost undamaged, while the same tailsection in the vitrine was covered in bullet holes! So, who shot that tail to pieces after it was already salvaged from the wreck? BW Roger

Shot this MD-11 from the small gate seen in the 747 shot, the day the AN-22 was there (2 weeks ago). Could have used a 28-70, but as my 500 mm was on my camera I had to use that one. BW Roger

No, can take some more time as I understand. It is however more or less known what went wrong, it is just not yet official. BW Roger

Should have brought in one of the Bouchons, especially the dual seater, in stead of just another Spit. Sorry, but you all know how I think about the Spitfre 😀 BW Roger

“P” will do fine in 99% of the cases. Slide is only more unforgiving under special light conditions. EG like when an aircraft is half in the shadow, half in full sunshine , or when you are shooting with the sun in front instead of behind you. In this situations, negative film will give you not a good photograph either, but on “paper” it looks slighter “better” than on the “screen”. BW Roger

According to the Pentax press release I checked on DPreview the Pentax dslr is to be launched in the last week of August. It has 6.1 effective megapixels (can get you A3 size posters, with interpolation even much bigger))and can be fitted with the current available Pentax lenses. End of August there is a very big photo expo in Berlin. Guess it will be launched there. To be commercial atractive, its p[rice must be lower than the Nikon D100 or Canon D10, so that sounds like good news to you. BW Roger

PS I never answered the original question. At first I used Kodachrome slides, then for 10 years Fuji (untill they launnched Sensia) and since then Kodak Elitechrome and Elitechrome HC . With good weather, they are all great. However in bad weather, the Elitechrome holds perfect, while the Fuji Sensia must be exposed as 100 iso or even 64 iso (at least on my camera).

I agree that digital dslr’s are more expensive now but, a camera like the Eos-10D is already droping fast in price. In Euro’s, I had to pay 2295 in April, now I can get one for 1750 already, a drop of over over 300 Pounds in just two months time, there is something more “heavier” (in pixels) expected in early September, and for sure the 10D will be offered for even less. It is worth the waiting if you aren’t in a hurry. However, if you get yourself a dslr, a whole new “photoworld” comes towards you. Photography in musea, with their terrible mix of Tungsten light is becoming “peanuts”, you can shoot what you want at airshows, trow the bad ones away at home, and you end up with a bunch of only perfect pics. In my slide days I was happy to get 5 good ones out of a roll of 36. For me the biggest advantage, although most “normal” dslr users hate this, is the 1.66 enlarging factor the dslr (still) offers. My 300 mm becomes a 500 mm, and my 100-400 becomes an almost 170-700 mm. I can get shots now that never were possible. With a D10, and its 6+ megapixels are more than enough for most, you can photograph for years, which in the end makes it a cheap camera. It is only that a dslr is expensive the moment you buy it, after that, you hardly have to pay for your shots, while an analog is cheaper, but you must buy films for it as long as you use it, and must trow away the “not so good slides or photo’s”. If you shoot digital, and only print the realy good ones (and don’t do this on your home printer as this is terrible expensive) at a photolab, you get cheap, high quality prints. Untill january 1 was a very big “digital scepptic” and I invested last year in both an Eos-3 and Eos -1V , then I bought an outdated (in the digital world) second hand digital KDC-520 (digi Eos-1N) , and I haven’t touched my 3 and 1v anymore ( my Eos 3 and motordrive is now for sale) . Digital is so muchmore joy to work with. Only thing I hate is dust on the sensor, as I have a spot on it I can’t remove. BW Roger