April 18, 2014, 10:17:46 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - dgatwood

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27
Photography Technique / Re: What if we were still shooting slide film?
« on: April 09, 2014, 03:16:11 AM »
Would like to hear your thoughts on this. Are you shooting more but getting less keepers? Or is the opposite true? Would we all be better photographers if we were still shooting slide film?

Percentage-wise, I'd imagine my keeper rate is lower, but I shoot more in an average day than I could afford to shoot in a year with film, so I still have orders of magnitude more keepers quantity-wise.

Of course, a lot of my favorite shots these days tend to be candid shots, where doing a lot of composition is pretty much impossible without alerting the victim^H^H^H^H^H^Hsubject to your presence.  Back in film days, that didn't work too well at all, because the cost was too high for the inevitable reject rate.  Now, I can just burn through a dozen shots and pick the one where everybody's eyes are visible or whatever.

So no, personally, I can't imagine going back to film.  :)

In fact, putting a filter on the 50 1.8 causes flare unless you are using a hood (not needed otherwise because the front element is set back.

I'm not sure why it would cause flare on that lens any more than it does on any other, unless you got a cheap filter that wasn't multicoated (or not multicoated very well).

This company is paying photogs $20 an hour and you might have to drive as far as 100 miles... But that's neither here nor there. 

At that rate, you'd have to be crazy to even consider it unless they pay travel on top of that cost.  For a trip 100 miles each way, given the IRS estimate of travel costs, and assuming you're in the lowest 10% tax bracket, after taxes, social security, and medicare, you'd make a whopping $9.52 for an 8-hour shoot, or $1.19 per hour.  You'd do better begging for money outside a 7–11.

In the 15% tax bracket, you make $1.52, or 19 cents per hour.  You'd do better walking into random buildings and searching the couches for loose change.

If you're in the 25% tax bracket, you don't break even until you've worked more than 9 hours.  Assuming the shoot is less than that, you'd do better staying at home and posting snarky comments about their quiz.

I got a 44M-4 about a month ago along with a fotodiox adapter for my 5d mkii.  It does have mirror hang so I put a very thing rubber band in between the adapter and the lens.

The mirror hang depends on the size of the mirror, which varies a bit from model to model.  Apparently, the 44M-4 hangs right at infinity on some of the 5D series, but it doesn't hang on the 6D as far as I can tell.

The 44M, by contrast, hangs noticeably at or near infinity on the 6D, so I always make sure to use live view mode if I want to shoot near infinity (and make sure to focus away from infinity before I leave live view mode or let the camera doze).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Not sure which Canon body to get
« on: April 06, 2014, 11:29:58 PM »
Reminds me of the old programmers joke:
    There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.:)


That and... There are two hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors.

Technical Support / Re: Canon EOS 7D Battery drain Issue
« on: April 06, 2014, 11:26:29 PM »

There's nothing wrong with your camera or your battery.  Using live view mode (the back display) burns a lot of power.  Two hundred shots is typical when using live view.  You get a thousand shots per battery when using the optical viewfinder (which uses no power).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Not sure which Canon body to get
« on: April 06, 2014, 12:04:27 PM »
For the uses listed, the 6D is the better choice, budget permitting. 


I was going to say +1, but 6D + 1 = 7D, and that's not what I mean.  ;)

No, 6D + 1 = 6E.  6D + (0x)10 = 7D.  :D

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Curved Sensor Tech by Sony
« on: April 06, 2014, 01:37:51 AM »
Curved sensors are well proven and effective, been in use at least a few million years.

So have the lenses designed for those curved sensors.  In the case of a curved camera sensor, current lenses would not work (thus the suggestion of a new 35/1.8 lens for the curved sensor).  Given the general performance of Sony lenses, I'm not encouraged by their ability to deliver an ILC based on a curved sensor.

Can you explain why a current lens wouldn't work? I suspect that they will all work just fine. The suggestion of a new 35/1.8 for the curved sensor is just that - a suggestion without understanding.

What I find intriguing is that lenses optimised for curved sensors might be smaller as there is less of a vignetting problem to overcome.

The elements in camera lenses are specifically designed to flatten out the focal plane so that the output of the lens is roughly in focus everywhere on a flat sensor even though the distance from the sensor to the lens is greater near the edges.  Some lenses do a better job than others when it comes to flattening the focal plane, hence the reason that some lenses have poor corner sharpness (as I understand it, anyway).

With a lens that is designed to focus light on a flat plane, a physically curved sensor would only cross the lens's focal plane either at a point or in a circular ring.  You'd have to add additional optical elements to the lens and/or remove optical elements from the lens to compensate for that.  Otherwise, only part of the picture would be in focus.

UV filters are necessary, because they have a really high markup that means more profit for the store and/or more commission for the salesperson.   :P

They're also necessary for some lenses to be fully weather sealed, but obviously that doesn't apply to the 50mm f/1.8 II, which isn't weather sealed at all, AFAIK.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Curved Sensor Tech by Sony
« on: April 05, 2014, 06:03:47 PM »

Looking at the patent photo, it looks more like each photosite is individually curved to allow the ones near the edge of the sensor to pick up more incident rays.  That doesn't necessarily mean that the sensor as a whole is curved, so it might well be compatible with existing lenses.

EOS Bodies / Re: Advatages of a hybrid viewfinder?
« on: April 05, 2014, 05:53:47 PM »

Incidentally, many of the newer DSLRs, including the 550D, support face detection when used in live view mode.

EOS Bodies / Re: Advatages of a hybrid viewfinder?
« on: April 05, 2014, 03:27:06 PM »
Depends on what hybrid means.  If it just means that they're able to show data superimposed over the OVF image, then no.  If it means that the OVF can become a full EVF, then yes, but only when in EVF mode.

A centennial has redeemed a groupon for a nude photo shoot.  You have a 5dmkiii, a 24-70 f/2.8 mkii, and a jar of vaseline.  Elaborate on your technique.

First, buy some gaff tape.  Then arrive early, so that you are already in the room when your models arrive.  Smear the vaseline in your eyepiece so that you can't see any details.  Tape the camera to your head, and use the vaseline jar's cap as an eye patch to cover the other eye.  Trust the autofocus, and thank whatever deity you worship that you're not using a 6D.

Hi, thanks for your message. I did go to the Apple store, showed the tech guys the same pictures I posted here. They said it's logic board/graphic card failure (I hope I understood them correctly). I told them about this thread and the one on the apple.com website. They said they never heard about this issue with early 2011 models. The funny thing was they said, well you know people say all different kind of stuff on forums  ;)

No matter what, there will always be a small percentage of laptops whose GPUs fail because of solder ball failure.  Keeping that number low is certainly a goal, but it is impossible to make the number be zero, given the temperature extremes involved.  Assuming Apple has maintained the 70/30 laptop/desktop split that they've talked about in the past, then Apple sold somewhere around 12 million laptops in FY2011.  1,000 failures is less than one hundredth of one percent.  If the failure rate really is at that order of magnitude, I wouldn't expect any sort of recall, because it's likely a fluke caused by inconsistent manufacturing.

With that said, assuming everyone who signed that petition is, in fact, an affected customer, then a thousand signatures is somewhat alarming.  For every person who complains about a problem with a company, statistically speaking, there are usually anywhere from 10–100 affected people who didn't complain, with the average being about a 25:1 ratio.  So 1,000 signatures could really mean that there are on the order of 25,000 affected 2011 MacBook Pro laptops that failed just outside of warranty, which is a different story altogether.

So, I paid $310 to get the new logic board + 8gb RAM, although they said it usually costs ~$500-600. I didn't really care as I'm covered with Squaretrade warranty. I picked up the laptop today, so far it's working fine.

For folks who don't have any warranty, the good news is that Apple recalls tend to be retroactive, so if it isn't a fluke, you'll probably get that money back.


Pretty cool.  In other news, Apple (according to rumor sites) just sold its 500 millionth iPhone.

Ain't perspective fun.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27